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.
We're measuring and comparing the size, scale, and scope of these cities. How intense their size makes them feel and how overwhelming a feeling you get when you're walking, driving, viewing their aerials, or really doing anything in these cities.
We're set on ranking these cities #1, #2, and #3 by their intensity level.
The problem with the skyscrapers of Shanghai is that unlike icons of NYC such as Empire State and Chrysler Building, they are ugly. The tallest one looks like a poorly rolled newspaper and the second tallest one looks like a bottle opener. The Oriental Pearl Tower, however, looks nice.
Well to be fair, this isn't a competition for which city looks the prettiest or has the prettiest building or architecture. We're simply comparing size, scale, and scope to measure the intensity level of these cities compared to one another. We're looking to see which one is the most overwhelming and which one the least.
I'll do everyone a favor and state the obvious. None of these three cities should ever be mentioned among the world's prettiest, because none of them are that pretty physically speaking. They're not Madrid, they're not Barcelona, they're not Saint Petersburg, they're not Vienna, they're not Budapest, they're not Prague, they're not Paris, they're not Sydney, they're not Tel-Aviv, they're not Melbourne, they're not San Francisco, they're not Stockholm, they're not Copenhagen, they're not Oslo, they're not Auckland, they're not Casablanca, they're not Cape Town, they're not even Rio de Janeiro, they're (Shanghai, Sao Paulo, New York) just not that beautiful to begin with.
That's fine. These cities are huge metropolises, all three of them are hypercities, Greater New York is a place with more than 23 million people, Greater Sao Paulo is a place with more than 22 million people, and Greater Shanghai is a place with over 28 million people. These places aren't meant to be all cute and cuddly and beautiful. These three are very serious cities, built of so much concrete that it looks like concrete and cement is raping the Earth underneath it.
These cities are meant to look like monstrous giants and monstrous giants they definitely do look like.
Also, while Shanghai is no beauty pageant winner, neither is Sao Paulo, or even New York for that matter. That's fine, these aren't meant to be pretty little cutesie cities, they're meant to be pretty serious and monstrous worldbeaters, which they are.
Well to be fair, this isn't a competition for which city looks the prettiest or has the prettiest building or architecture. We're simply comparing size, scale, and scope to measure the intensity level of these cities compared to one another. We're looking to see which one is the most overwhelming and which one the least.
I'll do everyone a favor and state the obvious. None of these three cities should ever be mentioned among the world's prettiest, because none of them are that pretty physically speaking. They're not Madrid, they're not Barcelona, they're not Saint Petersburg, they're not Vienna, they're not Budapest, they're not Prague, they're not Paris, they're not Sydney, they're not Tel-Aviv, they're not Melbourne, they're not San Francisco, they're not Stockholm, they're not Copenhagen, they're not Oslo, they're not Auckland, they're just not that beautiful.
That's fine. These cities are huge metropolises, all three of them are hypercities, Greater New York is a place with more than 23 million people, Greater Sao Paulo is a place with more than 22 million people, and Greater Shanghai is a place with over 28 million people. These places aren't meant to be all cute and cuddly and beautiful. These three are very serious cities, built of so much concrete that it looks like concrete and cement is raping the Earth underneath it.
These cities are meant to look monstrous and monstrous they definitely do look like.
Also, while Shanghai is no beauty pageant winner, neither is Sao Paulo, or even New York for that matter. That's fine, these aren't meant to be pretty little cutsie cities, they're meant to be pretty serious and monstrous worldbeaters, which they are.
So they fit their role well.
You are right, I cannot disagree with you. I'm sorry for diverting the topic.
You are right, I cannot disagree with you. I'm sorry for diverting the topic.
No problems at all, you didn't divert the topic. You added a new dimension for discussion. I welcome the aesthetic discussion, it's been beneficial to the thread. So thank you for bringing it up.
I just wanted to take the chance to point out that really big cities are sometimes not the prettiest ones to look at. They're not meant to be, in my opinion. They are serious worldbeaters.
Pretty and cute, to me at least, is best left to teeny tiny little cities (non-megacities and/or non-hypercities). Like a Prague or an Oslo or a Portland or a Boston or something cute of that sort. A place that can manage itself and its aesthetics simply because it doesn't have to deal with the intensity of tens of millions of people on a daily basis. Cute little tiny cities, the type of places that make you say "awww adorable!" but never be able to hold in high enough regard as a major sized power (like a New York, a Shanghai, or a Sao Paulo). All in my personal opinion though, other people's viewpoints may vary.
Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 02-03-2017 at 02:37 PM..
I must add in the case of São Paulo that all of these buildings are in the old inner city and they are - believe me - only a small part of the high rises. There is an album of the modern part of the city - many kilometres away from the place where these pics were took: https://www.flickr.com/photos/carlos...57631958022378 (won't post the pics themselves because they are copyrighted).
Last edited by Fabio SBA; 02-03-2017 at 01:25 PM..
No problems at all, you didn't divert the topic. You added a new dimension for discussion. I welcome the aesthetic discussion, it's been beneficial to the thread. So thank you for bringing it up.
I just wanted to take the chance to point out that really big cities are sometimes not the prettiest ones to look at. They're not meant to be, in my opinion. They are serious worldbeaters.
Pretty and cute, to me at least, is best left to teeny tiny little cities (non-megacities and/or non-hypercities). Like a Prague or a Oslo or a Portland or something of that sort. A place that can manage itself and its aesthetics simply because it doesn't have to deal with the intensity of tens of millions of people on a daily basis. Cute little tiny cities, the type of places that make you say "awww adorable!" but never be able to hold in high enough regard as a major sized power (like a New York, a Shanghai, or a Sao Paulo). All in my personal opinion though, other people's viewpoints may vary.
Agree with you.
I like to live in great cities but I prefer to visit the smallest ones.
My favourite cities in terms of architecture are Vienna and Amsterdam.
However, London and Paris are huge cities which are also pretty...
I don't feel Shanghai to be intense, except the crazy cab drivers after midnight. Most intense times of my life!
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.
