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.
Well I was only responding to this (slightly over the top) assessment:
I never said that attendance was a perfect indicator but merely that based on the available evidence there is no basis for this conclusion. It seems you do not disagree so I don't know why you are arguing with me.
I, on the other hand do disagree, since I'm the ("slightly over the top") poster you've quoted. There are a lot of people posting here who know, and probably care, little about classical music, museums, theaters, etc. For those of us who do care about such things, the quality of those offerings are of incredible importance.
As for the Minnesota Orchestra, this is hardly about one review in The NY Times (The link Drewcifer posted was a story in The New Yorker magazine). You can actually find several reviews of the orchestra's recent Carnegie Hall appearances in The Times. You can also find reviews in The various London papers . If you read German, the reviews from performances in Vienna and Berlin are available. What all of these reviews have in common (other than their praise for the quality of the orchestra), is the fact that they were written by professional music critics who have the knowledge-base to assess the relative quality of orchestral performances.
Setting aside The MIA for the moment, the Walker Art Center is also located here. Below is a link to a review which deals primarily with The Walker's web site, but which also addresses the museum itself.
"[The Walker] is still one of America's foremost experimental contemporary art spaces, as well as the most important in the vast area between Manhattan and LA." [my bolding]
This statement doesn't come from me, or from the museum, or from The Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce. It comes from a highly respected contemporary art critic and writer who lives in Berlin, and has strong ties to London and New York. Honigman writes a blog for The London Guardian, which is based in what is, arguably, the most culturally-sophisticated city in the world.
My point is simple enough: within the world of classical music, theater, and art; Minneapolis is recognized as one of the most important art destination cities in North America. Obviously, such views are subjective in nature; but, I'll take the opinions of people who work professionally within the performing arts community, over Wikipedia entries of dubious origin and pop culture pronouncements. I certainly stand by the claim you bolded in your quotation from my post.
Well no. You are just speculating now. We only know that none of the MPLS museums is in the top 17 in the US or top 100 in the world by attendance -- according to Wikipedia. The Wikipedia list may be flawed or outdated but that's the only ranking I was able to find. We don't know how many other museums can claim attendance between 400k and 500k (or
even more). I suspect many.
The link below shows the following attendance for a number of museums that don't even crack the top 100 by Wikipedia:
Philadelphia Museum of Art - 800k
Carnegie Museum of Art (Pittsburgh) - 860k
Cleveland Museum of Art - 630k
Detroit Institute of Arts - 590k
St Louis Art Museum - 480k
Why are these not on the Wiki list? i dont know. Point is there could be 20 other museums claiming attendance between 400k and 500k (depending on the source). And this is just art museums! What about science, natural history, music, etc.? So I wouldn't rush to put Minneapolis on the level of Philadelphia and DC. I am not yet convinced it is ahead of Cleveland and Pittsburgh.
I understand the argument, but I doubt that you would find twenty more museums within that 400-500k range when you only have 17 museums of 500k+. I get that there is a huge drop-off between the top 10 in attendance and the rest of the list, but when there is only a distribution of 200K between the next 7, it would strike me as odd that there would be 20 more in the next tier of 100k.
Plus, your post neglects the obvious: in markets like Seattle, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh, there is really only *one* big fine arts museum. In Minneapolis, there are clearly two (arguably three), plus the Sculpture Garden which attracts 500k+ and could easily be grouped with the Walker's total attendance and catapult it towards the nation's top ten attended, if you wanted to do the metric that way.
And why would we even mention Science/Natural History museums? This discussion is about art, right? But if we wanted to, Science Museum of Minnesota is the 21st best attended museum in the country (of any category), the highest attended science museum outside of DC, NY, Chicago, Boston, Philly, LA or Indianapolis (for some odd reason). 1.1million visits. A pretty good endorsement for our museum scene, if you want/feel the need to go there...
Gotcha. I love when the cheese burns! I normally use cheddar or swiss but I love multiple cheeses but that's off topic just a wee bit.
That's the only way to do it! Some places make you sign a fun novelty waver in case you burn your mouth
Quote:
That's a good thought, Minneapolis was a big player in the old American west, true? I'm sure the population would have been larger if slavery ended earlier.
It depends on what you classify as American West, but it does fall into that "first city of the West" category like St. Louis or Kansas City do. It is entirely Western in a few cultural/historical aspects that it shares with most of the rest of the big cities between Chicago, and say-- Denver:
1. City fathers consist *heavily* of wealthy Anglo-Protestants from "Back East."
2. Grew first with a River, and later with the railroads as the main medium of trade (in fact, I'm in the process of reading a book about a very famous court case in the 1850's involving the first rail bridge across the Mississippi at Davenport IA/Rock Island, IL. St. Louis merchants opposed it in practicality because it made the river tougher to navigate -- the whole case was set off by a steamboat collision with the bridge-- and in principle because it would dethrone riverboats as the main means of transport in the West. Pres. Lincoln worked as an attorney for the Chicago-backed railroad company).
3. The industry was based off of a natural resource (wheat) that was available in the West, processed, and sent to markets in the East.
4. The city is rigidly grid-ed and had a "master plan", unlike many cities of the East that grew organically and have a network of streets/roads that resemble old English towns.
Quote:
I know a girl from there. I wouldn't think Minny had so little blacks for a city of its size. Africans are completely different culturally than American blacks.
Oh, yes. I know they are. I just mean to mention that they have contributed a lot to the growth of the city's African-American population.
Quote:
Most of New Orleans' museums focus on American and Louisiana history, you would have a ball down there. Also at the Aquarium, Insectarium, and 98 year old Audobon Zoo.
I'm sure I would. I love a good zoo, too.
Quote:
That's what I thought. It seems like a burger and fries city but I know better than that.
It used to be, hence the Lucy. It still has a big dive bar/sports bar/grill culture to this day.
Quote:
Yea there's plenty of normal city stuff and immense civic pride by the natives and even transplants. Downtown shopping is getting better, not how it used to be though. Apple is looking to open a store on Canal St, stores like that will only improve the experience downtown. Ones that everyday people use.
Maybe I'll try to get down there sometime next year. Right now, vacation time is tough to get from work. I'm already taking some time off in April to meet a friend in the Baltimore/DC area. But New Orleans is definitely on my list
I, on the other hand do disagree, since I'm the ("slightly over the top") poster you've quoted. There are a lot of people posting here who know, and probably care, little about classical music, museums, theaters, etc. For those of us who do care about such things, the quality of those offerings are of incredible importance.
As for the Minnesota Orchestra, this is hardly about one review in The NY Times (The link Drewcifer posted was a story in The New Yorker magazine). You can actually find several reviews of the orchestra's recent Carnegie Hall appearances in The Times. You can also find reviews in The various London papers . If you read German, the reviews from performances in Vienna and Berlin are available. What all of these reviews have in common (other than their praise for the quality of the orchestra), is the fact that they were written by professional music critics who have the knowledge-base to assess the relative quality of orchestral performances.
Setting aside The MIA for the moment, the Walker Art Center is also located here. Below is a link to a review which deals primarily with The Walker's web site, but which also addresses the museum itself.
"[The Walker] is still one of America's foremost experimental contemporary art spaces, as well as the most important in the vast area between Manhattan and LA." [my bolding]
This statement doesn't come from me, or from the museum, or from The Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce. It comes from a highly respected contemporary art critic and writer who lives in Berlin, and has strong ties to
London and New York. Honigman writes a blog for The London Guardian, which is based in what is, arguably, the most culturally-sophisticated city in the world.
My point is simple enough: within the world of classical music, theater, and art; Minneapolis is recognized as one of the most important art destination cities in North America. Obviously, such views are subjective in nature; but, I'll take the opinions of people who work professionally within the performing arts community, over Wikipedia entries of dubious origin and pop culture pronouncements. I certainly stand by the claim you bolded in your quotation from my post.
look I appreciate hometown pride but putting MPLS in the class of SF/DC/Philly based on some articles praising a few good shows by its orchaestra or this museum or that is pure homerism. You still havent convinced me that MPLS has a stronger art scene than Cleveland, let alone SF or DC.
More to the point of the thread though, if we expand the discussion to culture overall I would say NO comes out ahead as it has more history, better architecture, strong musical and culinary heritage and a respectable art scene of its own.
look I appreciate hometown pride but putting MPLS in the class of SF/DC/Philly based on some articles praising a few good shows by its orchaestra or this museum or that is pure homerism. You still havent convinced me that MPLS has a stronger art scene than Cleveland, let alone SF or DC.
More to the point of the thread though, if we expand the discussion to culture overall I would say NO comes out ahead as it has more history, better architecture, strong musical and culinary heritage and a respectable art scene of its own.
Yup, I'm sure you're right.
But, we are getting there. We have almost as many cows in the grazing field downtown as Des Moines does, and our jug and washboard band plays twice a week now down there in the new town barn!
But, we are getting there. We have almost as many cows in the grazing field downtown as Des Moines does, and our jug and washboard band plays twice a week now down there in the new town barn!
Your sardonic tone can't compensate for the fact you aren't on the level of DC/Boston/SF.
Just to clarify - I have a degree in art and I follow it closely but I am not an art professional per se. I am the head chef of a fine dining restaurant.
look I appreciate hometown pride but putting MPLS in the class of SF/DC/Philly based on some articles praising a few good shows by its orchaestra or this museum or that is pure homerism. You still havent convinced me that MPLS has a stronger art scene than Cleveland, let alone SF or DC.
More to the point of the thread though, if we expand the discussion to culture overall I would say NO comes out ahead as it has more history, better architecture, strong musical and culinary heritage and a respectable art scene of its own.
I've lived in both cities (Minneapolis and Cleveland), and Minneapolis is easily a bigger "arts" city than Cleveland. It would be homerism to say Minneapolis compares with DC, SF or Philly, but I think the only comparison was for the arts, not overall. Most/all MN "homers" would never take a stance like that.
I ALSO think NO has more interesting/unique culture....but that shouldn't discount Minneapolis as much as it should be a credit to NO's key strength as a city.
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.
