# Are cities becoming dull?



## Mr Bricks (May 6, 2005)

I have been thinking about this quite a lot. With the current redevelopment of the Helsinki docks a part of me is beginning to fear the city is losing its spirit. 

With all the redevelopment and gentrification going on in cities nowadays I think many cities will become quite dull in the future. Even a few decades ago the situations was different, despite the fact that the post-war decades were quite dark in many ways.

However, in the 19th century for example cities were bustling and lively and more real. It was a time when markets served a purpose instead of being fun and tourist hot spots. The docks were busy and saw ocean liners come and go etc. Railways, goods yards, wharves, slaughter houses and factories made for an interesting environment. 

Nowadays most of this activity is long gone and replaced by (admittedly often nice) modern developments that make cities "fake" in a sense.

What do you think?


----------



## ThatDarnSacramentan (Oct 26, 2008)

You have an interesting point, but keep in mind: the world is completely different now. In the 19th Century, the world seemed so big, and traveling took so long. Now, everyone in the world has access to the sum of mankind's knowledge from the palm of their hand. The world is a much smaller place now, and it's only natural that the world grows as one.


----------



## spongeg (May 1, 2006)

yah in some ways it is 

but i think people are better off and are seeking out more


----------



## Svartmetall (Aug 5, 2007)

I'd say so, yes. Even rather radical Western cities like Berlin are losing their edge with creeping gentrification.


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

Most cities still have significant ungentrified places with all that "jazz" and character left.

The only city that I can think of that is like totally gentrified is San Francisco.


----------



## LtBk (Jul 27, 2004)

I wonder if gentrification going to stop.


----------



## jcarloschile (Jul 12, 2008)

I would love to go back in time and live in the 19th century, when the rest of the wrold seemed exotic and you only knew of other places by the legendary tales you heard from people who went to those places, and maybe someday you could have you're own exotic adventure!


----------



## PedroGabriel (Feb 5, 2007)

I think thats an issue. that's why when i crated a thread about my city i added tags explaining the buildings, because many cities in europe are fake, they try to look older and monumental. I dont think my city is fake, never tried, so we have lots of scares, but lots of diverse architecture and popular architecture, and is not moving towards that with the new developments, in fact the exiting grid pattern is being removed, but we always had the gentrification problem, and was a concern, and is now. but I think we have learned from the past. It is still possible to go to houses of old inhabitants that keep the traditional culture, even if that is now a rarity.

but I think that is more true in northern europe, where their desire of perfection made their cities so dull. In the US, they are prisoners to the grid pattern. :nuts: which looks horrible and inhuman.


----------



## NorthLimitation (Mar 21, 2009)

PedroGabriel said:


> *I think thats an issue. that's why when i crated a thread about my city i added tags explaining the buildings, because many cities in europe are fake, they try to look older and monumental.* I dont think my city is fake, never tried, so we have lots of scares, but lots of diverse architecture and popular architecture, and is not moving towards that with the new developments, in fact the exiting grid pattern is being removed, but we always had the gentrification problem, and was a concern, and is now. but I think we have learned from the past. It is still possible to go to houses of old inhabitants that keep the traditional culture, even if that is now a rarity.
> 
> but I think that is more true in northern europe, where their desire of perfection made their cities so dull. In the US, they are prisoners to the grid pattern. :nuts: which looks horrible and inhuman.


It's all this 'copying the past' that people are so unsure about. In my opinion, rebuilding architecture on older styles is OK in some cases. Certainly, I do not oppose modern architecture, but I do feel that there is no difference between boring from the 1970s and borrowing from the 1870s. So long as the surrounding architecture / spirit of an area is taken into account when designing a building, then it does not bother me in which style a new building is built, so long as it compliments its surroundings.


----------



## ThatDarnSacramentan (Oct 26, 2008)

PedroGabriel said:


> In the US, they are prisoners to the grid pattern. :nuts: which looks horrible and inhuman.


The ancient Romans invented and used the grid pattern, and there are still places in Europe that follows the remains of the Roman grid. I will admit, the United States went for function over form and greatly overused the grid.


----------



## Ribarca (Jan 28, 2005)

Cities started to look more alike for sure. Few cities have unique modern architecture. Most of the new buildings can be moved to any city in the world without looking out of place.

The other element that seems to make cities alike is the disappearance of small traditional stores typical for a city. All main streets have the same chains these days (H&M, Zara etc.). Luckily the old city centers in Europe seem able to keep some old-fashioned stores


----------



## monkeyronin (May 18, 2006)

Xusein said:


> The only city that I can think of that is like totally gentrified is San Francisco.


No, San Francisco is not "totally gentrified".


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

I know it has some small areas, but compared to many other cities in the US, its areas that aren't gentrified are rather small.


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

PedroGabriel said:


> but I think that is more true in northern europe, where their desire of perfection made their cities so dull. In the US, they are prisoners to the grid pattern. :nuts: which looks horrible and inhuman.


A lot of cities in the Northeast have no grid. Like Boston for example.


----------



## erbse (Nov 8, 2006)

> Are cities becoming dull?


Many (if not most) of them already are. The process started with modernist architecture after WW2 and proceeded with mass consumption and the globalization.




PedroGabriel said:


> but I think that is more true in *northern europe*, where their desire of perfection made their cities so dull


Explain this term to me. What's Northern Europe? Only Scandinavia and Finland? Or do you include Middle Europe (Germany, Czech Rep., BeNeLux, Austria and so on) and the UK as well? If so: *No way!*


----------



## NorthLimitation (Mar 21, 2009)

erbse said:


> Many (if not most) of them already are. The process started with modernist architecture after WW2 and proceeded with mass consumption and the globalization.
> 
> 
> 
> Explain this term to me. What's Northern Europe? Only Scandinavia and Finland? Or do you include Middle Europe (Germany, Czech Rep., BeNeLux, Austria and so on) and the UK as well? If so: *No way!*


Scotland included? Don't make me getting Braveheart on your arse.











Edit: Not you btw, Erbse. Pedro.


----------



## PedroGabriel (Feb 5, 2007)

Nothern is different from the Middle. I think.... :lol:

C'mon. I'll take those Scots:bleep:


----------



## Accura4Matalan (Jan 7, 2004)

NorthLimitation said:


> Scotland included? Don't make me getting Braveheart on your arse.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think hes still getting over his divorce


----------



## erbse (Nov 8, 2006)

Mel Gibson is responsible for our cities being dull.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

Mr Bricks said:


> I have been thinking about this quite a lot. With the current redevelopment of the Helsinki docks a part of me is beginning to fear the city is losing its spirit.
> 
> With all the redevelopment and gentrification going on in cities nowadays I think many cities will become quite dull in the future. Even a few decades ago the situations was different, despite the fact that the post-war decades were quite dark in many ways.
> 
> ...


The opposite of gentrification is suburbia with a dead remain of a once active urban center somewhere in the sea of low density settlements and shopping malls.

It seems to me you see the past through pink glasses. Just a few decades the ultimate death of many urban centres was to be expected already. The districts were indeed "authentic", if that means in a desperate state. If that trend had gone on, we would not have today "authentic" and bustling city centres but dead ruins of former city centres.

I only have to look at Vienna. Yes some of the charme had been lost on one side, but on the other side, had there been so many new great things created a new that I would not be surprised if the city is actually livelier today than lets say 20 years ago. Vienna was a much more boring place back then.


----------



## Dallas star (Jul 6, 2006)

^^ I totally agree!

America is a dull boring country, it may be the safest but that's not always good.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

America is dull because people are resting on their laurels. Dallas is getting more exciting I think though.

I do not think the US is all that safe. We are very car dependent and the amount of traffic homicides is astounding. Obesity, guns and violence are rampant.

Our laws suck. Marijuana should be decriminalized and the churches should be taxed.
Also, the zoning laws are terrible. Have you noticed the strip malls and mega malls? Some parts of the US are exciting though. 

Today I asked five people if they knew where Tripoli was and nobody knew. Americans lack the curiosity of the rest of the word.

This is a money hungry country that is dysfunctional because of bad laws keeping non criminals incarcerated and because we import everything that we could be producing here. People are not paid fairly in the US and the healthcare system is wretched.

We lack history and what history we have we generally knock down for financial gain.
Money is the culprit.

If we legalized marijuana here we would be out of debt.

Things are changing now. It is not cool to drive Hummers and wear Abercrombie anymore.


----------



## bayviews (Mar 3, 2006)

philadweller said:


> Two cities in the US seem to be getting duller and they are San Francisco and Manhattan. Both cities are past ripe in terms of overimprovements and a more mainstream residency. Boston is lucky to have a constantly changing student and government base. The city itself is like a museum quality heirloom.


It's quite refreshing to hear San Francisco described as a dull! 

Really though, San Francisco's not nearly as gentrified as many think. Its not that the city's residents are that affluent. Rather, SF's housing prices are the highest by far in relation to the incomes of the city's residents. The median housing price in SF reached TEN times the city's median income before the real estate bubble burst, higher than any other city, & are still over 6x median incomes. That leaves a lot of residents stuck with very poor housing. By contrast, while a city like Washington DC has been becoming more gentrified, it's median housing costs are still just double median income. 

Much more than say Manhatten, San Francisco has a huge & very visible homeless population & large parts of eastern & southern SF are still very gritty.


----------



## LtBk (Jul 27, 2004)

philadweller said:


> Do many Europeans realize how lucky they are to live in Europe?


I'm sure the majority do.


----------



## Koen Acacia (Apr 17, 2007)

Mr Bricks said:


> Many modern city districts and developments are very nice though. Many modern office districts do offer all kinds of entertainment and the streets are not entirely dead. One example is the Sony Centre in Berlin, I liked it very much when I visited Berlin last year.* However, when I one evening found myself in London´s Brick Lane I was suddenly struck by this feeling of how cities once could have been like. The people, the mess, the dimly lit streets and surprises around every corner. Everything was much more intense.*


I think I see what you're getting at, but I think that we both have a different mental image associated with the word "city".
To me, the Victorian/Industrial Revolution city with it's grime and it's factories is the aberration, not the norm. It was a time when, because of the agricultural revolution, millions of people were _forced _to move to the city, simply because there was no alternative for them. That gave us the idea of cities as high-poverty areas, less safe than the countryside, but at the same time more lively, true. Still, historically, those inside the citywalls would have been both safer and more affluent than those outside them.

That a lot of those old inner city areas are becoming gentrified, high-value neighborhoods again only makes sense to me: historical districts like that are _supposed _to be high in value. If the result seems "boring"... depends. A place like London has truckloads of events, restaurants, galleries and so on these days, most of them impossible if those going there and paying for them would still be huddled away somewhere in Suburbia.


----------



## Mr Bricks (May 6, 2005)

philadweller said:


> Do many Europeans realize how lucky they are to live in Europe?


I can´t speak for the whole continent, but for Finland I would say yes. Finland may not have the great cities, culture and history of continental Europe but generally Finns do appreciate being born in this country.



philadweller said:


> America is dull because people are resting on their laurels. Dallas is getting more exciting I think though.
> 
> I do not think the US is all that safe. We are very car dependent and the amount of traffic homicides is astounding. Obesity, guns and violence are rampant.
> 
> ...


Good points. However the US is huge and I´m sure has loads of interesting places. I think the biggest problem is the American coservatism. The US might have been the country many saw as as opportunity in life, the American dream was real back then (at least in some form). The problem is that the US never modernised itself. Europe went through two world wars and was socially transformed. This never happened in America. 

I watched Obama´s election speech on tv and I was astonished by how old fashioned it sounded. And to think this is Obama, not Bush. Politicians in Europe would never go on about the founding fathers and the American dream etc. Furthermore no European politician would ever say "God bless x European country". 



Koen Acacia said:


> I think I see what you're getting at, but I think that we both have a different mental image associated with the word "city".
> To me, the Victorian/Industrial Revolution city with it's grime and it's factories is the aberration, not the norm. It was a time when, because of the agricultural revolution, millions of people were forced to move to the city, simply because there was no alternative for them. That gave us the idea of cities as high-poverty areas, less safe than the countryside, but at the same time more lively, true. Still, historically, those inside the citywalls would have been both safer and more affluent than those outside them.
> 
> That a lot of those old inner city areas are becoming gentrified, high-value neighborhoods again only makes sense to me: historical districts like that are supposed to be high in value. If the result seems "boring"... depends. A place like London has truckloads of events, restaurants, galleries and so on these days, most of them impossible if those going there and paying for them would still be huddled away somewhere in Suburbia.


Naturally the 19th century city was a reuslt of the social and political climate of that age. Still, I would not want to lose those gritty and special places. Most historic streets in Europe are beatiful and often full of life with cafés, bars etc which is very nice. Take Copenhagen for example, the pedestrianised city centre is lively and beatiful but it doesn´t feel or look different in any way. The district of Norrebro on the other hand is a more gritty place where the locals have left their mark on every corner which makes it a very interesting area. Now, if Norrebro was gentrified and the historic buildings turned into luxury flats the area would quickly lose its spirit.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

Very true, America is very conservative. This applies to gay marriages and bad drug laws. Medical marijuana should be legal in every state. After all, so many people smoke it and you can't lock the whole smoking base up. I watch COPS sometimes and cannot believe how severely people get busted with pot. It's not like carrying firearms.

America is exciting geographically. Driving across the US is an exhilarating experience.


----------



## Koen Acacia (Apr 17, 2007)

I'd assume that most people appreciate that they've been born in their own country.



Mr Bricks said:


> Naturally the 19th century city was a reuslt of the social and political climate of that age. Still, I would not want to lose those gritty and special places. Most historic streets in Europe are beatiful and often full of life with cafés, bars etc which is very nice. Take Copenhagen for example, the pedestrianised city centre is lively and beatiful but it doesn´t feel or look different in any way. The district of Norrebro on the other hand is a more gritty place where the locals have left their mark on every corner which makes it a very interesting area. Now, if Norrebro was gentrified and the historic buildings turned into luxury flats the area would quickly lose its spirit.


I don't know Copenhagen very well tbh. :/ 
I'm a bit on the fence about the sort of neighborhood you describe though. They do have their own dynamic, absolutely. And that dynamic can change over time. Whether or not that change is "bad" depends on the change I think. 
When looking at, say, the Jordaan in Amsterdam, or the Marais in Paris, you might be seeing an area that has lost a lot of it's "spirit", but what I am seeing is a neighborhood that has lost a lot of it's grittiness, and has been gentrified, but has become _more _liveable, and _more _interesting in the process, not less.


----------



## Martin S (Sep 12, 2002)

When I lived in York, England I visited the Jorvik centre, the reconstruction of the Viking town on the site of an archaeological dig that took place in the 70s. There was a system of electrically powered pods that took you round this Viking town where you could see reconstructions of Viking houses, with models of Viking men women and children and artificial smells so that we could have the full 'Viking experience'.

It struck me that the way of life that the Vikings led was one that changed very little for many centuries and which is still intact in a large part of the world - and that it was our lifestyle with its cars, air travel, skyscrapers, shopping centres, computers etc, which was transient. Really the tour should have been the other way around and the Vikings should have been marvelling at the way of life that we live.

Our towns and cities have changed immensely in the past hundred odd years but, we can be sure that they will change far more in the next hundred. So maybe we should just enjoy how we live today rather than nostalgia for a past that would have been amazed by our way of life.


----------



## jefferson2 (May 31, 2008)

erbse said:


> Mel Gibson is responsible for our cities being dull.


erbse is right...


----------



## jefferson2 (May 31, 2008)

Dallas star said:


> ^^ I totally agree!
> 
> America is a dull boring country, it may be the safest but that's not always good.


do you really think cities in america or anywhere were more exciting 50 or 100 eyars ago than today...?

of course not

safe is good.. you dont need a threat of being robbed or shot to have a good time


----------



## rossie1977 (Jul 17, 2007)

Dallas star said:


> America is a dull boring country, it may be the safest but that's not always good.


i disagree that america is a dull boring country or that its the safest

i think you are confusing usa with belgium :lol:


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

True. The US has a huge murder rate. Also far too many car crashes, with the most dangerous traffic being the places with wide roads and high speeds, i.e. the suburbs.


----------



## Blindfold (Jan 22, 2006)

I currently live in Perth, Western Australia (pop nearly 1.7m and growing fast) and the city is commonly known as 'Dullsville' by sections of the local media and a percentage of the population. I'm afraid to say that it very often lives up to its namesake. 

Any other cities around the world known colloquially as 'Dullsville?


----------



## Luis80 (Dec 28, 2005)

Dallas star said:


> ^^ I totally agree!
> 
> America is a dull boring country, it may be the safest but that's not always good.


actually america is the most unsafe country out of any industrialized country. Most developed countries are alot safer then the states.


----------



## bayviews (Mar 3, 2006)

Mr Bricks said:


> I can´t speak for the whole continent, but for Finland I would say yes. Finland may not have the great cities, culture and history of continental Europe but generally Finns do appreciate being born in this country.
> 
> Good points. However the US is huge and I´m sure has loads of interesting places. I think the biggest problem is the American coservatism. The US might have been the country many saw as as opportunity in life, the American dream was real back then (at least in some form). The problem is that the US never modernised itself. Europe went through two world wars and was socially transformed. This never happened in America.
> 
> ...


Keep in mind that most of the European colonies that eventually became the US started out as religious settlements. If you end up "discovering" & taking over from their original inhabitants a HUGE chunk of relatively virgin land you tend to think of your good luck & conquest as being "blessed" by divine right, by god. 

By contrast, many European countries faced near destruction in two world wars, Had it not been for the Americans & the Soviets, the Nazis might still be ruling Europe. Add to that a small country like Finland had to face the realities of losing a big chunk of its land to the Soviets & later being trapped between two opposing systems during the Cold War. 

Not surprising that those types of realities had a lot do with the demise of religion in Europe. The last century of the European experience didn't lend many Europeans to think of themselves as "blessed". Even though today, most Europeans live, by most standards, a better quality of life than most Americans, struggling under the HUGE military burden of trying to maintain a global economic empire. 

Which of course, along with their relative newness, is a significant part of the reason why most American cities can't compare in quality with most European cities.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

Dullsville...Toledo, Ohio.


----------

