Dear New Yorkers..How Do You Rate Other Urban Experiences?

[dc_denizen]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Just standard density. You can't really do an apples-to-apples weighted density comparison between U.S. and Europe since we are using census tracts to calculate weighted in the U.S. But I'm sure weighted density would show the same thing, or it might even look even less favorably for American cities. Also, the populations of the top 10 in each place are fairly similar. The average population of the top 10 European cities is 2,941,595 and the average population of the top 10 American cities is 2,610,502. So it is a somewhat rough analysis, but the takeaway point is demonstrated.

well, the density in the major European centers varies by a massive amount. It's impossible to generalize across Barcelona/Madrid/Athens and Helsinki/Stockholm/Frankfurt; weighted densities in the latter are 5x lower.

I'm not sure that American urban areas (not city limits, who cares what San Antonio's weighted density is) would show much more comparable weighted densities, at least for SF/LA/NYC/Chicago/Philadelphia/Boston.

[mousquet]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

no, london

Yeah...

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by JManc

The average non poor/working class European dresses waaay better than the average American. Not even a contest.

Eh, beg to disagree.

Med Europeans, and French, dress far better than Americans, on average. But Germans dress terribly. Non-posh Brits dress terribly. Eastern Europeans dress terribly. Have you been to Prague, or Bratislava?

Germans dress like the Norcal/Pacific NW stereotype, but even more extreme. No makeup, formless clothes, "outdoorsy" clothing even when not doing outdoorsy stuff. Everyone wears Jack Wolfskin, which is like a cheaper, uglier version of Patagonia. And the shoes are ridiculous. Orthopedic shoes at age 30.

[SFBruin]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Eh, beg to disagree.

You shouldn't. I drag the average down enough that he's probably right.

[SFBruin]

Out of curiousity, is there any other country that has urban areas that are as geographically large as some of those in the US?

I'm probably sounding like a naive American (or, whatever you want to call us since the US isn't "all of America"...), but I am not aware of a foreign city that maintains densities of, say, >3,000 ppsm over an area > 2,000 mi^2, the way that, say, Dallas-Fort Worth does.

[badrunner]

The US is, on average, the worst dressed nation among its first world peers, probably by a wide margin. US cities vs Euro cities it's a closer contest with the edge going to Europe. Within the US, DC is probably the best dressed city on average, even though you'll definitely see more fashion-forward people in NYC or LA. It goes back to that whole conformity thing for DC I guess.

[mja]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Eh, beg to disagree.

Med Europeans, and French, dress far better than Americans, on average. But Germans dress terribly. Non-posh Brits dress terribly. Eastern Europeans dress terribly. Have you been to Prague, or Bratislava?

Germans dress like the Norcal/Pacific NW stereotype, but even more extreme. No makeup, formless clothes, "outdoorsy" clothing even when not doing outdoorsy stuff. Everyone wears Jack Wolfskin, which is like a cheaper, uglier version of Patagonia. And the shoes are ridiculous. Orthopedic shoes at age 30.

My observation has been that the French have slowly but surely dressed more "American" over the last 20 years. I used to feel self-conscious in France (well, except for the Languedoc, there I felt/feel relatively well-dressed), and it was easy to pick Americans out just by looking at footwear, but not so much anymore. This year I even saw large numbers of people wearing - *gasp* - active wear.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Eastern Europeans dress terribly

Well, sort of. There is an expectation, at least in Bucharest, that people dress "nicely" when they're outside. But... what is nice there is not nice here .

[proghousehead]

The fashion in Paris was disappointing. Felt NYC was better dressed. London was more formal than NYC (and Paris too). Milan was amazing though. Everyone dressed to the nines.

LA fashion is very casual vis a vis London/NY/Paris. Not worse. Just less “formal” and well kept.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by mja

My observation has been that the French have slowly but surely dressed more "American" over the last 20 years. I used to feel self-conscious in France (well, except for the Languedoc, there I felt/feel relatively well-dressed), and it was easy to pick Americans out just by looking at footwear, but not so much anymore. This year I even saw large numbers of people wearing - *gasp* - active wear.

Most everyone in the western world at least has been dressing more American. Of course it's a question of degrees and there are still differences and varying degrees, but for about 80% of people you run into there isn't much of a difference from one western country to the other.

Rome in summer is full of people walking around in flipflops these days. And not just tourists.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by SFBruin

Out of curiousity, is there any other country that has urban areas that are as geographically large as some of those in the US?

I'm probably sounding like a naive American (or, whatever you want to call us since the US isn't "all of America"...), but I am not aware of a foreign city that maintains densities of, say, >3,000 ppsm over an area > 2,000 mi^2, the way that, say, Dallas-Fort Worth does.

The Kanto Plain is about 6,000 square miles, where about 50 million people live (Greater Tokyo). And they live right up to the near-vertical mountain borders that ring 2/3rd of the plain. That's around 8,500 ppsm, unweighted.

The Osaka Plain and connected Kyoto Valley are about 2,200 square miles and have about 21 million people (Osaka-Kyoto-Kobe), for an unweighted density of about 9,500 ppqm.

The Aichi Plain is almost exactly 2,000 square miles and has 9.5 million people (Greater Nagoya), for an unweighted density of about 4,700 ppsm.

[Shawn]

Regarding fashion and the Big Five:

I too am not a New Yorker, but I've worked in advertising communications for 20 years, with a major focus on luxury fashion. I've worked with/for LVHM, Richemont, Kering, Ralph Lauren, and Evisu. This has given me a window into how the different luxury groups themselves view the New York, London, Paris, Milan, and Tokyo markets; even for Ralph Lauren, New York is considered the least fashion-oriented of the five.

I don't have any experience with Milan or most of mainland Europe, and all my Parisian experience is actually Parisians living in Tokyo, Hong Kong, or Singapore. But I have a lot of on-the-ground experience in Tokyo, NYC, and London in a fashion media and marketing capacity; Londoners are on average more fashion-conscious than New Yorkers, across all demographics. And yeah, Tokyoites (and Japanese in general) are much more fashion (and overall aesthetically)-oriented than either New Yorkers or Londoners.

I'm not making a moral judgement call on this, so please don't read it as such. It's a difference in cultural values and expectations. Looking as sharp or stylish as you appropriately can for any given situation is a 2,000+ year old Japanese norm. In most of 21st century America, looking as sharp or stylish as you can is considered anywhere on a gradient of "unnecessary" to "fucking gay".

[SFBruin]

Originally Posted by Shawn

The Kanto Plain is about 6,000 square miles, where about 50 million people live (Greater Tokyo). And they live right up to the near-vertical mountain borders that ring 2/3rd of the plain. That's around 8,500 ppsm, unweighted.

Right. I was just wondering if these plains are developed the whole way through (Tokyo city itself I think is ~200 mi^2), or if they have rural areas that interrupt the development.

I think what makes DFW somewhat unique is that you can drive for 40 minutes on the freeway and never really leave development.

[Crawford]

Fashion conscious ≠ style conscious. East Asian cultures are extremely label and high fashion conscious, everyone knows that. When you go to Au Printemps or any higher-end store in Paris it's mostly East Asian tourists, and the Middle East and Russian tourists form much of remainder. Louis Vuitton and Gucci aren't "style".

Hell, go to South Coast Plaza in Orange County, CA, and do a demographic survey of the shoppers. This is a very different topic, IMO.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Fashion conscious ≠ style conscious.

Oh, absolutely. And to this point, I still feel Tokyo and to a lesser extent London stand above New York. The kids running around Ura-Hara or in America-machi in Osaka aren't doing so in high brands. It's all repurposed hand-me-downs and upcycled thrift shop stuff. But BAPE and Evisu are taking their cues from these kids. It's the standard art kids-to-runway collection/haute couture house-to high end retail-to Old Navy/Uniqlo path that style takes.

Or take your every day salaryman. I promise you his conservative business shirt and tie look is more stylish than the American equivalent. Or if he works in a more office-casual environment, he's still going to be sharper and more well-presented than his American counterparts. Even though he's wearing a domestic no-name Y-shirt and the Japanese equivalent of a Van Heusen JC Penny tie.

[YSL]

Originally Posted by Quixote

Since you called CaliNative out for giving his thoughts, I’ll preface by saying that I’m not from NYC, nor have I ever lived there.

And since your opinion on the food scene deviates from the standard narrative, and that you also happen to work in fashion and see art/design in everything (me too), I’ll go out on my own limb and say that the average New Yorker really doesn’t dress that much better than the average American, because the vast majority of New Yorkers come from the middle and working class neighborhoods in the outer boroughs. Joe DiFalco from Staten Island, Joe Shapiro from Brooklyn, Joe Smith from Queens, and Joe Martinez from The Bronx on an ordinary day will most likely wear trousers that aren’t well-tailored, perhaps a decent pair of Nike, Adidas, or Under Armour sneakers, a t-shirt cheap enough to use as pajamas, and maybe a New Era fitted cap (the kind that is boxier and more structured).

The average Londoner, Parisian, or Tokyoite is much more well-put-together, in part because British, French, and Japanese design cultures are more sophisticated than Americans’ decidedly indifferent value toward aesthetics in general—I think largely owing to America’s cultural values of boldness and masculinity, which call for less elegance and refinement. I would also guess that a good majority of men who work on Wall Street get their suits from like Men’s Warehouse instead of, say, Brooks Brothers or Ralph Lauren.

You are aware that the vast majority of people in London, Paris and Tokyo also come from average and working class backgrounds, right? The notion that Europeans are notably “sophisticated” is a joke. Sure, if you stay in the very posh sections of Paris and London, it can be very fabulous, and filled with sophisticates, but have you ever actually ventured outside of the tourist areas and into the areas most people actually live?

[craigs]

Originally Posted by SFBruin

I think what makes DFW somewhat unique is that you can drive for 40 minutes on the freeway and never really leave development.

Is that really unique, though? Los Angeles has that. So does the Bay Area and probably others.

[Steely Dan]

i've driven in chicago on the kennedy expressway for 40 minutes before and only gone 3 miles, so........

[JManc]

Good point on Eastern Europeans but overall based on my travels to Europe and across the US, Europeans seem to pay better attention to what they have on more so than Americans...who often have zero fucks. Fat old German guys in Speedos at the beach not withstanding of course. This is echoed here in the US from region to region; big northern cities dress better than those here in the south where it's warmer and dress is more casual.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by SFBruin

Right. I was just wondering if these plains are developed the whole way through (Tokyo city itself I think is ~200 mi^2), or if they have rural areas that interrupt the development.

I think what makes DFW somewhat unique is that you can drive for 40 minutes on the freeway and never really leave development.

You can drive for 3+ hours north-south, from Odawara in Kanagawa Prefecture to Maebashi in Gunma Prefecture (passing through Tokyo and Saitama Prefecture along the way), and never dip below 10,000 ppsm. It's unbroken. Check it out in Google Earth, it's incredible.

This is what we mean when we say Tokyo's scale is much larger than New York's. New York's peak densities, both for population and for tall buildings, eclipse Tokyo's by a whole lot. It's not even close. But on the other side, Tokyo goes on and on and on . . . and on, unbroken, at a density scale far greater than metro New York's.

Less than 30% of Japan's land area is flat, and 18% of that is farms and commercial or protected forests. So you've got 127 million people living in 12% of the country's area. Which is about 17,500 sq miles. Which is a little larger than Denmark or Estonia or Maryland.

Can you imagine Maryland having 127 million people? So . . . yeah, they pack 'em in here.