Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-23-2013, 08:13 PM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,556 posts, read 20,788,592 times
Reputation: 2833

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionIMPOSSIBRU View Post
The city itself I meant. It just doesn't have that intangible property, that indefinable 'spark' or 'magic' that it used to.

Though it is still a very bustling city, there's a pervasive feeling of 'can't be arsed'-ness that permeates the place, especially by mid-afternoon.
Well I visited in 2011 so I don't know what it was like back then, but to me it felt just like the NYC I imagined, and retained a lot of it's character and grit despite the positive changes...maybe the gentrification wasn't such a good thing, but I think the lower crime rate was a good tradeoff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2013, 09:06 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,983 posts, read 53,454,351 times
Reputation: 15184
Quote:
Originally Posted by dunno what to put here View Post
London's underground is older in age, but is more modern. NYC still uses old carriages and is dirtier - it's busier, so I guess that might explain it.
Many of the trains in the NYC subway are new. London had some rather outdated feeling ones, too, though it seemed like it was in the process of replacing them. I didn't get modern out of the London underground trains. The one real new thing that London has is the indicators showing when the next train is coming, but NYC has added that on many lines now, too. London's underground is definitely cleaner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2013, 09:11 PM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,556 posts, read 20,788,592 times
Reputation: 2833
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Many of the trains in the NYC subway are new. London had some rather outdated feeling ones, too, though it seemed like it was in the process of replacing them. I didn't get modern out of the London underground trains. The one real new thing that London has is the indicators showing when the next train is coming, but NYC has added that on many lines now, too. London's underground is definitely cleaner.
London's Underground is impressive in it's scale (coverage, stations, frequency, service) but yes, the actual stations don't look brand spanking new as some of the newer ones around the world, but to me that's far from the most important thing as long as the trains run properly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2013, 09:48 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,983 posts, read 53,454,351 times
Reputation: 15184
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postman View Post
Yes NYC definitely IS unique. I mean parts of Chicago or Philly come close, but maybe it's artificial (constructed through portrayals and American dominance) or it's the way NYC is treated, but Manhattan seems like sort of separate from anywhere else. No, they can't, but London just didn't feel as unique to me as NYC. I don't know, everything about NYC is just so 'New York.'
London feels just as unique to me as NYC. London has less of an endless concrete jungle feel, but that doesn't mean London doesn't have its unique aspects. I grew up near NYC, so many aspects of it I took for granted, but many of its cultural distinctiveness is a more extreme version of the culture of the US "Northeast Corridor".

Quote:
There was a comic map which showed how New Yorkers viewed the world: everything west of the Hudson was irrelevant. Maybe it's that sheer insularity which adds to it. I actually found the London Underground lacked the character of the New York Subway.

The biggest difference between London and the NYC subway, is the outer parts of the London Underground feel like mainline surface rail lines [which many were] that happen to be part of a subway system. NYC's subway lines, with a few exceptions are either underground till the end of the line or run elevated above a rather built commercial road. Stop spacing is smaller, it feels like a more urban system throughout. A few London underground station have their own parking:

Tube station car parks | Transport for London

No NYC subway station has that, there's not really a station building just a staircase/elevator on the street. End of the line:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=edgew...133.45,,0,-0.1

vs

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Jamai...154.87,,0,-3.6

staircase to underground. Both lines are about the same length.


Quote:
Maybe because New York is the original modern big city, even if London is older and was bigger...New York FEELS like a vast concrete jungle, with seemingly endless skyscrapers. London is more a collection of neighbourhoods/villages stuck together interspersed with parkland. Which has it's benefits. London feels surprisingly local and manageable for a city of it's size, while NY overwhelms you with it's sheer urbanity.
New York City is modern in the sense that modern art is modern — not traditional, but dated from a style from the early and mid 20th century. Perhaps the city that seems the most out of the industrial era or the machine age? It's the only new world city that as dense as old world cities (Latin American cities might count, but they weren't as big in the early 20th century). As a new world city, it followed less traditional urban styles. No other city in the world has a large fraction (nearly half) of its tallest buildings from the early 20th century.

But you could probably find a way to call other cities unique, too. Some concrete jungle photos:







Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2013, 12:47 AM
 
3 posts, read 7,873 times
Reputation: 13
I definitely get this feel when I'm in New York. It feels so disconnected from the rest of the States, because it's so huge. It really does feel like its own little world. This is a compliment, rather than a criticism. Many people will call it modern, but I was so surprised with how much historical architecture it retained. It's got a great balance between old and new.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2013, 01:51 AM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,556 posts, read 20,788,592 times
Reputation: 2833
Good point nei...I think what NYC encapsulates best is the 20th century, as do many American cities. NY sort of represents the early 20th century with it's gothic revival and art deco, while in LA art deco to 70s utilitarianism is represented. Parts of NY are surprisingly quite retro looking, like Harlem and parts of Brooklyn, and the subway still has that 'grit.' The brownstones remind me of Sesame Street or something lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2013, 02:55 AM
 
Location: the dairyland
1,222 posts, read 2,278,385 times
Reputation: 1731
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postman View Post
the subway still has that 'grit.'
Don't know why that is a good thing. I am not into rats, roaches and dirty water (or worse) dripping on your neck when you lean on a pole. NYC has many things going for it but I don't think the "gritty" subway is one of its selling points.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2013, 03:11 AM
 
Location: Westminster, London
872 posts, read 1,384,914 times
Reputation: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob702 View Post
Don't know why that is a good thing. I am not into rats, roaches and dirty water (or worse) dripping on your neck when you lean on a pole. NYC has many things going for it but I don't think the "gritty" subway is one of its selling points.
The public realm in NYC is a problem - at least relative to the rest of what it offers. It's always been somewhat of a dirty city, but now we have several synergistic factors exacerbating the problem: Demographic changes, bringing with it a "don't care" attitude about cleanliness, service cutbacks, and a filter-down mentality from the powers that be that let infrastructure just crumble into dysfunction and decay (only addressing it when it becomes hazardous to the degree that it provokes litigation).

As it is, the street experience, even in the most opulent areas, detracts a great deal from the quality of the entertainment/leisure venues in New York, which is a shame.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2013, 03:35 AM
 
43,630 posts, read 44,355,249 times
Reputation: 20546
Quote:
Originally Posted by dunno what to put here View Post
London's underground is older in age, but is more modern. NYC still uses old carriages and is dirtier - it's busier, so I guess that might explain it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Many of the trains in the NYC subway are new. London had some rather outdated feeling ones, too, though it seemed like it was in the process of replacing them. I didn't get modern out of the London underground trains. The one real new thing that London has is the indicators showing when the next train is coming, but NYC has added that on many lines now, too. London's underground is definitely cleaner.
The NYC subway system has new trains and many of them now even have digital displays of their routes.

I do agree the NYC stations are dirty and not attractive. But NYC has a one fare system which it makes a better deal than the London system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2013, 04:48 AM
 
Location: Westminster, London
872 posts, read 1,384,914 times
Reputation: 726
It may be a bit grotty, but the MTA clearly overperforms relative to its budget in running a cheap, efficient, no-frills, 24 hour service.

The 'character' of the subway is a defining feature of the New York experience. The typical visitor is either hideously appalled or impressed by it (or both).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top