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.
Sorry that the side show bothers so many people, but my point was that having a very recognizable landmark like the Arch in St Louis or the Monuments in DC don't really make or break a local ' culture. I could have just as easily used MSP as an example instead of Philly which also has a good local culture, but little to no nationally recognizable monumental buildings. (which isn't to say MSP and Philly are the same Historical significance, they aren't)
Yep. And also important is that exposure ∝ recognizability. Key landmarks are as recognizable as they are because they've seen repeated presentation through various forms of media, while being amalgamated in their respective fabrics: as a result, residents and outsiders alike can easily interact with them.
What the hey? I have no idea who you are. After reading a few posts you claim Houston wasn't a good fit for me? Really? Get real. I moved to Houston because I wanted to - twice - because I thought I'd have a greater QOL than where I was living (KC and Wilmington at respective times). During the 26 years I lived there, I volunteered my time and money to programs ranging from the Special Olympics to visiting AIDS patients in the old Jeff Davis hospital on Allen Parkway. I contributed cash to two mayoral candidates and served on 2 non-profit byioards. I was proud to call Houston home and invested time and energy to make it better. Read more of my posts before you claim to know me.
But you are right about one thing. I love Philly. It's possible to love one place but love another more. I am more of a brick and cobblestone guy than a brass and glass one.
Sorry, no offence, Id never gotten the impression you really liked Houston, let alone loved it so much, I just know you are big on Philly (which is great, I love it when people love where they call home)
I think it is unique that you "get" both places, I think there is an unreadable quality to many born and bred easterners. It took my college buddy from Boston years to accept that Dallas and Houston didn't work the same as the old cities he was used to. I showed him the above article and he said he agreed with it. BTW he still prefers Boston.
I understand how you feel on loving two different places, I also love Dallas, but love the mountains of the west more.
Sorry, no offence, Id never gotten the impression you really liked Houston, let alone loved it so much, I just know you are big on Philly (which is great, I love it when people love where they call home)
I think it is unique that you "get" both places, I think there is an unreadable quality to many born and bred easterners. It too my college buddy from Boston years to accept that Dallas and Houston didn't work the same as the old cities he was used to I showed him the above article and he said he agreed with it. BTW he still prefers Boston.
I understand how you feel on loving two different places, I also love Dallas, but love the mountains of the west more.
Enjoyed the exchange.
Done posting about Philly. Other threads for that.
Dallas doesn't. Austin maybe, but only in terms of having a general known "experience to be a part of."
I disagree with respect to Dallas. It has one of the nation's most storied football franchises, has had a popular, long-running soap opera by the same name, and is seen as a more Texan city.
Sorry that the side show bothers so many people, but my point was that having a very recognizable landmark like the Arch in St Louis or the Monuments in DC don't really make or break a local cities' culture.
Except nobody made an argument about local culture.
I disagree with respect to Dallas. It has one of the nation's most storied football franchises, has had a popular, long-running soap opera by the same name, and is seen as a more Texan city.
Splitting hairs imo - Houston is known as the energy capital of the world, the home of NASA and mission control, and is seen as a more diverse, international city.
Not sure either trumps the other in terms of an identity. When I'm in other parts of the country most people lump the two cities in with one another unless there's a specific reason they'd have to talk about one or the other.
My city (state, county) has worked hard to limit sprawl, as have all West Coast cities, in addition to having natural boundaries. For the quality of city and for preservation of farms and natural areas it's essential to control sprawl. (We generally haven't done enough to keep growth inside the boundaries affordable, like upzoning, but that's another topic.)
I remember Austin trying to limit sprawl. Don't think it has worked.
Except nobody made an argument about local culture.
Because the arguments you all are making are really about recognition, even though the operative term in play (identity) refers more to a city's local culture. The two have been getting mixed up so far this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77
I disagree with respect to Dallas. It has one of the nation's most storied football franchises, has had a popular, long-running soap opera by the same name, and is seen as a more Texan city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Clutch
Splitting hairs imo - Houston is known as the energy capital of the world, the home of NASA and mission control, and is seen as a more diverse, international city.
Not sure either trumps the other in terms of an identity. When I'm in other parts of the country most people lump the two cities in with one another unless there's a specific reason they'd have to talk about one or the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pine to Vine
I disagree. For me, when I'm deciding where to spend time and money on vacation, cities that come to mind are those with a compelling image or identity drawing me there. Think about the first thing that might pop into your mind when you hear about the following cities mentioned:
NYC - Broadway?
DC - museums and monuments?
Boston, Philly - history?
SF - Fisherman's Wharf?
LA - Hollywood?
Seattle - Space Needle?
Miami - South Beach?
New Orleans - French Quarter?
Chicago - Navy Pier?
Las Vegas - The Strip?
San Diego - the zoo?
Even less touristed cities have iconic images (Cleveland - R&R Hall?, St Louis - arch?, Memphis - Elvis).
When folks hear "Houston," I'll bet most draw a blank or the first image that comes to mind is "oil" or Enron. Not something that would make me want to visit.
Because the arguments you all are making are really about recognition, even though the operative term in play (identity) refers more to a city's local culture. The two have been getting mixed up so far this thread:
Identity, even if thought of as local culture, plays a big role in recognition. Think aspects like music, food, history, etc.
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.
