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.
Well, New York has torn down plenty of their past landmarks over history so that wasn't suprising. But they did basically just build a fancy new stadium that looked similar to the old one.
I'd say Centennial Park and Turner Field are considered landmarks especially the former, plus Stone Mountain which is part of the Atlanta region. I'd probably go with:
San Diego
San Jose
Pittsburgh
Phoenix
Albuquerque
Kansas City
Denver
Milwaukee
Norfolk
Minneapolis
If I saw a picture of any of those three, I would not be able to tell you where it is. Sorry.
On the other hand, the Cathedral of Learning, Balboa Park, Spoonbridge and Cherry, and Milwaukee's art museum are all landmarks that I'd recognize instantly.
Admittedly, I'm better at this than some people, but....if Atlanta's landmark is Centennial Park (which I've never even *heard* of, let alone know what it looks like....), then Atlanta don't have no landmarks at all....
South Beach Neon Lights - Miami (again, street scape)
I am willing to bet if you asked those same 1,000 people, most would have no idea where Mt. Rushmore is. Same goes for
Um....nobody would be able to look at a picture of that, and say "that's Miami!" Or, at least the average person wouldn't. I agree with all the rest, but if that's Miami's recognizable landmark, well, then Miami isn't very recognizable...
I think that the problem we are encountering here is one of perspective. The people that *we* talk to every day might know the same landmarks, but people thousands of miles away do not. In the same way that I can't recognize a picture of Centennial Park (whatever that is....) or neon signs on South Beach, I'm guessing there are lots of people who don't recognize the Spoonbridge and Cherry or Cathedral of St. Paul at first glance, remarkable as they are. They might say, "hey that's cool! Where is that?" but they don't know that they are in Minnesota. They don't know that the Cathedral of Learning is in Pittsburgh, either.
There are probably regional landmarks, too. Just from growing up in the Midwest, I know what Ren Center in Detroit looks like, what Milwaukee's art museum looks like, what Monument Circle in Indianapolis looks like, even though I haven't been to all of those places.
The Twin Cities' area's most recognizable landmark probably is the Mall of America, and that's not really fair, since there is a big sign that says "Mall of America" above the entrance. Even if people can look at it and say "that's the Mall of America!", I'll bet not all of them know it's in MN, and those that do can't all name the city.
There are only a few internationally recognized landmarks in the US, and I don't think any of us are debating much about twhat they are....statue of liberty....white house....willis tower....golden gate bridge....maybe the space needle?....Mt. Rushmore.....Hoover Dam.....Vegas Strip.....Hollywood sign.....that's really about it. Everything else is pretty much regional or national.
As far as city's not having landmarks, there are very, very few. But the landmarks might not necessarily be recognizable to somebody from far away. The Astrodome was a remarkable engineering feat; I know it because I'm a big baseball fan. Would I know it if I wasn't a baseball fan? No, almost definitely not.
I believe the Astrodome has moved from landmark to eyesore. It was a remarkable achievement in sports stadiums and changed the game of baseball (and even football, to a great degree) for both better and worse. It is now a rotting corpse, though.
The Astrodome, in its prime represented the optimistic, can-do spirit of Houston. The city was inhospitable to big-league baseball in summer heat, torrential thunderstorms and mosquito swarms, so they brought the game inside. Purists balked, but everyone was amazed. Everyone considered it a priviledge just to be in the place. I remember standing in the field level seats as a kid and looking up at the massive roof in awe. It was truly an amazing engineering achievement.
It misses the landmark status today, in my opinion, because, while being a great engineering achievement it is not a great architectural one- like Golden Gate Bridge or The St. Louis Arch. It was showy and entertaining, with its scoreboard and Judge Hoffheinz's palatial playpen, but the more public spaces lacked any soul or flair. It was a big, soulless, concrete spaceship sitting in the middle of a square mile of concrete parking lot. Not exactly the most attractive representation for a city, but nonetheless, iconic.
Now, it is a victim of the Houston Texans. As the primary tenants of Reliant Park, they have blocked all attempts to refurbish the Astrodome, because it would create a competitive fixture for their parking revenues in the lots that they would share. They want the thing destroyed and looking at its present condition, its hard to argue with them. That doesn't make their behavior any less shameful, though.
Indeed, the Astrodome was once a landmark. It's a shame the vision that led to its creation wasn't employed in its preservation.
Despite your insistent and predictable supercilious comments about Houston, when I think about it, I can't say that I disagree with your post (from what I know of the situation with the dome). It doesn't pain me to say that either. It does trouble me to think of the stadium's fate, though.
With that said, I maintain that it's a landmark of some sort. I'd bet the general population knows what it looks like and can tell you where it is.
I think that the problem we are encountering here is one of perspective. The people that *we* talk to every day might know the same landmarks, but people thousands of miles away do not. In the same way that I can't recognize a picture of Centennial Park (whatever that is....) or neon signs on South Beach, I'm guessing there are lots of people who don't recognize the Spoonbridge and Cherry or Cathedral of St. Paul at first glance, remarkable as they are. They might say, "hey that's cool! Where is that?" but they don't know that they are in Minnesota. They don't know that the Cathedral of Learning is in Pittsburgh, either.
There are probably regional landmarks, too. Just from growing up in the Midwest, I know what Ren Center in Detroit looks like, what Milwaukee's art museum looks like, what Monument Circle in Indianapolis looks like, even though I haven't been to all of those places.
The Twin Cities' area's most recognizable landmark probably is the Mall of America, and that's not really fair, since there is a big sign that says "Mall of America" above the entrance. Even if people can look at it and say "that's the Mall of America!", I'll bet not all of them know it's in MN, and those that do can't all name the city.
There are only a few internationally recognized landmarks in the US, and I don't think any of us are debating much about twhat they are....statue of liberty....white house....willis tower....golden gate bridge....maybe the space needle?....Mt. Rushmore.....Hoover Dam.....Vegas Strip.....Hollywood sign.....that's really about it. Everything else is pretty much regional or national.
As far as city's not having landmarks, there are very, very few. But the landmarks might not necessarily be recognizable to somebody from far away. The Astrodome was a remarkable engineering feat; I know it because I'm a big baseball fan. Would I know it if I wasn't a baseball fan? No, almost definitely not.
^Good post.
I think we need to differentiate what are "North American landmarks" (the white house, gg bridge, etc.), and what are regional landmarks (ones that are more identifiable to a city/state/specific geographic region of the U.S./Canada) and may not be identifiable in the same way by the general public across North America.
I think that the problem we are encountering here is one of perspective. The people that *we* talk to every day might know the same landmarks, but people thousands of miles away do not. In the same way that I can't recognize a picture of Centennial Park (whatever that is....) or neon signs on South Beach, I'm guessing there are lots of people who don't recognize the Spoonbridge and Cherry or Cathedral of St. Paul at first glance, remarkable as they are. They might say, "hey that's cool! Where is that?" but they don't know that they are in Minnesota. They don't know that the Cathedral of Learning is in Pittsburgh, either.
There are probably regional landmarks, too. Just from growing up in the Midwest, I know what Ren Center in Detroit looks like, what Milwaukee's art museum looks like, what Monument Circle in Indianapolis looks like, even though I haven't been to all of those places.
The Twin Cities' area's most recognizable landmark probably is the Mall of America, and that's not really fair, since there is a big sign that says "Mall of America" above the entrance. Even if people can look at it and say "that's the Mall of America!", I'll bet not all of them know it's in MN, and those that do can't all name the city.
There are only a few internationally recognized landmarks in the US, and I don't think any of us are debating much about twhat they are....statue of liberty....white house....willis tower....golden gate bridge....maybe the space needle?....Mt. Rushmore.....Hoover Dam.....Vegas Strip.....Hollywood sign.....that's really about it. Everything else is pretty much regional or national.
As far as city's not having landmarks, there are very, very few. But the landmarks might not necessarily be recognizable to somebody from far away. The Astrodome was a remarkable engineering feat; I know it because I'm a big baseball fan. Would I know it if I wasn't a baseball fan? No, almost definitely not.
AS far as the Mall of America goes, you are mostly right. But, the Mall of America is more of what I would call a... conceptual landmark instead of a visual one. If you show a picture of a really big mall, from almost anywhere in the country, most people would probably guess the Mall of America, whether it is or not. It's famous for what it is, not for what it looks like. I would consider it as a major landmark, but not because of its appearance, but because of what it is. Of course, the sign is widely recognized, but as you said it can be considered unfair because it says the name on it. Most people would also say that it is in Minneapolis, not Bloomington, but that's good enough for me. You can see both downtowns fom the top floor of the parking ramps.
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.
