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.
Most museums, as well as the best ones usually, are going to be in bigger cities because it was wealthy patrons of the arts and culture who greatly subsidized such museums' construction and operating costs, and they were viewed as civic assets for everyone and not just certain classes of people. It has only been maybe 20-30 years that possession of a bachelor's degree, and therefore overall educational attainment rates, became the significant sociocultural/socioeconomic barometer that it is today and the best museums have been around for a lot longer. If anything, you'd think Austin would do better with museums just by being the capital of the country's second-largest state with additional revenue coming in from the energy industry.
Do Sacramento, Albany or Springfield have great museums? I don't know if being the capital of a state matters that much in terms of cultural amenities, at least not more than the size of the population or the wealth of the population.
Unlike Denver Austin had a reputation for being somewhat of a culture mecca for decades so one would think the highly cultured tech upper middle class would demand higher quality museums, symphonies and other amenities.
Do Sacramento, Albany or Springfield have great museums? I don't know if being the capital of a state matters that much in terms of cultural amenities, at least not more than the size of the population or the wealth of the population.
Unlike Denver Austin had a reputation for being somewhat of a culture mecca for decades so one would think the highly cultured tech upper middle class would demand higher quality museums, symphonies and other amenities.
I am in tech, I know high level and low level people in tech. I wouldn't describe them as any more cultured than any other genre. I've never known Austin to be known for being a culture mecca.
Do Sacramento, Albany or Springfield have great museums? I don't know if being the capital of a state matters that much in terms of cultural amenities, at least not more than the size of the population or the wealth of the population.
.
Sacramento has few good museums - the Crocker Art Museum and the CA Railroad Museum. There are several others but those two are by far the most prominent. They are currently building the Powerhouse Science Center Museum, which I'm looking forward to.
While I agree that being a state capital doesn't necessarily mean they are filled with cultural amenities, and certainly Sacramento isn't a cultural mecca like Boston, Atlanta, and Denver. I don't think you can compare Sacramento with Albany or Springfield. Sacramento is so much larger than those two cities.
Last edited by pistola916; 05-21-2020 at 10:54 AM..
Sacramento has few good museums - the Crocker Art Museum and the CA Railroad Museum. There are several others but those two are by far the most prominent. They are currently building the Powerhouse Science Center Museum, which I'm looking forward to.
While I agree that being a state capital doesn't necessarily mean they are filled with cultural amenities, and certainly Sacramento isn't a cultural mecca like Boston, Atlanta, and Denver. I don't think you can compare Sacramento with Albany or Springfield. Sacramento is so much larger than those two cities.
I think Sacramento has great potential but so far it's been all wasted. You go to Old Town Sac and it's tiny, mostly vacant, and devoid of foot traffic.
Sacramento is entering a building boom, and I hope this time it will be different, but plans for Sacramento's future tallest building were scrapped late last year...So many of Sacramento's most ambitious projects are massively delayed or scrapped.
Do Sacramento, Albany or Springfield have great museums? I don't know if being the capital of a state matters that much in terms of cultural amenities, at least not more than the size of the population or the wealth of the population.
That's a good question and I know much of this depends on a state's priorities and population distribution. Georgia has most of its state museums spread across the state which makes sense, at least in theory, given the fact that Atlanta is big and wealthy enough to have its own museums. But with Texas' unique and rich history and oil wealth, I'd think they would have wanted to build a couple of great museums in Austin. Plus Austin is home to the state's flagship university which usually has a few decent museums associated with them.
Looking at this list, I can at least see there's a pretty large collection of both state and local museums in Austin. Of course quality is a different thing altogether but at first glance it looks like the museum landscape in Austin is at least varied and interesting.
Quote:
Unlike Denver Austin had a reputation for being somewhat of a culture mecca for decades so one would think the highly cultured tech upper middle class would demand higher quality museums, symphonies and other amenities.
Historically, I thought Austin's reputation was more counter-cultural and "weird." Maybe that's why it doesn't have as many great and grand museums as you guys say since they are hallmarks of conventional and institutional culture and Austin may not have really wanted them or at least not at the level they could have been.
I am in tech, I know high level and low level people in tech. I wouldn't describe them as any more cultured than any other genre. I've never known Austin to be known for being a culture mecca.
Didn't Paul Allen start a museums in Seattle? I think Ross Perot also did one in Dallas.
I'm in tech too and while I wouldn't say tech people are into classical music or the ballet, but as a group they're certainly more interested in science, history and pop culture than the general population. Lots of trivia nerds in the bunch.
Most museums, as well as the best ones usually, are going to be in bigger cities because it was wealthy patrons of the arts and culture who greatly subsidized such museums' construction and operating costs, and they were viewed as civic assets for everyone and not just certain classes of people. It has only been maybe 20-30 years that possession of a bachelor's degree, and therefore overall educational attainment rates, became the significant sociocultural/socioeconomic barometer that it is today and the best museums have been around for a lot longer. If anything, you'd think Austin would do better with museums just by being the capital of the country's second-largest state with additional revenue coming in from the energy industry.
Austin has a long way to go in terms of catching up to do in the world of museums/fine arts. Many cities on the East Coast and Midwest have much lower overall education attainment rates yet still have much more to offer.
Take a look at Toledo....The Toledo Museum of Art and Glass Pavillion blow away anything in Austin and the Toledo Zoo is so much better than the one is Austin.
I just don't see Autin ever catching up to even cities like Toledo, or Dayton and certainly not Pittsburgh or Cincinnati.
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.
