As much as I complain and bitch about Manhattan and how many low lives that I find here at any moment, I must forfeit my complaints from time to time.
It is true that I am sure that 98% of the people that I see and have encountered here are peasants with accompanying low forehead and flip flops and all, I don't think that there is another city on this planet, that in absolute terms (#s), that has as many interesting and diverse group of people.
Other than S.F., New Orleans, Chicago, London, Paris, Honolulu, Sydney, Barcelona, Montreal, Monte Carlo, and Hong Kong, I can't imagine living anywhere else. Nowhere else (I would think) has the same level of energy, diversity, and modernity.
In Manhattan, there is nothing that one can not have. Food, shopping, clubs, lounges, hotels, people, culture, and possibilties.
It's true that if one does enough of it, it does become a routine and routines can become boring. But we Manhattanites have the choice to not participate amidst all of the choices at any given day and night. What other cities (besides the aforementioned) can one say this about? Manhattan ranks on top.
S.F. would be the closest to this. Plus it has the better weather and better access to nature. Kudos to S.F. But may the gods bless Manhattan. My Salome; my sweet toxic love.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Emphasis on "toxic."
True true.
FKNY,
If you could find a tenth as much to do in SF, NO, Honolulu or (gak) Monte Carlo as one find in New York, I'd pay for your one way ticket to any of those cities.
Monte Carlo? You are kidding, right?
It's also a bit odd that you seem to think the best things in New York are food (OK on that, but not as #1), shopping, clubs, lounges, hotels. You could probably be talking about Dallas.
As for food, I meant foremost the variety of food. At any given day, I can go eat with my hands at an Ethiopian place or eat jellyfish or sea cucumber at a Cantonese place downtown. I doubt that a place like Dallas would have such variety. And, variety as the cliche goes 'is the spice of life.'
Monte Carlo, I have never been to but from what I gathered from someone who visited there often, it sounded interesting.
True, most places, even the ones that I listed don't have tenth of the stuff to do as in Manhattan (save SF).
Ah, you've never been to Monte Carlo. That explains it. I was there two or three years ago, and believe me, it's not much. I couldn't wait to get back to Nice, which at least had a marvelous Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, though not a great deal else. Food in Nice: superb across the board. There is more and better to do in Cleveland than in Monte Carlo. (Grace's tomb was nice. I liked the signs on her grave: "Silence!" and "Respect!", both of which function equally well in French and English. Everything else was cornball souvenir shops.)
Could it perhaps be that you have not been to SF or NO either. I found SF to be highly overrated, and would probably have experienced ACUTE boredom symptoms within two weeks at most. The performance of le Nozze di Figaro at the War Memorial Opera House (an OK bldg.) was by far the worst I have ever seen. I would not have imagined such a weak Nozze possible. And very expensive.
The "SFMoMA" (I wonder who thought that up?) was really shocking in its shortage of any sort of major works. I'd say between 50 and 60% was really dreck. With very little knowledge of the material, I did like the Asian Museum very much. I couldn't really evaluate the breadth or depth of the collection, but I did enjoy seeing it all. There was a small but beautiful travelling collection of Monet in Normandy the last time I was at the Legion of Honor, but the main collection is very weak.
I was not especially impressed with the food. Nothing to come NEAR Sripraphai in Woodside or Spicy and Tasty in Flushing.
I found the people boring, unfriendly and self-congratulatory in a vaguely insecure way.
New Orleans? Very small, very touristy, and very ersatz. It seems, all too often, like a Disney exhibit, or a Las Vegas faux city. People mostly sweet, but in a rather unconvincing way, since for the most part they wanted your money. There are charming visual moments, but most of the nice things are quickly undercut by the commercialism and total tourist-orientation of just about eveything. No real texture for such an old and "historic' place. Go to Williamsburg instead.
Food was good. Music? Not really. Heard much better in Saint Louis and KC.
London and Paris have always thrilled me. The more you get to know them, the more wonderful things you are able to find. They seem to me, like New yrok, to be pretty much inexhaustible.
Barcelona is still on my list.
First off Pierce, thanks for the comment. This one in particular is very beautifully written. Flows nicely. I enjoy reading your comments; except when you are being a queen :).
Yes, I have been to both SF and NO. But I didn't go there for culture. I went to play (drinking, dining, shopping) and for that, it was fun albeit low brow. Fine.
As for Barcelona. I must go! I've never been. But I'm sure that it has everything. Great food, the arts, culture, and siesta. I'll have to put it on top of my cue to supercede Prague/Budapest.
There's nothing quite like New York on a radiantly beautiful day like today (April 17, 2009).
The light. The flowers. The slightly more relaxed atmosphere as people of all professions slow down a bit and say to themselves: "This doesn't happen every day. I'm gonna take a minute to enjoy it."
Glorious.
Post a Comment