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.
Cities to me(skylines included) represent the epitome of human culture. They arose partly on economics and necessity. Our Museums, Government buildings, Libraries etc. become more accessible to the most people by being concentrated in cities.
They also make it possible by their infrastructure to allow a higher population density; this is necessary to support institutions such as Opera Houses, Transportation Hubs, Businesses etc. Without cities a good deal of our culture would/could not functionally exist nor be economically feasible.
On a lighter note...I think skyscrapers are a kinda cultural phallic symbol....LOL. Whose got the "tallest"!
Given the tone of your posts I don't suppose anyone ever could. The world is not black and white. There are a lot of people who are really in to big cities, skycrapers, and architecture. If you aren't then, just move on. I mean seriously, this website is called CITY-data. If you went on a forum named CAR-data, and asked why people loved old cars so much when there were better looking new ones or that cars sucked, what type of response do you think you'll get?
Just move on and deal with the fact that people are interested in things that you aren't and are under no obligation to explain themselves for that.
I obviously... realize that alot of people are really into big cities, skyscrapers, architecture etc. If I did not realize all that, then my original question could not have even been formed.
I don't live in some cave in the Smokies sippin' moonshine with ma bear OK? And yes, several people responded to this thread who were very positive and shared unique thoughts about why I should possibly care more about large cities or skyscrapers. They did not change my view too much, but I appreciated their not judging me so harshly while giving their input. After all, this is city data, not "megacity data" People need not get so defensive just because some people dont like tall skyscrapers or impersonal big cities. It's opinion. And one that I was trying to see others perspectives about in the first place. Chill.
I have never been impressed by our world's tall skyscrapers. Or really any skyscrapers. There are only like two that I've ever seen in person that are even moderately pleasing to the eye. I think if an advance civilization ever visited Earth, they would surely smirk at what we consider modern architecture (if they have mouths with lips)
Is there a reason I should be impressed with these soul-less towers? Or big cities in general? I've visited many times but never felt compelled to live in one. What am I missing if anything?
lol! You sound like the reincarnation of Frank Lloyd Wright. It's funny that the greatest architect in American history had the almost exact same opinion about skyscrapers and big cities. He's the only architect I've heard of who admitted to hating New York.
1: Tall buildings are a feat of human engineering and allow for more people/companies to reside in the same land area.
2: The fact that some of these towers (like Fountain Place in Dallas) look different from every angle and that others (like 1999 Broadway in Denver) are designed to fit their surroundings.
3: Big cities offer WAY more than some dinky little town in the middle of nowhere (Hays, Kansas comes to mind for some reason).
Billiam's post was spot on..... why like anything?
lol
But seriously, as both an architect major and native of the DFW area, I can't help but get a little too excited over skyscrapers and big cities. What gets me even more excited is seeing skyscrapers in smaller cities, because you actually get to see more of the building instead of a massively dense skyline like NYC or Chicago.
Besides, if you've seen my Fort Worth skyscraper idea thread, you KNOW I cant understand why ya wouldn't like to see the same thing..... but everyone has their own minds.
A little off topic but with that in mind what would you say to this:
I know they aren't very tall but it's about as small as you get for being about as spread out as you can get while still calling it a skyline. The city is Broomfield, Colorado.
1: Tall buildings are a feat of human engineering and allow for more people/companies to reside in the same land area.
2: The fact that some of these towers (like Fountain Place in Dallas) look different from every angle and that others (like 1999 Broadway in Denver) are designed to fit their surroundings.
3: Big cities offer WAY more than some dinky little town in the middle of nowhere (Hays, Kansas comes to mind for some reason).
OK, but unlike some others who posted, these points^ mean nothing to me. Sorry.
1. I do not see how cramming more and more people into giant, ugly vertical fire hazards is relevant in 2010 or beyond.
2. I really could care less what physical attributes designers give to a tall building. I don't get any personal satisfaction from designs that I play no part of, and like billions of other people on this planet, I will never live in one so who should really care besides the people that live or work there? I am also not an architect, so why do people poop a brick when I am not in awe of these things.
3. True, but you don't have to live there to get it.
lol! You sound like the reincarnation of Frank Lloyd Wright. It's funny that the greatest architect in American history had the almost exact same opinion about skyscrapers and big cities. He's the only architect I've heard of who admitted to hating New York.
lol! that sounds like something he would say, especially considering the crap they where putting up in New York during the 40's and 50's. Most of those skyscrapers really did look like huge filing cabinets (for people nonetheless). But to answer your question, skyscrapers do save a lot of space. Could you imagine the kind of environmental problems in places like India and China would have due to deforestation if it wasn't for skyscrapers? I say cram all the urbanites into their boxes so everyone else has more of the "real" world to enjoy.
I know they aren't very tall but it's about as small as you get for being about as spread out as you can get while still calling it a skyline. The city is Broomfield, Colorado.
Nice scenery, but those are just barely mid-rises. They don't count.
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.
