This may seem like a strange question, but...

Americans (fellow American), what effect do it have on you when you view the skylines of cities outside our nation, many in places like Africa, Asia, Latin America in cities we either don't know or know little about?

I don't know about you, but when I go and view them, I am in awe.

We are a huge, successful, and geographically issolated nation (we only border two other nations and our Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts are massive).

We sometimes see the world as being the US.

When I see some of these global skylines, often in cities I've never heard of, I'm blown away by it...and I end up feeling darned provencial.

For all our discussion of which US cities are the best, the greatest, etc., there is a whole big, wide world out there with similiar things happening and sometimes I think we just don't get that world in focus.

Is that true of other nations, as well as the US? No doubt. But I think the sense of issolation in our country exceeds the others; we are a world unto ourselves.

Do others have such feelings when they view the type of pictures I've described?

I feel pride, because we Americans invented skyscrapers and now many other countries are copying us.

European skylines wow me. I especially like how the great cathedrals were so towering for their time. I also like the low slung turrets and domes of cities like Rome and Madrid.
Skyscrapers look best mixed in with other buildings from earlier periods. London looks fantatstic with its mix of gothic and postmodern so does Barcelona.

I don't particularly like a skyline of nothing but squalid apartment towers or glassy, pretentious office edifices. There needs to be a mix of the two along with interesting lowrises and midrises....perhaps a bridge or other engineering feat. A low building can be just as much a signature as a tall one. The Sydney Opera House is a good example. I am fascinated by the skylines of Tokyo, Manila and Hong Kong. Shanghai looks forced as do many sunbelt cities here in the US.

I like skyscrapers when they are well designed and have a personality. The skylines Sydney and Melboune, Montreal and Toronto never fail to impress me. Vancouver's skyline on the oher hand is very disturbing as it gives off a hint of Kowloon.

As for SA Buenos Aires is simply dazzling.

When I see some of these global skylines, often in cities I've never heard of, I'm blown away by it...and I end up feeling darned provencial.



There are plenty of cities in the world with impressive skylines but America is truly the birthplace of the modern skyscraper. Pre-war skyscrapers in New York and Chicago are so damn gorgeous and usually beats the pants off of any pre-fab building that are common in "instant-skyscraper-cities."

Your comment can be easily be reversed: when I see American skylines. . .I end up feeling darned provincial.

I think it's fascinating so many cities in the world have sprung up from nothing in the last several decades: Dubai, UAE, Brasilia, Brazil, etc. I'm also awe-struck by some of these cities; they just make me wonder why most (but not all) of the new construction in the US is unending suburbia.

I read an article once that foreigners find us curiously insular. I think it's true, but has more to do with our history than any intentional arrogance.

I feel pride, because we Americans invented skyscrapers and now many other countries are copying us.

No you didnt but still....I wouldnt call it copying!

Being a native New Yorker I can't help but to feel amused by you feeling "provincial" by seeing all those other skylines. I certainly do not. But you must take into account other things about those so called skylines of those other cities. Poor design, shoddy workmanship and poor or non existant urban planning is pretty common. Quite frankly, I'd take the Chicago skyline any day over many of those horrid skylines around the world. They just have the skyscraper itch we had a century ago.

edsg, I think you're right. whatever tonka says about other skylines, the rest of the world is coming into its own. Its exciting, and hopefully can quiet some of the more nationalist/isolationist people within our country. Someday we'll realize that we are no longer the exception that we once were. and that will give us all the more reason to continue to become a better place.

Tonka, Houston doesn't even have zoning laws. think about it. LA, ATL, DC are all constantly stuck in gridlock. most of suburban america can't buy a carton of milk without driving somewhere, and most of america is suburbanizing. and we don't even have to deal with a history of colonial exploitation, domination or ethnic strife. can you really claim that we have good urban planning?

No you didnt but still....I wouldnt call it copying!


I wouldn't call it copying either. but there is no argument that the first skyscrapers were built in America, particularly in Chicago. It is where the confluence of steel, elevators and water pumps were first combined.

tall church spires don't count as skyscrapers, as they aren't inhabitable. So I'm not sure what the hell you're on about.

oh, and by the way...

http://www.vi.nl/assets_tracker/logo_c/everton_logo_8927.gif

Since the 1500's buildings (not talking about churches, castles or whatever) became higher and higher, few (but not none) buildings in the middle ages where more then 2 or 3 story high, very slowly they rose up, the US (or the Brits, I don't want to start an argument here) where the first to build a "modern" skyscraper, but even if, at that time, they didn't, I doubt the rest of the world wouldn't have tried to go higher then 12 story high

All of this is bad logic that's just going to go in circles, so I suggest we end the topic of who invented skyscrapers and what not now. If you want to find that out, do some research on the Internet or read some books and magazines.

Anyway, yes they do have an impact on me, but it depends on the place. I'm amazed to see how far countries have come in only a few decades, and how cities have literally been born (well, reborn) into modern metropolises. But to a certain extent, I'm saddened by the way these cities have become. It just seems like a game of who can build the biggest and best until they are topped by someone else. And I understand competition is healthy and exciting, but I don't see anything interesting about "THE GREATEST MALL IN ALL OF ASIA/EUROPE/NORTH AMERICA/THE WORLD" that can make someone come back.

So what I guess I'm trying to say is that, yeah, a mall full of Prada and Gucci is great for a city that was once not even on the map, but does that really show progress or uniqueness in a world full of the same kinds of things? Are these cities something that the world will get a feeling of reverence by seeing, or will they fall the way of many places in history that have rusted out and have become obscure?

I find the pictures of the massive cities to be unbelieveable, buildings as far as you can see. I've never been to NYC but Chicago, LA, Toronto they are all big cities but pale in size to others in the wider world.

Skyscrapers are awesome. But they arent everything.

A lot of foreign skylines make me feel envious and jealous. I want them here. I really like that "mega-city" look of cities such as Sao Paulo, Tokyo, Shanghai, and Buenos Aires, for example.

i must admit that a good percentage of the "awe" i expressed on the intitial post had little to do with aestethics or the quality of the architecture. more than anything else, some of the pictures of massive skylines (albeit mundane and undoubtedly mostly residential) are just reminders to me of how large that world is beyond our shores.

i believe, for all our power and sheer size (and maybe because of them), we can get damned provencial about the rest of the world....and massive skylines in cities I've never heard of gives me quite a reality check on how competitve the world out there is with us....and what the implications of that will mean for our future.

I know exactly what you are talking about, and China is very very similar within its borders (the "world unto itself......" when you're there, the sense in so many ways is> that's it. It's just China and then 'foreign land') and the Chinese I believe share many of these types of 'isolated' world-view similarities with Americans. (Chinese are unlike Americans, and Chinese are indeed like others in many many other ways, but anyway)

Yeah, I think the isolation from a real world-view among huge huge numbers of Americans IS such that it becomes a trend, and I see it as being quite a powerful force> I see the "american view", inward-looking perhaps or should I say just-not-particularly-outward-looking, that overwhelms people's ideas/thoughts about the rest of the world as being very strong.

Of course it is the case everywhere. Everywhere is parochial to a degree without a doubt.

well, I think its safe to say that a lot of american skylines looks much better than a lot of these cities out there that look like they were made in sim city. Cut the ugly fat away from those citie's skylines and you probably have skylines in those cities very comparable in size.

Then again, Id probably rather have all those scrappers than a lot of the ugly burbs all over the US.

though also, in my opinion, i'd keep in mind that:

cities like Shanghai are indeed incredible on the ground, and street to street... amazing. It's not just a skyscraper-theme-park; it's a phenomenal and indeed beautiful city in its own right... and there are many others like that

i'm in awe that foreign cities, especially in Asia, are putting up massive skylines in a matter of months that american cities took decades to build.

this only means one thing: the US is no longer the skyscraper capital - it's in the far east - ie China.

of course, provincialism is something that afflicts numerous americans, as demonstrated by the vapid, idiotic remarks from the likes of tonka.

It only means that the economic influence of USA is dwindling. And now East Asia is taking over particularly the NorthEast and SouthEast Asia. You can see this by their rapid development and modernization including the rapidly increasing of their skylines. In the 19th century it is for britain, 20th century it is for USA, 21st century will be for EastAsia for sure.

Honestly, I'm an Asian and I feel better with American influences.

I feel pride, because we Americans invented skyscrapers and now many other countries are copying us.

heh...so the people over in China should be proud because Americans are toting guns and launching fireworks and rockets, things that were invented over there hundreds of years ago...

Whether the skyscraper is an invention is debatable...people just built higher and higher because of land value.

heh...so the people over in China should be proud because Americans are toting guns and launching fireworks and rockets, things that were invented over there hundreds of years ago...

Whether the skyscraper is an invention is debatable...people just built higher and higher because of land value.

thats certainly not true, on a few levels.

Skyscrapers are, in fact, a bundle of innovations and inventions, each one crucial to it's function. We wouldn't have skyscrapers without elevators, air conditioning, improvements in steel technology, steel construction (try building 20 stories with load bearing exterior brick walls) revolving doors, etc. And as buildings go higher, the problems are far more complex (ie: double-decker elevators and multiple shafts). I do beleive these are all American innovations.

Secondly, land value is only half the story. Hieght is a psychological acheivement.

I am amazed at the visual power of some Asian skylines. The first time I saw a pano of Hong Kong I thought I was dreaming. Shanghai, Tokyo and others also have stunning cityscapes.

European skylines are usually more subtle, though. I like that Paris' old monuments still play a part in its visual appearance. London is beginning to move away from that kind of look.... even Big Ben and Nelson's Colum are beginning to look stumpy compared to Swiss Re and the Canary Wharf projects. But the Eye was a nice nod back to the days when public interest, not corporate power, drove the development of the skyline.

I feel pride, because we Americans invented skyscrapers and now many other countries are copying us.

The Pharos of Alexandria was the first skyscraper imho.

South American countries had skyscrapers in the 20s already (I know US had in the 1880s)

i must admit that a good percentage of the "awe" i expressed on the intitial post had little to do with aestethics or the quality of the architecture. more than anything else, some of the pictures of massive skylines (albeit mundane and undoubtedly mostly residential) are just reminders to me of how large that world is beyond our shores.

i believe, for all our power and sheer size (and maybe because of them), we can get damned provencial about the rest of the world....and massive skylines in cities I've never heard of gives me quite a reality check on how competitve the world out there is with us....and what the implications of that will mean for our future.

so you are in awe with brazilian cities, cuz all of them have massive skylines (although rarely really awesome architecture)

I do think that American cities certainly were well-known for high-rises before other nation's cities. However, I think that over time, other cities are catching up and in some cases moving beyond our skylines. The US still has many world-class cities (Boston, NYC, Chicago, San Fran, Seattle, Miami,etc), but we also have some cities that have an impressive skyline but not much else in the heart of the city (think of Dallas or Houston) as they are so suburbanized. In contrast, cities in other countries are more centralized and, in addition to having a growing skyline, also have an incredible sense of vitality too.

PS: I realize that both Dallas and Houston have made improvements to the vitality of their downtowns in recent years, but they hardly compare to European cities.

guys... here's the straight talk.

yes, you bet! American cities, as a general idea, and I should really say America itself IS seen by the entire world as the home of the skyscraper. It's pretty simple really. Empire State Building> you get the idea. The world knows the story. Old New York (and to a lesser extent Chicago) is forever imprinted in history and in the minds of people everywhere as the birth of the skyscraper.........

I do think that American cities certainly were well-known for high-rises before other nation's cities. However, I think that over time, other cities are catching up and in some cases moving beyond our skylines. The US still has many world-class cities (Boston, NYC, Chicago, San Fran, Seattle, Miami,etc), but we also have some cities that have an impressive skyline but not much else in the heart of the city (think of Dallas or Houston) as they are so suburbanized. In contrast, cities in other countries are more centralized and, in addition to having a growing skyline, also have an incredible sense of vitality too.

PS: I realize that both Dallas and Houston have made improvements to the vitality of their downtowns in recent years, but they hardly compare to European cities.

On the other hand, many of the cities that are rapidly centralizing and becoming skyscraper forests are also dealing with severe problems of human crush. Poverty, disease, and pollution are far higher in most of these places than in Dallas or Houston. In American cities, skyscrapers are often built as monuments of engineering, virtually pieces of art (look at the Houston skyline). In many other places, they are built as a means of simply stacking people on top of one another in the most compact and efficent manner possible (look at the Hong Kong skyline). "Vitality" is a very ambiguous term; until recently Kowloon was simultanously the most interesting and the most depressed part of Hong Kong.

it is indeed true that many americans believe that USA is the centre of the universe.
there are many reasons for this, we cant really blame them.
firstly the US is a vast country, a continent in its own right. every kind of climate and terrain can be found there, and people do travel large distances by car.
2nd most americans never leave the safety of their own country. the ones that do are usually in their 40s because they can afford it.
3rd what are the options, where to go? south American.... too dangerous
further North upto Canada, but that pretty much the same as the US.
either side are huge Oceans. expensive 5 or 6 hour flights.

Its niave to think that all americans are either stupid inbred country folk, bible bashers, red necks, white trailer trash or any other stereotypes. they all have a basic understanding of where they came from and the old worlds of Europe and the founding fathers.
I like to think that the average educated american has some idea about what is happening around the world today.
You will find it tough when China overtakes you as the worlds largest economy :)
i hope you dont start a war with them though :)

someone said that Asian cities are building skylines overnight. they may well be, but at least there is a valid reason for them. Mass migration to the cities (as per the wests industrial revolution of the 19th C. there are many Cities in the US that have a decent skyline with a tiny population of less than 1million. after 5pm the centres are ghost towns. SO WHO IS BUILDING SS FOR FUN?

Id say it makes me proud, because it shows that, again, American culture, in the form of skyscrapers, wins.

If the whole world looks more and more like America, skyscrapers and all, can you really say that the 21st century is anything but another American century?

The assyrians where the first ones to use wheels, everybody uses weels now, does it mean we are all assyrians?

I feel pride, because we Americans invented skyscrapers and now many other countries are copying us.

Americans originally built the tallest highrises and called them skyscrapers, but thats not really inventing. Other countries building tall buildings isnt copying because the need to build up is universal. Today the very tallest buildings no longer call the USA home.

The assyrians where the first ones to use wheels, everybody uses weels now, does it mean we are all assyrians?

no, it just means we're 'copying' them.. LOL

Id say it makes me proud, because it shows that, again, American culture, in the form of skyscrapers, wins.
ok... but still, really my friend, this statement and this opinion (while I sort of get it, if I really try) it still strikes me as kind of weird and insular and (mostly:) severely-lacking-in-an-idea of the real world

If the whole world looks more and more like America, skyscrapers and all, can you really say that the 21st century is anything but another American century?
yet to be seen!

Id say it makes me proud, because it shows that, again, American culture, in the form of skyscrapers, wins.

If the whole world looks more and more like America, skyscrapers and all, can you really say that the 21st century is anything but another American century?

As an american living overseas, its this ^^ kind of thinking that makes me cringe.

sogod.... what is it that is being 'won'? and furthermore, why would you want the world to look more and more like the US (not that the US looks bad)?

but I can barely see Toronto from Buffalo...

she's pretty "amazing"...

she also give's beauty queens a bad name.

actually, she gives ALL women a bad name...

thank god we dodged THAT idiot...

but they keep talking about her...

god help us all...

^^ You can see Toronto from Buffalo? I can't. Niagara Falls sure, but not Toronto. :dunno:

This thread = myheadissofarupmyass. That's what you all are known for :)

No offense intended... of course

A lot of foreign skylines make me feel envious and jealous. I want them here. I really like that "mega-city" look of cities such as Sao Paulo, Tokyo, Shanghai, and Buenos Aires, for example.

Just move 1,500 km east to NY then.

So many foreign talls were designed by US firms like KPF, SOM and Caesar Pelli so in a way, they seem very familiar and very american. I look at them like the US in the 1920s when our emerging status and wealth fostered incredible feats of rivalry and engineering. I worry about what some cities abroad are losing to their infatuation with gleaming skylines. Preservationist movements need to grow to contain the worst of the demolition and maintain a balance of old and new.

I was extremely impressed by Hong Kong and Singapore when I was there in 2003. I can only imagine how I would feel about each now. Even though Canadian cities are a hop skip and jump away...Montreal and Toronto are always a beautiful sight.

I'd like to add that I really...really like Toronto.

Nobody knows for example Caracas' skyline :(

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v453/JoseSA/PARQUE_CENTRAL13.jpg?t=1260053940

There are some foreign skylines I really like, but the majority just don't feel right to me. American skylines do very well at combining old with new, and every building seems to flow with each other. Even with cities like New York and Chicago, it just feels like each building is one piece of the puzzle, all contributing to the overall image and vibe of the skyline. When I look at pictures of Hong Kong or London (I love both these cities very much, no hate here), they feel jumbled, almost chaotic. Each building is beautiful and unique, but they don't complement each other very well, if at all.

I wouldn't call it copying either. but there is no argument that the first skyscrapers were built in America, particularly in Chicago. It is where the confluence of steel, elevators and water pumps were first combined.

tall church spires don't count as skyscrapers, as they aren't inhabitable. So I'm not sure what the hell you're on about.

oh, and by the way...

http://www.vi.nl/assets_tracker/logo_c/everton_logo_8927.gif

I can't really add much to this thread, as I am not American and while I know that this post is age old, I could not resist responding to it.

Its not perfectly true that cathedral towers where not inhabitable. It was quite common that there existed a tower room for a fireguard who pretty much lived up there, watching out over the city and alarming it if he should spot fire somewhere. That was at least the case in the Stephan's Cathedral in Vienna. During the Turkish sieges it was even the central watch tower of the city. So it was very well occupied by people up there, a bit like a very high light house.

I think I read someone in here saying that the next power country is now in Asia...well, that's ok to me..I mean...I think is time for the USA to take a break from the spotlight, rest a little. Let asia (China) take over as the next power...I wonder is they will have the same problems that we face now...mass immigration, illegal immigration. Maybe people will start flocking to China and looking for work there, if not already happening.

^already happening

There are some foreign skylines I really like, but the majority just don't feel right to me. American skylines do very well at combining old with new, and every building seems to flow with each other. Even with cities like New York and Chicago, it just feels like each building is one piece of the puzzle, all contributing to the overall image and vibe of the skyline. When I look at pictures of Hong Kong or London (I love both these cities very much, no hate here), they feel jumbled, almost chaotic. Each building is beautiful and unique, but they don't complement each other very well, if at all.

it's true that hong kong is a bit chaotic, but so is nyc. i think that gives both cities a certain charme. HK is still a very young city compared to NY, just give it time and it will have that great mixture of old and new architecture like NY.

Because ThatDarnSacramentan mentioned London's skyline which in large parts indeed seems chaotic (there are some cool clusters though), the best skyline in Europe I'd say has the greater area of Paris with La Defense, at least from the distance. Its very unique I think with the "Grand Arche" in the centre which lies in direct line with the Arc de Triomphe

http://www.developpementdurablelejournal.com/UserFiles/Image/imageJourLaDefense.jpg
http://www.developpementdurablelejournal.com/spip.php?article1182

it's true that hong kong is a bit chaotic, but so is nyc. i think that gives both cities a certain charme. HK is still a very young city compared to NY, just give it time and it will have that great mixture of old and new architecture like NY.

I love China, but cities like HK and Shanghai will never have buildings like this. They're from another era and won't be replicated.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_YeVVfegW8Vc/RsFARWYETmI/AAAAAAAAAz4/xYzEzN8bc7g/BH000006.jpg

Many Chinese cities also have a mixture of old and new. The only difference is that the old aren't that tall.

http://site.silkroadcollection.com/images/website/shanghai-zhuhai-07/shanghai-oldcity-rooftop.jpg

Many Chinese cities also have a mixture of old and new. The only difference is that the old aren't that tall.

http://site.silkroadcollection.com/images/website/shanghai-zhuhai-07/shanghai-oldcity-rooftop.jpg

I realize that China has old buildings. It's older than all of Europe except for Rome and Greece. However, it does not have old skyscrapers. No city in the world has the vast number of pre-WWII skyscrapers that NY does.

it's true that hong kong is a bit chaotic, but so is nyc. i think that gives both cities a certain charme. HK is still a very young city compared to NY, just give it time and it will have that great mixture of old and new architecture like NY.

Here's the thing: old for Hong Kong is 70s and 80s while old for New York is turn of the 20th Century. Yes, New York is also chaotic, but I finally figured out the word that explains my viewpoint: synchronicity. Even if New York's a gargantuan entanglement of skyscrapers, they all fit together. Hong Kong, they just pop up because developers need to fill demand. There's not a lot of, if any at all, consideration for the surrounding buildings.

I love Hong Kong. Its vertigo-inducing skyline radiates the energy that defines HK. Other cities look staid by comparison but New York sure doesn't!

I think HK looks stunning with or without turn of the century skyscrapers, beautiful as they are.
The city is all about neon, light and epic futurism.

This pic needs no introduction on this forum, but it pretty much encapsulates what HK is all about in it's built form:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Hong_Kong_Skyline_Restitch_-_Dec_2007.jpg

^^That picture is exquisite!

I am awestruck at the futuristic skyscrapers in Oriental countries (china, japan, malaysia, etc)

I'd like to add that I really...really like Toronto.

and we really...really like you!! Come back to visit! :cheers:

I wouldn't call it copying either. but there is no argument that the first skyscrapers were built in America, particularly in Chicago. It is where the confluence of steel, elevators and water pumps were first combined.

tall church spires don't count as skyscrapers, as they aren't inhabitable.

Yep, correct... then the skycraper typology comes from the baloon frame technique used by the settlers: Chicago school was inspired by that way to build applying the steel industrial technology to it
That allowed to lighten the weight of the structure and consequently to increase the height of buildings

So there is no doubt that the skyscraper is an American 'idea'

A lot of foreign skylines make me feel envious and jealous. I want them here. I really like that "mega-city" look of cities such as Sao Paulo, Tokyo, Shanghai, and Buenos Aires, for example.

Actually I prefere by far the compact (and very high) Chicago skyline, with skyscrapers of different styles (and the oldest ones got more than 100 years), that those messy skylines you mentioned

EDIT
Damn'... I just relized I'm replying to 4 years old posts :nuts:

All my favourite skyscraper are pretty much all American. All the 1900-1940 towers really are fabulous, and some very tall!

i prefer asian skylines.

That Hong Kong shot reminds me of Zanarkand of Final Fantasy X for some reason. Maybe it's the harbour and futuristic architecture. In any case, its stunning.

I love China, but cities like HK and Shanghai will never have buildings like this. They're from another era and won't be replicated.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_YeVVfegW8Vc/RsFARWYETmI/AAAAAAAAAz4/xYzEzN8bc7g/BH000006.jpg



This is awesome!!

You know, new scyscrapers are the same all over the world - but this style is special. I'm always bring NYC to my memory when I see this! Speechless!

I feel pride, because we Americans invented skyscrapers and now many other countries are copying us.

this is the kind of atittude that makes europeans and in general the rest of the world see the americans like a bunch of badly educated people.....

The first Skyscraper in the notion of the term...was created by Romans, or by the Egiptians...I don't know.....a skyscraper, before its tallness most fullfill a requisite....be bigger and taller, than the rest of the cities skyline...

i believe, for all our power and sheer size (and maybe because of them), we can get damned provencial about the rest of the world....and massive skylines in cities I've never heard of gives me quite a reality check on how competitve the world out there is with us....and what the implications of that will mean for our future.

the implications are not in the future...they are a present now...I'm European and live in Europe...after the second world war, US took a place of both military and economical superpower...and in a bit arrogantly way, people in general and a government in th US, might have tought that things would be always like that...

but some ideas to clarify this "idea":

- After the second world war, the largest European trading partner, was, the US...today, its China, Japan, South America, and the arab emirates, like Abu Dahbi and Dubai....tradings with US felt or din't grow, while other trading markets grown a lot....
- The life conditions in the rest of the world...US can have a great economy, and a lot of poor people, the thing is that this poor people, represent more people than the entire population of some countries...for example....and in Europe, the last decades where a fight to erradite the lack of quality of life...you have countries like norway, where mid class, is the lowest class in the country...
- the arrogantly way, that sometimes it seems that the US sees the rest of the world...lead the rest of the world, to start building trading routes, and commerce apart from the US, like excluding US....the biggest proof is that China, Japan, India, the Arab Emirates and European Union, have or will have in a near future, more economical power than the US...

Americans must accept that their country is nothing special anymore. Just a normal country among others. American cities are quite average in an international context. And the first impression you get at their international airports is quite poor.

Americans must accept that their country is nothing special anymore. Just a normal country among others. American cities are quite average in an international context. And the first impression you get at their international airports is quite poor.

It's quite true. Americans have been living a "coccooning" lifestyle where we interact with each other physically as little as possible, work in one or two story corporate office parks instead of skyscrapers, live in detached houses, and spend nothing on roads, airports, mass transit, or anything else that isn't a consumer electronic gadget or car. That's beginning to change but compared with other societies, we are still marching in the other direction. While we are well past the need to impress anybody, we sometimes forget that change can be good and that sometimes you have to reinvest in your infrastructure just to keep going.

America is "nothing special" in the world today for one reason only: the rest of the world has become thoroughly Americanized. "Nothing special" indeed: in the 20th century, this country re-made the world in its own image. Skyscraper skylines all over the world are merely a fashionable American hairdo over heads filled with American ideas and ideals. The world *IS* American, and that's an achievement that no civilization in history could really boast of. Although a hat tip to the Greeks, the Romans, the Brits is in order for getting things started: Americans stood on the shoulders of giants.

America is "nothing special" in the world today for one reason only: the rest of the world has become thoroughly Americanized. "Nothing special" indeed: in the 20th century, this country re-made the world in its own image. Skyscraper skylines all over the world are merely a fashionable American hairdo over heads filled with American ideas and ideals. The world *IS* American, and that's an achievement that no civilization in history could really boast of. Although a hat tip to the Greeks, the Romans, the Brits is in order for getting things started: Americans stood on the shoulders of giants.

are you actually that small-minded or are you just trying to be provocative?

America is "nothing special" in the world today for one reason only: the rest of the world has become thoroughly Americanized. "Nothing special" indeed: in the 20th century, this country re-made the world in its own image. Skyscraper skylines all over the world are merely a fashionable American hairdo over heads filled with American ideas and ideals. The world *IS* American, and that's an achievement that no civilization in history could really boast of. Although a hat tip to the Greeks, the Romans, the Brits is in order for getting things started: Americans stood on the shoulders of giants.

More the other way round. Seems like the American city becomes more and more European with public transport, inner city living, coffee shops etc.

Americanisation has stopped a long time ago. The ideal of a perfect city has shifted away from the car centric American city toward a more european urban city. Indeed, American cities are nowadays used as negative urban planing examples.

And a skyline is not really American. If land prices are high, then its the most logical thing to build up. Especially in high population areas in Asia. And Asian cities such as HongKong or Singapore have not much in common with the typical American suburban city.

More the other way round. Seems like the American city becomes more and more European with public transport, inner city living, coffee shops etc.

Americanisation has stopped a long time ago. The ideal of a perfect city has shifted away from the car centric American city toward a more european urban city. Indeed, American cities are nowadays used as negative urban planing examples.

And a skyline is not really American. If land prices are high, then its the most logical thing to build up. Especially in high population areas in Asia. And Asian cities such as HongKong or Singapore have not much in common with the typical American suburban city.

American cities WERE "European" with public transport and inner city living.. up until the 1920's (when the middle class started moving to the suburbs) - 1950's (when the working class followed).

But I do agree. While my post on the world getting thoroughly Americanized is fundamentally true (heh), the condo-towers-in-the-park type suburbanization in Latin America/Asia is developing independently of any American tradition. Apartment living is really not the American way.

Americans would rather live and work in a low rise building than in a skycraper. After the 9/11 twin towers attack who is comfortable working or living in a skycraper. I know that Chicago and New York for historical reasons are 2 exceptions to the rule but if you travel all over America you will see that the vast majority of people live in one or two story homes and work in one or two story office buildings. Remember I said the vast majority....here and there you will find some skycrapers in the downtown of cities but the vast majority does not work in them.

Americans must accept that their country is nothing special anymore. Just a normal country among others. American cities are quite average in an international context. And the first impression you get at their international airports is quite poor.


I can't agree with that. Although I'm European and I do prefer European life style - I do find American also very good though.

About the airports - Its not true. There are many good and bad airports in the World - as also USA has. Example: Washington Dulles is the worst airport ever, - but the Philadelphia International or JFK are preety amazing!

People who bash US public transportation obviously never been there. Buses in Philly, New York are very good. Off course there are places where things could be better (like transportation between East Coast cities), but inside cities I was very satisfied.

Somebody also mentioned cities.. yeahh - like I said: there are many cities in World - ones are stunning (New York, Paris, Amsterdam..), and some are boring (Baltimore, Dortmund, Eindhoven). Noone can say that "Americans have not good cities".

I can continue with the comparision, but dont wanna be bashed. Maybe we can continue discussion in another EU vs US comparision :)

Question

Do you Americans feel that Australian cities skylines are just like yours, so to you guys they are just "meh" lol.

Question

Do you Americans feel that Australian cities skylines are just like yours, so to you guys they are just "meh" lol.

I'll say this: if I were randomly shown a picture of a "standard" Australian skyline and a generic looking American skyline, I'd know which is which immediately, even if the buildings look similar. I've always just felt a different vibe from Australian skylines. There's something about your skyscrapers, I don't know what, but it just sets it apart from similar buildings in America.

I really agree with you, there is something sets our skylines apart from USA's. I think your buildings are usually a lot chunkier and wider.

^^ I wouldn't necessarily say that. I remember the first time I saw a picture of Perth. I didn't know what city it was or what country it was in at the time, but I remember asking if it was Australian. There was something about the skyline that just said to me, That's not American.

As a Westside American (and not Filipino), I am indifferent to the skylines of other countries... as in, who cares?

American cities WERE "European" with public transport and inner city living.. up until the 1920's (when the middle class started moving to the suburbs) - 1950's (when the working class followed).

But I do agree. While my post on the world getting thoroughly Americanized is fundamentally true (heh), the condo-towers-in-the-park type suburbanization in Latin America/Asia is developing independently of any American tradition. Apartment living is really not the American way.

It was the American way not soo long ago, and it seems perfectly possible that it could change once again eventually. Other wealthy modern countries also manage to have a large share of people living in dense environments. As far as I can see, that form of living is in the coming again in the US, at least there were already times when it was less asked for than nowadays.

Anyway, I am not sure if it is on topic, but it is a skyline, it is historic and even though its not scratching the sky still something I would consider rather high rise:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/Gran_V%C3%ADa_%28Madrid%29_20.jpg/800px-Gran_V%C3%ADa_%28Madrid%29_20.jpg

- After the second world war, the largest European trading partner, was, the US...today, its China, Japan, South America, and the arab emirates, like Abu Dahbi and Dubai....tradings with US felt or din't grow, while other trading markets grown a lot....

The largest trading parter of Europe combined is the US. Gte your facts straight. And yes, trade between the US and Europe has grown massively since even 1995.

- the arrogantly way, that sometimes it seems that the US sees the rest of the world...lead the rest of the world, to start building trading routes, and commerce apart from the US, like excluding US....the biggest proof is that China, Japan, India, the Arab Emirates and European Union, have or will have in a near future, more economical power than the US...

Arrogant, maybe. But this statement is stupid, which is even worse. None of those except China will get near US economic power in the next 40 years. US will continue to outgrow Europe, so forget that (and I do not consider 25 countries a single economic power). UAE? Are you crazy? A tiny bankrupt country is going to challange a $14 trillion dynamic economy? :lol:

Americans must accept that their country is nothing special anymore. Just a normal country among others. American cities are quite average in an international context. And the first impression you get at their international airports is quite poor.

Sorry, but a country is special beyond what their airports look like. LOL. In any case, Europe's airports are not much better. US has some very nice airports, actually. Ever been to the Dallas one?

The US obviously isn't just like any other country for many reasons, like having the high-tech capital of the world (silicon valley), being a young country that turned over night into a superpower, being the most dynamic economy, inventing rock&roll, being one of the most competitive economies, having the best research base, most won nobel prizes, highest living space per capita, highest material wealth, incredible landscapes, its dominating culture, etc. All this in under 200 years, which is amazing. Obviously it has many faults, but to say it is not special is being ignorant of reality and history.

Question

Do you Americans feel that Australian cities skylines are just like yours, so to you guys they are just "meh" lol.

Australian cities kind of give me a California or Florida vibe. Obviously because of the more subtropical climate. Heavily dissimilar to most other US cities though, Australian skylines seem to be newer looking than many of the skylines here too perhaps because the ones here developed earlier.

Sorry, but a country is special beyond what their airports look like. LOL. In any case, Europe's airports are not much better. US has some very nice airports, actually. Ever been to the Dallas one?

The US obviously isn't just like any other country for many reasons, like having the high-tech capital of the world (silicon valley), being a young country that turned over night into a superpower, being the most dynamic economy, being one of the most competitive, having the best research base, most won nobel prizes, highest living space per capita, highest material wealth, incredible landscapes, its successful export of its own culture which now is more influential than any others, etc. What country do you think is more "special"==whatever that means!

USA is large and has many cities but that is pretty much it. Didn't say that USA is a bad country but its individual regions are pretty average on a (developed) world scale. What sticks out is New York and perhaps Los Angeles.

For me it is always shocking to see so much poverty and homeless people in a developed world country. Something you don't really expect to see. in that regard, America is special indeed.

Oh so you mean just in terms of "cities"? If that is what you mean, then I can empathize with your point more. Even though you forgot to mention cities like Chicago, Boston, D.C., Seattle, etc. But to say that it's not special overall is rediculous. It literally goes against the encyclopedia!

Yes, it is shocking to see homeless people. You also see them in other rich countries. Ever been to Berlin? But that does not take away from the country's accomplishments and what truly makes it special, which are many variables independent of what cities it has. And even with the cities, I don't know what you are complaining about. What do you expect a young country to have?

USA is large and has many cities but that is pretty much it. Didn't say that USA is a bad country but its individual regions are pretty average on a (developed) world scale. What sticks out is New York and perhaps Los Angeles.

For me it is always shocking to see so much poverty and homeless people in a developed world country. Something you don't really expect to see. in that regard, America is special indeed.

What are you talking about? What constitutes "average"? True, our cities are not larded with new airports because the ones we built in the 1970s and '80s are quite adequate. Where new expansion is needed, what some countries can build for a few million dollars such as a runway can cost $2 billion here. A new terminal can cost as much as $4 billion and an entirely new airport might cost $6-10 billion here, not the $400-800 million that other countries pay. Sorry everything isn't brand new: I guess we just don't feel like spending hundreds of billions on new airports to impress visitors. The poverty and homelessness issue isn't the fact that we have such a problem and other societies don't, it's that our problem is VISIBLE because we haven't made the commitment to either institutionalize the mentally ill and keep them off the streets, or because we don't have a social safety net derived from 50% income taxes and a minimal defense budget; which this year alone, would free up $650 billion plus another $1 trillion in additional taxes to spend on sanitizing our cities of the visible poor and homeless.:ohno:

Speaking of airports, yes there are some "dumps" in places like LaGuardia, parts of LAX, and such, but then again so does much of the developed world. Look at parts of London Heathrow, CDG, MPN, BRU, etc. All these airports are old, and one should not expect them to look like brand new Asian airports.

Some US airports are quite nice.

Detroit:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/61/153028253_9c7bc12d85_o.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/32/51184186_1328ca0c2f_b.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/DTW_Edward_H._McNamara_Terminal.jpg


Houston:

http://www.panoramio.com/photos/original/4768347.jpg

Denver:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/32/36504080_9b84602c4c_b.jpg

Miami:

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g268/khst_2006/DSCN0145-1.jpg

JFK

http://i472.photobucket.com/albums/rr86/romanian_spotter/America%202008/Y14.jpg

http://nadiageller.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/terminal5_01_2.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/JFK_Terminal_5_Ticketing_and_Check-In.jpg

Dallas

http://hedonia.seantimberlake.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/06/06/cantinalaredo3.jpg

http://matadornetwork.cachefly.net/thetravelersnotebook.com/docs//wp-

Is that DFW(Dallas/Forth Worth)?

The US obviously isn't just like any other country for many reasons, like having the high-tech capital of the world (silicon valley), being a young country that turned over night into a superpower, being the most dynamic economy, inventing rock&roll, being one of the most competitive economies, having the best research base, most won nobel prizes, highest living space per capita, highest material wealth, incredible landscapes, its dominating culture, etc. All this in under 200 years, which is amazing. Obviously it has many faults, but to say it is not special is being ignorant of reality and history.

That's nice, but as a native America, all that shit doesn't mean much to many everyday Americans. The way things are going, our country wouldn't have much of a future. Honestly, who lives a fuck about stuff like most nobel prize and highest material wealth(if you mean material items). You sound like one of those wannabe American patriots.

You sound like one of those wannabe American patriots.

why is it nobody gets to applaud the accomplishments of the U.S. anymore these days? Wheras, its fine when people from other countries crow about how great their cultures/cities are?

Is that DFW(Dallas/Forth Worth)?



That's nice, but as a native America, all that shit doesn't mean much to many everyday Americans. The way things are going, our country wouldn't have much of a future. Honestly, who lives a fuck about stuff like most nobel prize and highest material wealth(if you mean material items). You sound like one of those wannabe American patriots.
Bullshit.
The US has a large, highly educated and growing population, fantasic colleges, tons of natural resources, and the most dynamic economy. The US will be just fine.

One of the things about the US is that it's culture and society tend to change significantly from generation to generation. I grew up in the '70s and '80s - the version of the US that I knew then is not the country I live in now. There is a traditionalist element in American society and for short periods of time in the country as a whole and for long periods of time in certain places they hold the upper hand but they always end up being washed away by the next wave of social/cultural transformation. I think that because of the countries' relatively short history it is more open to this sort of change compared to older countries because there is no set notion of what "American" is. It is impossible to say what the future holds but as long as that sort of dynamism exists I think we will be ok.

Is that DFW(Dallas/Forth Worth)?



That's nice, but as a native America, all that shit doesn't mean much to many everyday Americans. The way things are going, our country wouldn't have much of a future. Honestly, who lives a fuck about stuff like most nobel prize and highest material wealth(if you mean material items). You sound like one of those wannabe American patriots.

You have alot of things going for it. I know that it is very tough to realize it just after a bad recession, and where opportunities are not really "equal." But those things I mentioned are true, and indicate that the US is more than just any other country. Any country with huge amounts of natural resources, and innovative talent like the US is guaranteed success in the long-term (so long as it does not lose the innovative quality). We often hear that the population in India/China are gaining technological edge. If that's true, then where are the inventions? The populations of these countries may be book smart, but have little imagination. Where is their Apple? Google? Facebook? The world does not use any of their invented products because they have none. Instead they are busy making products on behalf of California. It also helps that US workers are the second most productive in the world per hour worked. This isn't because Americans physically work more, but rather because of the technological capital available per worker. Even now, the US is growing more in GDP than the rest of the OECD, and will end up with a smaller decline in 2009, and larger upswing in 2010.

What's the point of being the second most productive when many Americans have only 1-2 weeks of vacation or none at all? Why be so productive when you don't have much free time to benefit it?

American's should get more vacation. But I said they were the second most productive per hour worked, meaning even if you were to mandate 1 month paid vacation, the production per hour worked would be the same or even higher.

It's amazing how a 4 year old thread asking Americans to comment on foreign skylines turns into stupid crap like airports & homelessness in the US. This thread is just another bash America fest for foreigners. This thread needs to be closed already.

Question

Do you Americans feel that Australian cities skylines are just like yours, so to you guys they are just "meh" lol.

Australian cityscapes remind more of the US then just about any other then the U.S. but there is something distinct quality about them that I can't put my finger on. Looking at streeview it really does seem almost a 70-30% US-UK hybrid mix. In general the height of their CBD's are rather impressive considering Aussie land use patterns and transit are probably most similar to the US out of all developed nations I can think of.

It's amazing how a 4 year old thread asking Americans to comment on foreign skylines turns into stupid crap like airports & homelessness in the US. This thread is just another bash America fest for foreigners. This thread needs to be closed already.

Very true. Screw'em, they're just jealous.

One of the few true skylines in Europe, but also this one only looks nice and dense from a few angles: Frankfurt am Main.

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/3963/13595640.jpg

I guess Americans laugh about a skyline like this, but then Europe is specialized on something else anyway...

Americans originally built the tallest highrises and called them skyscrapers, but thats not really inventing. Other countries building tall buildings isnt copying because the need to build up is universal. Today the very tallest buildings no longer call the USA home.

Some of the greatest classical structures don’t call Greece home. ;)

I see the use of the skyscraper as an American success that the rest of the world uses. It makes me proud that many developing places look at cities in America for urban inspiration.

More the other way round. Seems like the American city becomes more and more European with public transport, inner city living, coffee shops etc.
.

A lot of American cities were built by Europeans, what did you expect?
BTW, research American history a little more, they were European to begin with, many are simply returning to their original form.

Americans would rather live and work in a low rise building than in a skycraper. After the 9/11 twin towers attack who is comfortable working or living in a skycraper. I know that Chicago and New York for historical reasons are 2 exceptions to the rule but if you travel all over America you will see that the vast majority of people live in one or two story homes and work in one or two story office buildings. Remember I said the vast majority....here and there you will find some skycrapers in the downtown of cities but the vast majority does not work in them.

True, at least in my region most people live in 1-2 story single wood (sometimes brick or the unbearable mix of brick and wood) frame homes of a ‘modern’ variation of traditional American homes.
Cities with 100’000 people may not have any high-rises at all.

True, at least in my region most people live in 1-2 story single wood (sometimes brick or the unbearable mix of brick and wood) frame homes of a ‘modern’ variation of traditional American homes.
Cities with 100’000 people may not have any high-rises at all.
Temecula has 100,700 people in it, and it's tallest is 5 stories! :happy:...:ohno:

Temecula has 100,700 people in it, and it's tallest is 5 stories! :happy:...:ohno:

Elk Grove is entirely two story houses and strip malls and it passed 100k.

Australian cities kind of give me a California or Florida vibe. Obviously because of the more subtropical climate. Heavily dissimilar to most other US cities though, Australian skylines seem to be newer looking than many of the skylines here too perhaps because the ones here developed earlier.

Depends on what city you look at, cities like Sydney, Gold Coast, and Brisbane yes, but if you look at other cities like Melbourne (which has a cooler climate) you will see that it looks a lot more European in terms of architecture, but still has many skyscrapers.

I noticed on google street view many American cities don't have very good inner city areas ( in terms of strip shops, cafes, restaraunts, clubs etc) , they seem to be more of just a middle ring suburbia with an occasional commerical zone just here and there, whereas Australian cities inner city areas have these and give off a great inner city vibe.

What are you talking about? What constitutes "average"? True, our cities are not larded with new airports because the ones we built in the 1970s and '80s are quite adequate. Where new expansion is needed, what some countries can build for a few million dollars such as a runway can cost $2 billion here. A new terminal can cost as much as $4 billion and an entirely new airport might cost $6-10 billion here, not the $400-800 million that other countries pay. Sorry everything isn't brand new: I guess we just don't feel like spending hundreds of billions on new airports to impress visitors. The poverty and homelessness issue isn't the fact that we have such a problem and other societies don't, it's that our problem is VISIBLE because we haven't made the commitment to either institutionalize the mentally ill and keep them off the streets, or because we don't have a social safety net derived from 50% income taxes and a minimal defense budget; which this year alone, would free up $650 billion plus another $1 trillion in additional taxes to spend on sanitizing our cities of the visible poor and homeless.:ohno:

Nothing wong with "average". Didn't say American cities are crap or shitty. Being average in the developed world is pretty good on a global scale.

Depends on what city you look at, cities like Sydney, Gold Coast, and Brisbane yes, but if you look at other cities like Melbourne (which has a cooler climate) you will see that it looks a lot more European in terms of architecture, but still has many skyscrapers.

I noticed on google street view many American cities don't have very good inner city areas ( in terms of strip shops, cafes, restaraunts, clubs etc) , they seem to be more of just a middle ring suburbia with an occasional commerical zone just here and there, whereas Australian cities inner city areas have these and give off a great inner city vibe.

Well that very much depends on the American city and the neighborhood. There are large hoods in Chicago, Boston, S.F., Philly etc. which can have a great dense mix. However very generally your observation is correct.

Aussie cities on average do have a more cohesive vibe. Not on a European type level but more then the average American one.

Older cities like Boston, Washington DC, Milwaukee, Chicago, New York etc have good inner city areas while younger ones like Atlanta, Charlotte, and Miami don't. Personally, I like European cities better but the US has good cities.

Our cities are unique if you ask me! :) ^^

Though I wish they were healthier. =/

Hello guys, im from indonesia...:)
US Cities vs China Cities (Number of highrise above 10 stories)

New York 7.750
Chicago 1.100
Los Angeles 560
San Fransisco 550
Honolulu 525
Houston 490
Philadelphia 390
Dallas 350
Boston 305
Washington 300
Miami 291
Atlanta 259
Arlington 215
Seattle 215
Denver 211
Detroit 197
Minneapolis 190
San Diego 181
Baltimore 170
Las Vegas 168
Miami Beach 156
St Louis 155
Fort Lauderdale 141
Kansas City 133
Pittsburg 129
Cincinnati 118
Nashville 112
Cleveland 111
Newark 107
Jersey City 99
San Antonio 98
San Juan 98
Indianapolis 92
Portland 91
Milwaukee 89
Columbus 88
Phoenix 85
Charlotte 82
Austin 78
Aventura 78
Alexandria 72
Memphis 69
Oakland 69
Long. Beach 66

Hongkong 7.600
Shanghai 1.100
Macau 560
Chongqing 550
Guangzhou 520
Wuhan 480
Beijing 400
Shenzhen 360
Tianjin 290
Xiamen 260
Shenyang 180
Hangzhou 180
Xian 170
Chengdu 165
Dalian 156
Harbin 143
Qingdao 137
Jinan 120.
Nanjing 100
Shijiazhuang 100
Fuzhou 95
Zigong 90
Dongguan 86
Wuxi 80
Zhuhai 80
Guiyang 80
Foshan 74
Changsa 72
Nanchang 68
Zhengzhou 64
Ningbo 62
Kunming 59
Jiangmen 55
Nanning 54
Urumqi 50
Suzhou 50

So:banana::banana:

10 best skyline US cities equal wih 10 best skyline China cities, but US second cities still win agains china second cities:)

I'm sorry, but Shanghai has way more. What are the parameters being used?

Older cities like Boston, Washington DC, Milwaukee, Chicago, New York etc have good inner city areas while younger ones like Atlanta, Charlotte, and Miami don't. Personally, I like European cities better but the US has good cities.

I was very surprised about Charlotte. It's downtown was much more active than I would expect.

Too bad the city is mostly suburban.

Older cities like Boston, Washington DC, Milwaukee, Chicago, New York etc have good inner city areas while younger ones like Atlanta, Charlotte, and Miami don't. Personally, I like European cities better but the US has good cities.

Agreed. I consider on average European cities to be much more aesthetically pleasing and cohesive then NA, SA, or Asian cities. Doesn't mean that NA and Asia don't have some rather kick asse cities, character, and urban gems. Even though I stylistically like European cities it would be a pity to have other continents to greatly resemble them.

I'm sorry, but Shanghai has way more. What are the parameters being used?

it's emporis stuff. user-updated. they don't have accurate figure for developing countries.

Temecula has 100,700 people in it, and it's tallest is 5 stories! :happy:...:ohno:
that tends to happen in exurbs.

it amazes me how much temecula has changed since i moved away. glad my family left though, i hated it there. i feel sorry for you.

it's emporis stuff. user-updated. they don't have accurate figure for developing countries.


He's a Danish troll, just ignore him.

Can someone tell me how a city like this (Nanjing) has only 100 hi-rises?

http://cache.mars.sina.com.cn/nd/citylifehouse/citylife/fb/04/20090724_60404_1.jpg

I don't think Bruton is Danish. He sounds more like an American.

Why wouldn't China's cities have more talls? High rises resolve a lot of land use issues, especially for a population that large. Picture China if they developed the way americans do: there would be no available land for anything it would be so carpeted with suburban tract houses. China is doing things right. It's America with nearly 310,000,000 people that has to rethink our cities.

china has more highrises desertman, it's all useless outdated info

I don't think Bruton is Danish. He sounds more like an American.

I mean Jakarta.

I love China, but cities like HK and Shanghai will never have buildings like this. They're from another era and won't be replicated.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_YeVVfegW8Vc/RsFARWYETmI/AAAAAAAAAz4/xYzEzN8bc7g/BH000006.jpg

Though I don't think Shanghai is totally devoid of old style high rise charm:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/The_Bund_of_Shanghai.jpg

They need to be impressive as they are facing off across the river with this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Shanghai_pudong.jpg

(Both from Wikipedia)

Great content and very helpful thank and keep up the good work.