Cities with Ugly Names (design, rated, corporate)

[Greensleeves]

Walla Walla only sounds ugly when Buggs Bunny says it.

[desert sun]

I dont think Albuquerque,Anchorage or Lubbock are ugly names,I think they are unique.

UGLY names--

Chicago
Pittsburgh
Yonkers
Bend,OR
Jackson,MS
Birmingham,AL
Omaha

[ajf131]

St. Louis??? How the hell is that name ugly? Or Buffalo? And it's Yonkers, NY. Personally, I think no name is ugly for a town that I've come across.

[SEAandATL]

San Diego is a pretty ugly name. Hearing it makes my stomach cringe. After all it's German for a whale's vagina (j/k, lol). San Diego also sounds like the name of a waffle covered with sand. Get it..."Sandy Eggo"? (2 drum beats and cymbal crash, LMAO)

[AZLiam]

Originally Posted by Steve-o

ugh

Do you even know what a Phoenix is? And have you ever heard of the great Chicago fire? And population growth has absolutely NOTHING to do with the name Phoenix.

Next.

LOL -

Yes, I know what a Phoenix is. It has many different symbolic meanings.

Still, the naming of Phoenix in 1868 has nothing to do with the Chicago fire of 1871, and I do not see how Chicago or the Chicago fire resembles a Phoenix. It wasn't reborn from a civilization that lived for 1,000 years, and Chicago never "died".

From Wikipedia:

Phoenix, Arizona was so named due to the town's usage of old Hohokam (Native American) canal paths, and the fact that the area contained the remains of various Hohokam settlements. It is believed that this group migrated out of the area due to devastating floods and droughts between 1300-1450 AD. The establishment of modern Phoenix was seen as a rebirth of this older civilization. The new city itself suffered damage from several large floods in its early years, such as in 1900, but eventually grew into one of the US's largest metropolitan areas as of the 21st century.

Also, Lebanon is often depicted symbolically as a phoenix bird having been destroyed and rebuilt 7 times during its LONG history.

The area of central and southern Arizona is rich in history. Tucson was probably first visited by Paleo-Indians, known to have been in southern Arizona by about 12,000 years ago. Recent archaeological excavations near the Santa Cruz River have located a village site dating from 4,000 years ago. The floodplain of the Santa Cruz River was extensively farmed during the Early Agricultural period, circa 1200 BC to AD 150. These people constructed irrigation canals and grew corn, beans, and other crops while gathering wild plants and hunting animals. The Early Ceramic period occupation of Tucson saw the first extensive use of pottery vessels for cooking and storage. The groups designated by archaeologists as the Hohokam lived in the area from AD 600-1450 and are known for their red-on-brown pottery.

So how is Chicago more suited for the name of Phoenix than the city of Phoenix itself? Because of its long history? It would be like giving Phoenix the name Chicago (reference to wild leeks or the smell of onions) - you can keep that. I applaud Chicago for rebuilding its downtown and it has (IMO) one of the best downtowns, but the city of Chicago as a whole was never lost due to that fire. It's great that you were trying to think outside of the box though.

Next.

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by AZLiam

Still, the naming of Phoenix in 1868 has nothing to do with the Chicago fire of 1871, and I do not see how Chicago or the Chicago fire resembles a Phoenix. It wasn't reborn from a civilization that lived for 1,000 years, and Chicago never "died".

Chicago arose from the ashes of the fire to a much bigger and better city than it ever was. Its the primo definition of phoenix.

Were getting too off-topic here....

More ugly city names:

Billings
Fargo
Lubbock

[DannyBanany]

I think Billings and Fargo are pretty names. Any cities named after saints are just unappealing to me. St. Louis, St. Paul, St. Petersburg are all ugly names. Now in another language they may be pretty. Sao Paulo, Brazil for instance.

[Djames9]

Originally Posted by DannyBanany

What cities do you think have ugly names? Here are ones on my list:

Eugene, OR
Box Elder, SD
Sturgis, SD
St. Louis, MO
Gary, IN
Buffalo, NY
Bozeman, MT
Walla Walla, WA
Albuquerque, NM
Austin, TX
Mobile, AL
Tallahasee, FL
St. Petersburg, FL
Chevy Chase, MD
Younkers, NY
Jersey City, NJ

I have one for you...try almost every town or major city in california......lol.. there almost all named from Spanish Descent...which automatically makes it extremely ugly... lol..jk..


UGLIEST NAME FOR A CITY EVER FRESNO,CA

[AZLiam]

Originally Posted by Steve-o

Chicago arose from the ashes of the fire to a much bigger and better city than it ever was. Its the primo definition of phoenix.

Were getting too off-topic here....

More ugly city names:

Billings
Fargo
Lubbock

Whatever -

I can't take you seriously...

[ajf131]

Originally Posted by SEAandATL

San Diego is a pretty ugly name. Hearing it makes my stomach cringe. After all it's German for a whale's vagina (j/k, lol). San Diego also sounds like the name of a waffle covered with sand. Get it..."Sandy Eggo"? (2 drum beats and cymbal crash, LMAO)

San Diego actually sounds like a very beautiful name to me, very fitting for a city on the Pacific Ocean in Southern California. You want an ugly name? Try Amarillo, Texas...everytime I think of that city and remember how ugly and run down it was, I equate it to the image of an armadillo..hehe...neither amarillo are armadillo are good looking things with good sounding names.