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.
Yes it is a much bigger city but 1.4 million of its population lives in 68 sq miles. That should tell you a lot.
Right, which is more than double the population of DC (in an equivalent area). So it tells us that Chicago has a bigger, denser, far more populous urban core. Not to mention that it also has 4 to 5 million extra people in the metro.
Cheers. One other thing that you alluded to that is important is that Chicago is simply a much, much bigger city. And although bigger is not always better, in this case it is.
Have you ever been to Chicago? From a tourist's perspective, what is there to do on the Southsides and Westsides other than go to Soldier Field or McCormick Place or the United Center (which is in no mans land)? These areas probably comprise of 70% of the 227 square miles.
1. Statue of Liberty: Not the biggest statue, but its placement in the NY harbor has assured its place in history. In my mind, nothing symbolizes the US like the Statue of Liberty.
2. White House: More unusual than the Capitol Building (tons of Capitols look similar IMO) this is shown in every movie about the President.
3. Hollywood Sign: In case you don't know where it is, it literally spells it out for you.
4. Golden Gate Bridge: The color, shape and location of this assures it is easily recognizable.
5. Empire State Building: The most iconic skyscraper of all time. King-Kong and countless other movies.
6. Washington Monument: I think this is the most unusual of the monuments/memorials on the national mall and thus the most recognizable.
7. Mt. Rushmore: obviously the mountain isn't man-made, but the sculpture is what makes it famous. This one is endlessly parodied.
8. St. Louis Arch: The city really seized the opportunity with this landmark to make something unique that identifies the city in an instant. I can't think of anything comparable.
9. Chrysler Building: After the ESB, the most famous skyscraper in the country. Copied so many times it is ridiculous.
10. Seattle Space Needle: I think this is the best of the observation towers, and the most recognizable.
Right, which is more than double the population of DC (in an equivalent area). So it tells us that Chicago has a bigger, denser, far more populous urban core. Not to mention that it also has 4 to 5 million extra people in the metro.
That's my point.
What does people have to do with this. Chicago has 4 million more people than DC but the DC metro almost has higher ridership than the EL and Metra together. We are talking about things to do? Are we not? Let's stay focused. Houston has more people than DC, SF and Boston combined.
DC's a good choice. What bumps it below Chicago and L.A. are, I think, a couple of things. Chicago and L.A. both have historical artistic movements (e.g. Chicago School and Pop Art in L.A.). DC has had artistic movements but none so influential. Their cities' symphony orchestras are internationally "ranked" higher. DC's got a great restaurant scene, but not better than either other city.
What makes things a bit difficult is weighing homegrown amenities over their abundance in DC that comes from the vast national endowment, as it's the nation's capital. The latter can't be undervalued; we're a wealthy country, after all. Still, I'd personally place it 4th.
Make a list of things to do and see and I will double it!
No we don't have to go into that depth becuase I don't have all the particulars and it would just make this thread even more obsessively subject inane.
Nah, changed my mind...
Chicago...
Restaurants: I'll simply say it, generally recognized as a top 10 world city for dining. (Saveur, Food & Wine, and just general knowledge). Is Washington DC top 25? I'd be very surprised if it is.
Theater: Chicago is generally ackowledged as a top 3 theater city in North America behind NYC and on par w/ Toronto. While there are several (5?) large venues for touring Broadway shows and whatnot, Chicago's Theater shines-- and is probably best in US for off-Broadway... Shakespeare Theatre, Court, Goodman, Steppenwolf and there are many others.
Music: Chicago is blues, is world-renowned for jazz and apparently house music as well. Add the Lyric Opera, and Chicago Symphony Orchestra-- both considered top 5 in world and that's tough to beat.
Architecture: It's Chicago.
Museums: Although a slight edge to DC, Chicago is top 3 in US (w/ NYC)
Nightlife: Chicago's nightlife laps DC by margins.
Dance: Don't know, Hubbard and Joffrey are here.
Sports: Probably Chicago.
Universities: Chicago - NU, U of C, UIC, DePaul, Loyola
Neighborhoods--getting subjective here, but Chicago has great, authentic hoods.
History: DC, by a large margin.
I'll come up with others, but that ^^^^ is my 5 min. take.
DC is a great city with tons to offer, it's just not big enough to be in Chicago's (or LA's) league. Making it more difficult, is Chicago actually plays above its own head.
I know Chicago pretty well, so I will offer a rebuttal. Chicago's music scene is great but on the east coast Baltimore has sort of hi jacked the Chicago house sound. A lot of people don't even know that house music originated in Chicago. On the east coast, they call it club music and people in Bmore/Philly/NJ eat it up.
Chicago's culinary scene is world class. I agree 100 percent.
As for filming, DC and Chicago have a sizable amount of films and TV shows set in the city. What difference does it make if one is about politics? That's DC. NYC and LA run the table on this anyway.
Last time, I checked DC has three airports with it's name on it. Dulles offers great access to Europe. Nothing in Chicago can match DC's access to National. Ten minutes from DT DC. Metro rail to Dulles in 2 years, so I would say it's about even. 25 minutes to BWI from Union Station on MARC. The EL is great as well as Metra but DC Metro has greater ridership numbers.
As for activities. Last time I checked, DC has the same big time concerts, bands, sports arenas (Verizon is in a much better place than United Center), outdoor concerts on the National Mall, etc.... Jay-Z at the Verizon is no different than Jay-Z at United. Same goes for Bruce Springstein, Rihanna, Lil Wayne, etc....
Plus nothing in Chicago is more iconic and recognizable than the National Mall (Monument, White House and Capitol).
What's Chicago's answer for Rock Creek Park? Can you rock climb in Chicago? Can you kayak/canoe on the rocks? Can you completely lose yourself in wilderness in the middle of Chicago?
DC has too many things to do and see! Newseum, Air & Space, Smithsonian, Archives, Supreme Court, CIA, FBI, White House, Monument, Vietnam, WW2, Korean Memorial, Holocaust Museum, African American Museum, Native American Museum, Kennedy Center, Hirshorn, Portrait Gallery, National Gallery of Art, Historic U Street (Black Broadway).
DC's media presence alone makes it much more world class in my opinion. It's in the news everyday!
"I know Chicago pretty well, so I will offer a rebuttal. Chicago's music scene is great but on the east coast Baltimore has sort of hi jacked the Chicago house sound. A lot of people don't even know that house music originated in Chicago. On the east coast, they call it club music and people in Bmore/Philly/NJ eat it up."
They call it club music in Miami and DC, certainly true but I havent experienced the type of fanbase for EDM/Dubstep/trance/house in DC that I have in Chicago but ok I can agree that DC is on par with Chicago. If it wasnt I wouldnt live here, I like a city with good fashion, film, and music scene and DC has all 3. Although fashion is a step down from Chicago and not talking about just locals wearing high end clothing but actual fashion shows. Chicago is 6th in the U.S. behind NY, LA, Miami, Vegas, and Dallas.
"As for filming, DC and Chicago have a sizable amount of films and TV shows set in the city. What difference does it make if one is about politics? That's DC. NYC and LA run the table on this anyway."
Well cool thing about this is that DC is known around the world but come on with this, as a resident do you only want people around the world to think of DC as the capital of the U.S. and all the capital entails?
I want DC to be more like London in films, politics yes but also considerable amount of city living and city life shown in films. DC doesnt have that yet and DC doesnt try to get that which is just to bad IMO. In this area DC can certainly improve how its shown around the world. Would you agree or disagree?
"Last time, I checked DC has three airports with it's name on it. Dulles offers great access to Europe. Nothing in Chicago can match DC's access to National. Ten minutes from DT DC. Metro rail to Dulles in 2 years, so I would say it's about even. 25 minutes to BWI from Union Station on MARC. The EL is great as well as Metra but DC Metro has greater ridership numbers. "
Ok I never said DC lacks good airports but what I said was that it isnt as connected to the world as much as Chicago and I am not only talking about Europe. ORD has more direct connections, more destinations, and a larger profile than any of DC's 3 airports IMO.
"As for activities. Last time I checked, DC has the same big time concerts, bands, sports arenas (Verizon is in a much better place than United Center), outdoor concerts on the National Mall, etc.... Jay-Z at the Verizon is no different than Jay-Z at United. Same goes for Bruce Springstein, Rihanna, Lil Wayne, etc...."
We're speaking two different languages. Sure a Jay Z concert is the same in any city and I am not talking about Verizon vs United here. I am talking about the actual venues you can be proud of for your city having. Amphitheaers, outdoors concert halls, etc. Have you seen the one Chicago has in Mellinium Park downtown? Look at its location next to the lake, inside downtown, and the backdrop. It creates an ambiance that we dont have here in DC although I think MDAllstar has posted a project along the Potomac that will nicely rival this area of Chicago IMO.
Also what about local music talents, not big name artists. I know DC is good in this but do we really have the variety to compete with Chicago musically? Violin players in hotel lobbies, violin players along the bridges of Chicago river, etc?
"Plus nothing in Chicago is more iconic and recognizable than the National Mall (Monument, White House and Capitol)."
I can agree with this one. DC has some of the most recognizable landmarks/buildings/monuments in the U.S. Only one or two cities can surpass that in the U.S. IMO.
"What's Chicago's answer for Rock Creek Park? Can you rock climb in Chicago? Can you kayak/canoe on the rocks? Can you completely lose yourself in wilderness in the middle of Chicago? "
I dont kayak or canoe. I am a city person that occasionally likes to go speed boating or jet skiing but your point is well taken. However I would argue international visitors dont come to the midwest, northest, or the south for outdoor recreation, thats a larger selling point for the west IMO.
"DC has too many things to do and see! Newseum, Air & Space, Smithsonian, Archives, Supreme Court, CIA, FBI, White House, Monument, Vietnam, WW2, Korean Memorial, Holocaust Museum, African American Museum, Native American Museum, Kennedy Center, Hirshorn, Portrait Gallery, National Gallery of Art, Historic U Street (Black Broadway)."
I agree. There is little reason that anyone could be bored in DC/especially on family visits IMO.
If this were only museums, I'd say that DC would get the second spot (and maybe even challenge NYC for #1). However, for overall cultural amenities, I'd say that after New York it goes:
Los Angeles
Chicago
SF and DC
Boston & Philly
But all of those cities have fantastic amenities and offer more than ample musuems, theatre, music, etc.
DC's a good choice. What bumps it below Chicago and L.A. are, I think, a couple of things. Chicago and L.A. both have historical artistic movements (e.g. Chicago School and Pop Art in L.A.). DC has had artistic movements but none so influential. Their cities' symphony orchestras are internationally "ranked" higher. DC's got a great restaurant scene, but not better than either other city.
What makes things a bit difficult is weighing homegrown amenities over their abundance in DC that comes from the vast national endowment, as it's the nation's capital. The latter can't be undervalued; we're a wealthy country, after all. Still, I'd personally place it 4th.
Great post! I am glad someone recognizes all that DC has in 61 square miles. DC can hold its own with Chicago in a lot of categories. It's hard for some of you to digest it.
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.
One other thing that you alluded to that is important is that Chicago is simply a much, much bigger city. And although bigger is not always better, in this case it is.
