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.
That’s absurd in Boston. One of my sister and brother-in-law’s best friends is “Lambo Larry”. A 7 figure income industrial psychologist in Vancouver. The roads there are considerably better than Boston and he unloaded the car after a few years because it was undriveable on Vancouver streets. Boston pot holes are far worse than Vancouver.
Man, when I tell you I know people in Roxbury driving Aventadors, Huaracans...Ive got video evidence.
Boston is home to stores like Riccardi and tons of huge high-end designers there is a mall dedicated exclusively to it.
Go to Concepts you find A Bathing Ape, Yves Saint Laurent Off-White, Alexander Mcqueen, Balmain...Stuff I have no chance of finding here in Seattle. Certain brands I just mentioned you literally cannot find in Seattle(Yves Saint Laurent, A Bathing Ape. Or you can only find them at 1 store versus 3 or 4in Boston.
You act like Newbury Street isn't lined with Hermes, True Religon, Armani, Barbour, Bang and Olufsen but rather it's like all Brooks Brothers and J. Crew this is very far from the reality. Am I to believe these stores aren't sustained by people living in Boston?
To be totally honest I've never thought of Chicago as glamorous I assumed there's some glamour just as a function of its size. But ive never heard it as a fashion city any more than Boston. I don't know it well to say much more than that. As I said earlier i saw it as a capital of middle America known more for meatpacking, da bears, and gang banging than fashion or glamour. You could say the same sort of thing with Boston.
Outside of NYC LA MIA, I think it become a splitting hairs thing. This is why my initial comment was "this list makes sense"
I'm not saying Boston doesn't have high end shopping, or high fashion. Newbury is one of my favorite streets on the planet, for reasons that include the stores and designers.
But Newbury isn't Michigan Ave. And Back Bay isn't the Gold Coast or River North. This is an area that rivals 5th Ave and probably bests Rodeo for luxury. Material things are a biiigggg deal. All around Michigan Ave, you find ultra expensive restaurants with world renowned chefs, with Bentleys, Bugatis, and Ferraris getting valet. It's just very loud luxury and fashion in Chicago's core.
Boston is so much more reserved, both downtown and in the suburbs. Tesla and Prius capital of the US. Mostly between the bell curve when it comes to fashion.
Come stay a weekend in the Gold Coast or River North in June or July. The difference in glamour/glitz/materialism will be evident as soon as you hop out of the uber. It's closer to Miami or Vegas than it is Boston.
Hmmm, really? I love in Chicago, and outside of the touristy areas(i.e. Michigan Ave, Lincoln Park, West Loop/Randolph Street, etc), I truly get the sense fewer people are into fashion here vs. in other cities(Miami, NYC, DC, etc). Sure a few people in Chicago might be into fashion, but I get the sense fashion isn't as hugely on the minds of an average Chicagoian, vs. someone in say like NYC.
Why do we keep making this point? Have you seen the average New Yorker? Even the average person from Los Angeles... Flat brimmed dodgers hat, white tshirts, and jeans.
Also, I wouldn't consider any of the areas you listed as touristy outside of Michigan Ave. The rest are firmly residential Chicago neighborhoods, just like Old Town, or Bucktown, or Pilsen, or Wicker Park.
I don't think Chicago is NYC or Miami, but the original point that was made to start the banter, was that it's a joke Chicago is on the list and higher than Boston. And to that I would say, it makes total sense.
I'm not saying Boston doesn't have high end shopping, or high fashion. Newbury is one of my favorite streets on the planet, for reasons that include the stores and designers.
But Newbury isn't Michigan Ave. And Back Bay isn't the Gold Coast or River North. This is an area that rivals 5th Ave and probably bests Rodeo for luxury. Material things are a biiigggg deal. All around Michigan Ave, you find ultra expensive restaurants with world renowned chefs, with Bentleys, Bugatis, and Ferraris getting valet. It's just very loud luxury and fashion in Chicago's core.
Boston is so much more reserved, both downtown and in the suburbs. Tesla and Prius capital of the US. Mostly between the bell curve when it comes to fashion.
Come stay a weekend in the Gold Coast or River North in June or July. The difference in glamour/glitz/materialism will be evident as soon as you hop out of the uber. It's closer to Miami or Vegas than it is Boston.
I'll take your word for the flash of Chicago but Boston is hardly homely. I exepct the #3 city in the Us to be significantly more glamorous.
But Boston is not completely out of the fashion world. Fashion trends in lifestyle streetwear, in particular, do have a strong footprint in Boston. But it ranges from practical to very much higher end.
Virgil Abloh was at the ICA shortly before his death and there are publications that come to Boston and examine more so streetwear fashion than the high-end more formal fashion scene in Boston. I'm not saying Boston is flashy- but materialism isn't all that makes "glamour" btw Tesla is pretty flashy IMO but depends on some on the model.
That said, I'm sure there are some people even in NYC, where fashion isn't as highly on their minds. You may as well say this would depend on how wealthy a neighborhood is, to be honest here.
Btw as for the person who mentioned where high end fashion stores are in Chicago, those stores are NOT so much located on Michigan Ave, and more located towards like Oak Street and Rush Street. I don't think such stores you'll find near Rush and Oak in Chicago are quite as high end as Worth Avenue in Palm Beach, or Rodeo Drive in LA though.
To be accurate. N Michigan Ave is also part of a DISTRICT Titled the - Magnificent Mile (Mag mile).
From Trip Advisor:
The Magnificent Mile is the 13-block stretch of North Michigan Avenue that runs from the banks of the Chicago River to the south, to Oak Street to the north. The Magnificent Mile district extends a full square mile from North Michigan Avenue.
The Magnificent Mile is a spectacular showcase of style, flavor, entertainment and fun. With more than 460 stores, 275 restaurants, 60 hotels and unique entertainments and attractions packed and stacked along its length.
So it is a district including eateries from the Viagra Triangle and boutique shops of Rush St and Oak St boutiques.
Whether one wishes to lessen cause these are not directly on N Michigan. They are all included as the Mag Mile.
The are has has a Tesla near and Lamborghini and Bugatti, Mazeratti showrooms on Rush also.
Oak St also is right off N Michigan Ave to Rush St right there. You would regularly see some cars parked on the street there and driving by the area and caught in older streetviews.
So this area still has its high-end stores and malls. N Michigan Av, despite loss it's Macy's Water Tower (its State St Flagship remains and will till last of Macy's would die). Loss of the Gap store no big deal (I think of the 90s average mall for the Gap). Sad the Disney Store was lost though. Not high-end, still tourist loved it.
Gaining a largest Starbucks Roastery in the world was and is a great addition. Every era, these streets need to re-imagine themselves. Retail is still taking hits in cities. Post-Covid we need like yesterday the new normal tourist back and office workers back to our new normal. Chicago got hit hard and lucky gaining some back.
Ths video on N Michigan. Though a hour long. Shows a full walk with the city and retailers, still going TROPICAL FLOWERS LOOK along most on the Mile. Crowds were back here summer 2021 on this day. Still I am sure less overall till tourist all return. Looks great yet and more its old self.
Can be changed to HD. Worth a scroll thru at least as a hour long retaining its ritz that wider sidewalks with flowers add much. Full walk both sides of street from the river.
I'm surprised at the ranking of this list. SF over NY & Miami, DC over Chicago, LA, and Boston? I don't know about that, to be honest.
I only really consider Georgetown and only CityCenter DC to be glamorous here in DC. Maybe the Wharf increasingly will become that, too. Obviously, McLean and Tysons, Potomac, and Bethesda might be the suburban equivalents.
I'll take your word for the flash of Chicago but Boston is hardly homely. I exepct the #3 city in the Us to be significantly more glamorous.
But Boston is not completely out of the fashion world. Fashion trends in lifestyle streetwear, in particular, do have a strong footprint in Boston. But it ranges from practical to very much higher end.
Virgil Abloh was at the ICA shortly before his death and there are publications that come to Boston and examine more so streetwear fashion than the high-end more formal fashion scene in Boston. I'm not saying Boston is flashy- but materialism isn't all that makes "glamour" btw Tesla is pretty flashy IMO but depends on some on the model.
I don’t think being the #3 city means much in this case. After NYC and LA, the difference from the rest of USA is a major cliff. #4 is Houston and #5 is Phoenix to continue this major difference between 2 and 3. After that point, the glamor of each city doesn’t have near as much affect on how big it is.
I don’t think being the #3 city means much in this case. After NYC and LA, the difference from the rest of USA is a major cliff. #4 is Houston and #5 is Phoenix to continue this major difference between 2 and 3. After that point, the glamor of each city doesn’t have near as much affect on how big it is.
Phoenix isn't here and Houston is not in the Top 10 here. Is this your personal ranking?
My personal would've been. If we're just talking overall
NYC
LA
MIA
>>>>>>>
LV
CHI
>>
SF
>
ATL
>
BOS
DC
DAL
HOU
The gap is huge but this does matter. Life in Baltimore and visiting Denver or Orlando feels sort of weird without that little glitz/glam/sophistication/elegance.
Philly could be up there but lowkey its the ultimate anti-glamour city in its attitude/demeanor/everything. But I love that.
Last edited by BostonBornMassMade; 02-22-2022 at 01:40 PM..
Phoenix isn't here and Houston is not in the Top 10 here. Is this your personal ranking?
My personal would've been. If we're just talking overall
NYC
LA
MIA
>>>>>>>
LV
CHI
>>
SF
>
ATL
>
BOS
DC
DAL
HOU
The gap is huge but this does matter. Life in Baltimore and visiting Denver or Orlando feels sort of weird thought that little glitz/glam/sophistication/elegance.
Philly could be up there but lowkey its the ultimate anti-glamour city in its attitude/demeanor/everything. But I love that.
No. That’s the ranking of the top 5 cities of the US by population. I was referencing where you said that by Chicago being #3, you’d expect it to be more glamorous.
And I said I don’t find that being the third city has much to do with it in this particular case due to the big gap after LA (as a city not as a glamor destination).
Chicago has no business being number 3 because NYC, LA, and Miami exist.
It was unrelated, but white Phoenix isn’t here, Scottsdale is here which is the glamor center of that area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag
Cities that Boston isn’t in the conversation to be more glamorous than
The obvious
NYC
LA
Miami
Vegas
Not as obvious but still easily more glamorous
Chicago
San Francisco
For Chicago’s case, it is often associated with crime but it is also associated with Magnificent Mile etc. For San Fran, replace crime with being the homeless capital. Not that the top 4 are seen as flawless because they’re not, but the glamor aspects of them are what are easily the biggest thing to associate there.
Philly could be up there but lowkey its the ultimate anti-glamour city in its attitude/demeanor/everything. But I love that.
That's definitely my take on this place.
And, as I believe I said upthread, while I can find some more-money-than-taste properties in our ritzy districts, the money here prefers to whisper rather than shout. Or at least it does now; there was a time when the new money definitely shouted. (The house pictured in that listing, Lynnewood Hall, is a 110-room Greek Revival mansion in the northern suburb of Elkins Park built in 1897 for traction magnate Peter A.B. Widener (grandfather of Harry Elkins Widener, for whom Harvard's main library is named; he and his father George D. Widener both went down with the Titanic). It's been vacant and moldering away for nearly two decades now, and it goes on and off the market periodically; it's off now.
I suspect that one reason the new money shouted in Philadelphila in the Gilded Age was because the old money shunned 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.
