Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If their not going to Fanieul Hall for the history, are they going there for the expensive food court?
I'm just going by what I see every time I walk by. Hoardes of people watching break dancers. Another group watching that Australian dude right in front of the market, and the market itself is always packed.
besides, it's not like Faneuil Hall's history in itself is that fascinating in the first place. Other places in Boston are much more interesting.
I'm just going by what I see every time I walk by. Hoardes of people watching break dancers. Another group watching that Australian dude right in front of the market, and the market itself is always packed.
besides, it's not like Faneuil Hall's history in itself is that fascinating in the first place. Other places in Boston are much more interesting.
This is all true.
I will say, though, that it makes an impression on visitors.. It's a national landmark, and there is something alluring about all of those countertop joints in one seemingly endless row. In reality, it's just an old mall food court.
I will say, though, that it makes an impression on visitors.. It's a national landmark, and there is something alluring about all of those countertop joints in one seemingly endless row. In reality, it's just an old mall food court.
Right, an old mall food court with Boston-themed food (as well as other garbage) in an historic shell. I get the draw for first-timers, but not people who have been around a while. Faneuil isn't really too far off from other tourist traps like Pier 39/Fisherman's Wharf, Navy Pier, South Street Seaport, etc. in that it's chalk full of chain retail/dining in a "unique" setting that's marketed as a city's signature attraction.
This is exactly it. Boston has history, but so does Philadelphia (more). So does Washington.
What Boston has, it doesn’t have a monopoly in.
San Francisco is much more unique in terms of landmarks, scenery, etc.
This is certainly a unique take...San Francisco doesn’t have a monopoly in bridges, prisons either...pretty sure the American revolution as well as the abolitionist movement started in Boston not philly so Boston’s history is unique just as San Fran’s prison is unique to the several in the Boston area
Which doesn’t say much considering Independence Hall is in Philadelphia and more important, and isn’t a food court either.
Boston lacks an instantly recognizable landmark, and a decrepit sports stadium doesn’t fit the bill either. Fenway needs to be replaced. I really don’t understand the appeal of it personally. The Red Sox aren’t the Yankees.
Wasn’t there a movement to have the Citgo Sign be an official landmark? I mean. Come on..
There’s no independence hall if we didn’t have the revolutionary battles....Quincy market and Faneuil Hall are part of the freedom trail 2.5 miles of history that includes Paul reveres ride preceding battles of lexington and concord, early revolutionary battle at bunker hill, events leading to revolution including a tea party and a massacre, us first public school attended by Ben Franklin, Emerson, Sam Adams, America’s first Public Park, events leading to abolitionist movement, oldest continuously operating bar, taverns that served George Washington, Ben Franklin, JFK..the marketplace is a stop on the journey to eat and be entertained. There’s no philly or dc if we are a British colony..If Boston doesn’t have an instantly recognizable landmark for you then
I suggest brushing up on the events that led to the country you live in today...
Independence Hall predates the Revolution..... you think it was built after?
No Philadelphia. No America. Philadelphia was the brains behind the conception, and not only that but more firsts and inventions come from Philadelphia than Boston. Not even gonna bother listing them when you can just Google it yourself. Be ready. There’s a lot. It also preserved way more of its history than Boston, which has seemingly gentrified to oblivion.
Didn’t Boston get the idea of their tea party from Philadelphia?
Taverns that served Washington, Franklin, etc. Oh like.. the City Tavern in Philadelphia?
I’m not arguing which has better history..have no desire...I’m arguing that Boston’s marketplace that attracts 15-17 million encompasses something larger than a food hall...
That’s precisely why it has those numbers. It’s a food market that draws almost all of New England. And workers on that go 200x a year.
There are plenty of National and international tourists..they don’t come to Boston to shop at an urban outfitters or eat a slice of pizza. People can get sucked into the marketplace but it’s most often a stop. If you come to Boston to solely to go to Quincy market (although granted the food hall itself offers some historical value) for the food and shopping then you’ve gotten sucked in and haven’t done much planning...people have to eat and can easily get distracted by shops and street acts. My point is the marketplace as part of freedom trail offers deeper cultural value that warrants high tourism...yes San Francisco is more unique in look I agree
Boston looks no different than other East coast cities like New York, and especially Philadelphia.
What US city resembles San Francisco?
JustVisitingHere is on to yet another name. Same banter though, typically predicated on how Boston/New England aren’t more special than Philadelphia/PA. Boston looks like New York!?!?
Boston is, without question, a nicer city than Philly. When talked about in combination with Brookline, Cambridge, and Somerville, I just don’t think anyone can say the two are THAT similar. They share some history, and the row home/brownstone look is prevalent in both. But, Boston is far more “elegant” in it’s delivery.. Probabaly closer to Chicago than Philadelphia in 2018. Seaport being the grandiose example of that. I’d say DC and Boston share more in common than Philly and Boston now, and it’s not that close to me.
Philly is probabaly more interesting for that very reason. Better music and arts scene for sure, too. So to be clear, i’m strictly talking aesthetics.
And, San Francisco is the west cost equivalent of Boston in almost every way. There’s a reason this comparison is realized even outside of this website.
Probabaly closer to Chicago than Philadelphia in 2018. Seaport being the grandiose example of that. I’d say DC and Boston share more in common than Philly and Boston now, and it’s not that close to me.
I don't think most would find the seaport as particularly novel or "grandiose." It's new and shiny, sure, but a bit soulless. Historic Boston, on the other hand, is what most find truly impressive.
DC isn't exactly the best city the emulate in the modern sense, unless one is a fan of monotonous, generic modern architecture of endless glass boxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwj119
Philly is probabaly more interesting for that very reason. Better music and arts scene for sure, too. So to be clear, i’m strictly talking aesthetics.
Philly undoubtedly continues to retain much of its post-industrial feel relative to Boston, for better and worse. Boston's aged more "gracefully" and is lucky to have been spared the worst of deindustrialization. But Philly's strength is feeling much more eclectic for sure, which many will appreciate. But alas, this is a Boston v. SF comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwj119
And, San Francisco is the west cost equivalent of Boston in almost every way. There’s a reason this comparison is realized even outside of this website.
There are theoretical parallels between the cities, sure. Robust tech industries being the most obvious link, with strong economies, in coastal cities of the same relative size.
But historically, architecturally and geographically, these are still pretty profoundly different cities. When visiting the Bay Area this past summer, aside from a couple pockets in downtown SF, there was literally nothing else that evoked a Boston feel in my mind.
Both SF and Boston march to the beat of their own drummer.
I don't see all that much more similarity between Philadelphia and Boston or SF and Boston. These pairings have different similarities and differences from each other, but overall, not really much more comparable to one or to another.
I've probably responded to this topic a while back since this is about an eight years running topic, but right now I somewhat favor Boston mostly because of the cost of living not having driven as many a diverse group of people working in a massive gamut of fields out of the city, out of the region, or out of their home.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
