SkyscraperCity banner

When did Los Angeles "officially" reach global city status?

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
LAL | LAD | LAK
Joined
·
6,477 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Los Angeles' status as a major global player is quite manifest nowadays with the steadily ongoing population growth; rapidly growing rail transit system; burgeoning arts scene; mega-developments like LA Live, Grand Avenue project, Hollywood & Vine, NBC Universal West Coast Headquarters project, etc.; green initiatives; more urban-oriented zoning laws; and waves of foreign investment. It has "matured" into a bona fide urban center, no longer known as just simply "Hollywood".

Yet Los Angeles has become increasingly global over the past several decades, arguably at its highest point today. It was not an overnight success story like Dubai. In your opinion, at what juncture did Los Angeles secure its future of promise? Was it in the 1910's when the Los Angeles Aqueduct was completed, which subsequently led to heavy growth and annexation? Did it occur in the 1920's when the motion pictures and aviation industries flocked to Los Angeles, the Pacific Electric Railway was the world's largest, the Port of Los Angeles became the West Coast's busiest shipping port, and a fourth of the world's oil-petroleum stock was being produced there? Who can forget the 1930's when Los Angeles hosted the Summer Olympic Games for the first time and surpassed the one million population mark? Or the World War II era when the aerospace industry created thousands of jobs, thus providing economic growth to the region? What about the post-war era when Los Angeles built its labyrinth of a freeway system, became one of the birthplaces of the internet, and established several cultural institutions (LACMA, Norton Simon, MOCA, Getty Villa, etc.)? Maybe it was in the 1980's when Los Angeles hosted the Summer Olympic Games for the second time, which went down in history as the most profitable? Could it be as recent as the late 1990's and early 2000's when Los Angeles' cultural scene really took off with the opening of the Getty Center and Walt Disney Concert Hall?

The venerable (sarcasm) GaWC study suggests that Los Angeles had already reached alpha world city status when it conducted its survey in 1999. But that is open to debate, which is why I created this thread.

What are your thoughts?
 

·
LAL | LAD | LAK
Joined
·
6,477 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
I'm going to go with the 1920's. Hollywood has benefited LA in so many ways.
 

·
L O S A N G E L E S
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
I agree.
We opened 'wide' wayyyy before we should have with the help of Hollywood back then, although our coming out party may have been the 1984 Olympics.​
Could have been the worldwide syndiction of simple television shows back in the late 60's, 70's 80's. Things like "I love Lucy" on through to 'Batwatch'. Music, but basically movies. Mostly this is a cultural effect. Cheap, 'pop' culture as the Los Anjealous would say.​
Around the world, day in and day out, it's still us telling the stories around the international campfire- but it's so much more than that today :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,500 Posts
One could argue for the late thirties and forties when Los Angeles became the intellectual capital of Central and Eastern Europe due to the large number of refugees from the Nazis who found their way here. Thomas Mann, Berthold Brecht, Igor Stravinsky, Aldous Huxley, Arnold Schoenberg, George Gershwin, William Faulkner, F. Scott Fitzgerald, etc. etc. all lived here drawn by Hollywood, and the weather. The city became the center of the aerospace industry, the port became a major transit point between North America and the Pacific War and the movie industry reached a peak.
 

·
Silver Lake
Joined
·
5,451 Posts
I'll go with Post War WWII era, so somewhere in the 1950-1970's.
 

·
Tastemaker Extraordinare
Joined
·
308 Posts
Probably post wwII did we get global city status.

However, there has been a significant increase in the city's status.

In late 90s early 90s LA was thought of being a little bit out of it with SF and NY being considered as the edgier cities, but then something happened that propelled LA to being perhaps the foremost influential city in the world since the very late 1990s. We are still on that crest.

It seems strange to say but the riots, oj and the earthquake reintroduced LA to America and the world.
 

·
Bleed Dodger Blue
Joined
·
1,773 Posts
1980s. We had the second Olympics in the city, a huge construction boom in the city (at least the late 1980s). We started to build our Metro lines, and the Tom Bradley International Terminal opened at LAX.
 

·
LAL | LAD | LAK
Joined
·
6,477 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
I am talking about a very minor global status. In the 1980's, the Los Angeles CSA had a population of well over 10 million.
 

·
Bleed Dodger Blue
Joined
·
1,773 Posts
It all depends on what your definition of a global city is.
 

·
LAL | LAD | LAK
Joined
·
6,477 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
^ When did Los Angeles first appear on the map? At what point in time did it start having some sort of global significance? I am not talking about full-fledged global status.
 

·
Bleed Dodger Blue
Joined
·
1,773 Posts
So then Salt Lake City should be a global city under that definition because of some global significance (Olympics). But would you consider it a global city?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
618 Posts
So then Salt Lake City should be a global city under that definition because of some global significance (Olympics). But would you consider it a global city?
If that is true, then Atlanta, Georgia would also be a global city

About being on a map, the difference between Salt Lake City being on a map and Los Angeles being on a map, is that even on a world-wide map with only 2 or 3 cities in USA identified, Los Angeles is marked, along with NYC and maybe our nation's capital... really, that is only because of populations, and DC being our capital. So... does population alone give a city global status?
 

·
LAL | LAD | LAK
Joined
·
6,477 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
So then Salt Lake City should be a global city under that definition because of some global significance (Olympics). But would you consider it a global city?
Having hosted the Olympic Games does not make a place globally significant.

The thing is, Hollywood was already the motion picture capital of the world in the 1920's. The movie studios brought foreigners from Europe who, in turn, brought money.
 

·
LAL | LAD | LAK
Joined
·
6,477 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
And I would consider cities like Boston and Atlanta "global", but not "world-class" -- if that makes any sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
618 Posts
it doesn't, and you lost me there. haha

isnt the world a globe... so how is world-class not global?

I think i just mis-interpreted this all, and since I can not provide an answer to this question anyways, I'll just back out and watch you all debate this.
 

·
L O S A N G E L E S
Joined
·
6,590 Posts
Having hosted the Olympic Games does not make a place globally significant.
Having the ability to host an Olympic games is just one characteristic of a 'global' classification. First name basis, familiarity is also an indicator. Worldwide interaction is the leading foundation for definition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
You mean star status!

The minute I stepped off the bus and got famous! lol:lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
You mean star status!

The minute I stepped off the bus and got famous! lol:lol:
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top