Chicago vs. New York (Manhattan, Cleveland: amusement park, theatre, school)

[veretina]

Originally Posted by steeps

yes... I guess the way you tell a New Yorker in Manhattan from a tourist is..... drum roll, please..... the New Yorker will be in high-fashion attire... the rest.... CAN ANYONE SAY.... ORDINARY AND MIDDLE-CLASS ....

Never said that. But considering New York is the fashion capital of the U.S. It's only logical that people dress better. More access to fashionable clothing and all. Also, being fashionable doesn't mean spending a lot of money.Calm down.

[jonnynonos]

Maybe, but I did notice a lot of Jeresy Shore types when I was there. You don't get that out here.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by veretina

Never said that. But considering New York is the fashion capital of the U.S. It's only logical that people dress better. More access to fashionable clothing and all. Also, being fashionable doesn't mean spending a lot of money.Calm down.

One of my favorite parts of fashion-watching in New York are the older people who wear long-out-of-fashion-but-once-avant-guard sorts of things. I don't think they're exactly old money, they're just people who made a lot of money in, say, the 1970s, bought fantastic clothes then and are still wearing them. I love that.

[veretina]

Originally Posted by emathias

One of my favorite parts of fashion-watching in New York are the older people who wear long-out-of-fashion-but-once-avant-guard sorts of things. I don't think they're exactly old money, they're just people who made a lot of money in, say, the 1970s, bought fantastic clothes then and are still wearing them. I love that.

A lot more diversity in the NYC fashion scene and thankfully less north face and uggs. Also the seventies are making a modern comeback. Those mid-low price clothes are probably worth tons now!

[steeps]

Originally Posted by veretina

Never said that. But considering New York is the fashion capital of the U.S. It's only logical that people dress better. More access to fashionable clothing and all. Also, being fashionable doesn't mean spending a lot of money.Calm down.

Some Miami boosters want it to be Miami....... especially Miami Beach THEY DON'T CONCEAL IDENTITIES..... BUT WANT TO BE SEEN AS ALL CELEBRITIES.

Really though, with soooooo many tourist on the streets in Manhattan. But for locals in business attire and perhaps the high fashion very wealthy and celebrity types getting in and out of Taxis and Limos. I'm not sure they walk Times Square. Around Central Park High-End CONDO'S and Apt.'s and others yes. But I could see that in Lincoln Park Chicago and Gold Coast. Different city's and celebrity types.

More of everything in NYC. The thing is today..... It isn't Just NYC any more. Top restaurants those Dressed for a night out on the town ARE in other cities like Chicago, who has a considerable wealthy population itself.

More in Manhattan ... for sure. Michigan Ave Chicago may be High-End Shopping and nearby Boutiques. But the street is full of Middle-Class Tourist all the time.

Manhattan is STILL the International and TOP Living and Visiting Destination. But for International Jet-Set (that term still used .... ) Miami as a few boast on C-D gives Manhattan Fashion watchers some competition. Especially being seen.

Just my slanted 2-cents. For perspectives..... and not demeaning any city. But not letting Manhattan keep ALL the glory. Largest share yes. ...... NORTH FACE AND UGGS OH NO..... Chicago you are Labeled again. But at least there Term Trixies was not used.....

[compactspace]

I live in a coop in Manhattan. And it's my first choice for living anywhere in America.

My second, and last, choice is Chicago. I'd be living in London if those two options were off the table.

The reason I prefer Manhattan is that it's simply superbly designed and saturated in culture. It's a centre of greatness and generates tremendous artistic output. The grit and the smell are just part of the deal and don't bother me in the least.

[via chicago]

Originally Posted by compactspace

I live in a coop in Manhattan. And it's my first choice for living anywhere in America.

My second, and last, choice is Chicago. I'd be living in London if those two options were off the table.

The reason I prefer Manhattan is that it's simply superbly designed and saturated in culture. It's a centre of greatness and generates tremendous artistic output. The grit and the smell are just part of the deal and don't bother me in the least.

how many "artists" can even afford manhattan anymore? there probably statistically more in brooklyn or queens these days.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by via chicago

how many "artists" can even afford manhattan anymore? there probably statistically more in brooklyn or queens these days.

Five. Five artists can afford to live in Manhattan now.

[probablyimnotsure]

Originally Posted by emathias

Five. Five artists can afford to live in Manhattan now.

And those five artists are the greatest artists in the world.

[jonnynonos]

Well, it's true that it's likely not as interesting a place as it was. Manhattan, anyway. A lot of wonderful artists emerged there in the 70s.

It sort of raises the question as to what a city is without a little grit, when the prices have become so astronomical that the possibility of anything interesting organically evolving becomes moot. Once all the legitimate ethnic enclaves, artists lofts, seedy clubs, etc., are gone. In a way, places like that become caricatures of themselves.

But, I'm sure the burroughs still have a lot of more interesting places.