New York City skyline vs. Chicago skyline
New York City
VS.
Chicago
New York City
VS.
Chicago
New York City vs. Chicago Skyline
2 reading
BALENCIAGA
- Status
241 - 260 of 275 Posts
Joined
·
558 Posts
I'm not being condescending. Chicagoans want to assert that their city produces the world's best architecture (and, at the very least, America's best) and that is, in most non-Americans' view, incorrect. Moreover, when non-Americans (and/or non-Midwestern Americans) dispute Chicagoans' false claim, they become indignant, as is clearly evidenced on this thread.
I posted a series of utilitarian boxes that Chicago has built as offices in the past decade. Chicago clearly is not building one Swiss Re after another, and star architects, such as Foster, Rogers, Piano, Nouvel, etc. clearly have not been involved in Chicago's office design in recent years.
In addition to the foregoing, I was appalled during my last trip to Chicago to see a large number of car parks in the middle of the city. That hardly is the setting of an architectural showcase.
Lastly, this crass, insipid attempt to mimic European Classicism belies Chicago's claim to a great architectural heritage. McDonald's (or some other tasteless brand that lacks substance) should be headquartered in this tower.
Jan
![Image]()
I posted a series of utilitarian boxes that Chicago has built as offices in the past decade. Chicago clearly is not building one Swiss Re after another, and star architects, such as Foster, Rogers, Piano, Nouvel, etc. clearly have not been involved in Chicago's office design in recent years.
In addition to the foregoing, I was appalled during my last trip to Chicago to see a large number of car parks in the middle of the city. That hardly is the setting of an architectural showcase.
Lastly, this crass, insipid attempt to mimic European Classicism belies Chicago's claim to a great architectural heritage. McDonald's (or some other tasteless brand that lacks substance) should be headquartered in this tower.
Jan
I agree. I see many buildings with parking lots as the base in Chicago which I think is terrible. Parking underground is OK but parking as the base of a building? Awful. Also, Chicago is just too boxy.
I just prefer New York's more dramatic skyline (and their overall urban design/architecture). Chicago's skyline is nice, but when I travel I'm never WOW'ed by it when I arrive in the city wheras I'm always WOWed when I arrive and am driven across a bridge into Manhattan.
Joined
·
7,867 Posts
Northsider, Pokistic, Balenciaga
Way to bring the thread back...you guys rock.
Dnob
You are out of line with the "second city syndrome" talk. Untrue and uncalled for. I will kindly ask you to cool it. Think...friendly competition. :hug:
599GTB &Duzk
Weak points on amounts of posts and membership for New York and Chicago. Those numbers are totally irrelevant to a thread dealing with a personal preference. That's like saying all the Chicagoans in here choose Chicago over NY and vise versa.
599GTB
"Why is it so hard to accept that people prefer New York's skyline and architecture?" now you are just generalizing.
That is such a baseless comment...and how would you prove that? A popularity poll with a clickable link? Please spare us and stop antagonizing the other members with snide questions. All this talk about second, third city syndrome isn't helping your case of superiority-complex-denial. Quit bashing. Oh and one last thing; don't go ahead and make a statement on behalf of "most" of us nyers--most don't give a crap about skylines and buildings and those of us that appreciate them, know Chicago is no slouch to New York. I'll ask you very nicely to stop inflaming arguments.
Way to bring the thread back...you guys rock.
Dnob
You are out of line with the "second city syndrome" talk. Untrue and uncalled for. I will kindly ask you to cool it. Think...friendly competition. :hug:
599GTB &Duzk
Weak points on amounts of posts and membership for New York and Chicago. Those numbers are totally irrelevant to a thread dealing with a personal preference. That's like saying all the Chicagoans in here choose Chicago over NY and vise versa.
599GTB
"Why is it so hard to accept that people prefer New York's skyline and architecture?" now you are just generalizing.
That is such a baseless comment...and how would you prove that? A popularity poll with a clickable link? Please spare us and stop antagonizing the other members with snide questions. All this talk about second, third city syndrome isn't helping your case of superiority-complex-denial. Quit bashing. Oh and one last thing; don't go ahead and make a statement on behalf of "most" of us nyers--most don't give a crap about skylines and buildings and those of us that appreciate them, know Chicago is no slouch to New York. I'll ask you very nicely to stop inflaming arguments.
Joined
·
5,233 Posts
First I'd like to comment on this. While this is no doubt a spectacular view, the skyline itself really isn't much. Like I keep saying, it's just an overwhelming mass of concrete. It just doesn't seem very dynamic to me.![Image]()
Next:
Great. We know that you can dig up a myriad of box buildings in Chicago at a feeble attempt to prove whatever point you thought you were trying to make. If this is what you think Chicago is, you have much to learn.
Do I really have to keep going, or can you keep your ignorant, anti-chicago comments to yourself and let this thread have fun?
...and Chicago doesn't have these sorts of fan forums either? tsk tsk. If you think this forum is the end all be all for Chicago architecture enthusiasts, you have much to learn as well. Next...
I'm trying...it's hard when douchebags want to ruin everyone's fun.
Chicago is indeed boxy, which is unfortunate. But that is not the epitome of Chicago architecture and certainly not of the skyline either. Yes, there are a lot of parking lots which many Chicagoans are not happy with...but many have been redeveloped in the past decade, it used to be worse.
sicut canis qui revertitur ad vomitum suum sic inprudens qui iterat stultitiam suam :lol:
Sorry, but I couldn't resist that one.
You, NYGirl, and the others are doing a splendid job highlighting both cities/skylines. Much appreciated.
Joined
·
20,070 Posts
That first pick of NYC with the bridge is excellent! :bow:
Joined
·
1,266 Posts
Chicago has an amazing mix of old and new, and its old buildings are unique and classy..I called it new school only in relationto NYC, which, to me, has more older buildings easily visible (Woolworth, Metlife, American International, etc)
Joined
·
5,233 Posts
Ok, I respect that. At least you were kind enough to reason out your opinion rather than a moronic blanket statement of some other users. Some Chicago angles lend themselves to better views of the older buildings.
Joined
·
558 Posts
Practically all US cities have nice old buildings. Milwaukee, Detroit, Denver, etc.
However, NY has nicer ones and in far, far, far greater numbers than any other (although its smaller East coast cousins, Boston and Philly, also have a high percentage of them too).
However, NY has nicer ones and in far, far, far greater numbers than any other (although its smaller East coast cousins, Boston and Philly, also have a high percentage of them too).
Joined
·
1,211 Posts
Well, do you have a source for this very large number (2000! highrises over 17 stories build in the 20's)? This would mean that New York had almost the same number of highrises that it has today.
I mean, today the second city in north america for number of highrises has only 1700 buildings over 12 stories! How many highrises over 12 stories new york had in the 30's? Four thousand?
Joined
·
558 Posts
2,000 is not my number. It's another poster's. I don't think, moreover, that it was meant to be a precise number. That being said, Manhattan alone has well over 2,000 buildings that from the 1920's and earlier, although they're far from all being 20 stories or more.
Joined
·
1,211 Posts
Well, I asked because I read somewhere that in the 20's building boom about one thousand buildings over 20 stories were build in manhattan and about 50 buildings over 40 stories. Now, if the two thousand buildings over 17 is correct, that would imply that in the 20's, one thousand buildings between 17 and 20 stories were build.
I get the impression that new york had most of its highrises build before the 1935, but most of the tallest buildings, over 600 feet tall, were build after 1935 (62 from the 80 tallest buildings build in new york were build after 1950).
Now, I think that it is fair to say that new york had more highrises in the 30's than Chicago or Toronto have today (maybe even more than their numbers combined). Well, since many highrises were demolished in the last 70 years, it can be said that new york, and since most of the new ones are very large and tall, had about the same number (less the 20% variation) of highrises in the last 70 years?
Joined
·
37 Posts
For me newyork has the most building that signatures the skyline of itself..
but my favorite buildings are in chicago the john hancock center and the sears tower
in new york they have their very own empire state building and the chrysler building
it is very hard to tell who has the best skyline...
but for me, please dont argue me
MANILA
but my favorite buildings are in chicago the john hancock center and the sears tower
in new york they have their very own empire state building and the chrysler building
it is very hard to tell who has the best skyline...
but for me, please dont argue me
MANILA
actually...looking at the last few images of both skylines.i noticed that it is hard to find a good angle for the New York Skyline...unlike the Chicago one which has great Images in this thread, i haven't seen many images of the New York Skyline that have caught my attention...
I guess in a way...the Chicago skyline is much better organized towards a single section than compared to the New York one which has Lower Manhattan, the ESB in 34st(in the middle of no-where) and then the Midtown Skyline(42st-72st)
I guess in a way...the Chicago skyline is much better organized towards a single section than compared to the New York one which has Lower Manhattan, the ESB in 34st(in the middle of no-where) and then the Midtown Skyline(42st-72st)
Hi LondonLawyer!I'm not being condescending. Chicagoans want to assert that their city produces the world's best architecture (and, at the very least, America's best) and that is, in most non-Americans' view, incorrect. Moreover, when non-Americans (and/or non-Midwestern Americans) dispute Chicagoans' false claim, they become indignant, as is clearly evidenced on this thread.
I posted a series of utilitarian boxes that Chicago has built as offices in the past decade. Chicago clearly is not building one Swiss Re after another, and star architects, such as Foster, Rogers, Piano, Nouvel, etc. clearly have not been involved in Chicago's office design in recent years.
In addition to the foregoing, I was appalled during my last trip to Chicago to see a large number of car parks in the middle of the city. That hardly is the setting of an architectural showcase.
Lastly, this crass, insipid attempt to mimic European Classicism belies Chicago's claim to a great architectural heritage. McDonald's (or some other tasteless brand that lacks substance) should be headquartered in this tower.
Jan
![Image]()
It is obvious that you have a problem with Chicago. That is completely fine, but your efforts to objectify your position are downright hilarious!
While the topic of this thread is inherently subjective, and based on people's personal architectural taste and sense of aesthetics, the fact that Chicago is recognized not only as a city of great architecture, but also as one of the world's leading centers of business and commerce is very bothersome to you. Various studies conducted by reputable organizations using sound methodology (MasterCard Company, The City of London) reflect Chicago's credibility in the international domain.
Finally if you are so impressed with 2000 midrise buildings built in NYC during the 1920s, I suggest you visit Paris and examine that city's midrise architecture. I don’t think there is a comparison, similarly to Chicago’s high-rise architecture.
LOL, that skyline "really isn't much". On what world? What a joke.
I haven't seen one Chicago photograph out of the hundreds I've seen on here that look as nice as that particular midtown shot (even though downtown Manhattan seems to be missing).
Nobody is dispuing Chicago's semi-relevance. The question is - it anywhere near New York City level in that regards? No.
241 - 260 of 275 Posts
- Status
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
