I don't really want to compare. I'd like to see things as they are, but of course, that's impossible. If there's one thing I learned in grad school it's that it's all relative. I cannot help but see these environments in relation to my own current and past experiences. I will move forward with the caution that these thoughts are interpretations, not judgements, and come from one who is now slightly over-educated and indoctrinated in the academic ideologies. As if you couldn't tell that from this very paragraph.
For me SF is at much higher resolution, and not just in terms of the density of the population on so little land. It is more than that. It is an attitude that stems from a history of open-mindedness and nice weather (my opinion, remember) that has made places like Venice Beach and San Francisco such a mish mash of cultures. Probably being on the westest most side of the country accounts for it as well, as if folks who did not like places like Chicago just keep heading west until they run out of room.
Chicago is so segregated still, so gridded in its layout. So entrenched in the politics of commerce. Here the crazy streets and angles and architecture make for a lot more diversity and unexpected combinations, both culturally and engineeringly, if that's a word.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
A city of commerce Chicago is for sure.
Check this quote:
Here, of all her cities, throbbed the true life-the true power and spirit of America; gigantic, crude with the crudity of youth, disdaining rivalry; sane and healthy and vigorous; brutal in its ambition, arrogant in the new-found knowledge of its giant strength, prodigal of its wealth, infinite in its desires.
Frank Norris, The Pit.
Money money money.
Post a Comment