Random ramblings

[hatman]

What's the most iconic city in England? If I asked you to name a city in England, what's the first one you'd name? If you were going to tour the country, to see its heart, which city would you have to visit? London, of course. The capital city.

What about France? Paris. The capital city.

Egypt? Cairo. The capital.

China? Bejing/Peking. The capital.

You get the idea. Pick just about any country, and it's the capital. But what about the US? Maybe I'm influenced by proximity, but I'd say that arguably the most iconic city in the country is New York. Which isn't even the capital of the state. (That's Albany. And if you've never heard of it before... I can't say I blame you.) LA is probably the second. Going down the list, there's Boston and Chicago... you'd have a ways to go before you got to D.C. (Or at least so it seems to me.)

Why is that? In part, I guess it's the history of it. Most capitals became capitals because they were major, influential cities. DC was created to be the capital, its location a compromise, moved from more northern proposals (such as New York, already an established major city) to help get the Southern states to pay an even share of the more heavily Northern debts from the Revolutionary War.

Even so, that was two hundred years ago. DC has grown, but not nearly so much (or, arguably, so well) as New York and other cities. Outside of the Federal buildings (Capitol Hill, the National Mall, etc.), it's not a city to really show off. (Which I've always thought was a disappointment and a shame.)

Why has it developed this way? What does it say about us?

Or are my perceptions just skewed? (Though since this mostly is about perceptions, any skewing I might have might just be considered exactly the point...)

Comments

[stellar_dust]

Well, the US is a constructed nation, and those older ones, as you said, developed organically over centuries with a "natural" capital. A fairer comparison would be to other planned colonial states - like Canada (I think of Toronto or Montreal or Vancouver before Ottawa) or Australia (Sydney? Brisbane? No, it's Canberra). Mexico has Mexico City, but it was built on top of Tenochtitlan, so there's a continuity there that's absent in the US.

Anyway, I think DC is a lovely city, with plenty of history! And I like its metro much better than NY or Boston's. d-:

[hatman]

Yeah, I'd never even heard of Canberra. Good point about that, and our neighbors. Interesting.

As for the metro... it's a matter of personal taste and what you're used to, I guess.

I look at parts of Philly and see dirt, dilapidation^*, and broken and faded dreams. I think of how my sister's bike was stolen in broad daylight on her first day, of the junkie who lived passed out literally around the corner from her apartment in the heart of the city, of the women who were attacked walking a single block from the bus stop home. There are parts of the city that are very cool, but outside those carefully maintained islands... Well, I try not to go there.

Mom, on the other hand, sees past that. She looks and sees the charm and variety and the history and she thinks it's beautiful. (I see that, too, but to me it just makes it sadder. I can see what the city could have been, what it was supposed to have been, what it used to be, what it was meant to be... and how far it's fallen from there.)

She also loves New York, which I've always found claustrophobic and a little too much.

To me, Boston is much closer to the ideal. The charm and history, the openness, the blending of urban, suburban, and rural...

It's all in how you see it. And what you, individually, are looking for.

^*Holy crow, I spelled that right on the first try!