Which city would you declare as the US cultural capital if there is one?

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by ocman

NYC would make the historical case. Los Angeles would make the contemporary case.

LA has always had the music industry, pop culture, lifestyle, film/tv, Hollywood stuff, sports dominance. And even that alone is undercutting LA's growing cultural heft. Especially because it's become formidable in the “high arts” as well, having built large, important art collections and institutions in very short order.

Add to that the frenzy of cultural institutions being built today and the fact that so many blue chip artists work, live or were educated in LA, due to city’s exceptional collection of art schools. , There’s the common refrain that now art is made in LA and sold in NYC.

Let’s also add the rise of LA Philharmonic to the "most important orchestra in America” according to the New York Times. New York recently poached Gustavo Dudamel from LA to great fanfare hoping to emulate LA's success. LA Phil’s ascent mirrors that of the city’s sudden establishment onto the art scene

Add the Los Angeles Master Chorale.

Opera and ballet still have some inroads to make, so it seems.

Broadway has enormous potential to be Broadway West with the collection of historic movie palaces and local talent pool of actors, singers, dancers, and musicians. The Colburn School is quite literally just around the corner, as is Center Theatre Group and REDCAT.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by Comrade

Athens, Georgia.

Obviously, you're living in your own private Idaho. You need to get out of that state... get out of that state you're in.

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Actually, this accent came from the Midwest. The generic California accent is basically a Midwest.

Naaaahh braaaahh

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Not eroding at all. LA is the king American city on social media.
To go along with all the hollywood and entertainment stuff.
Social media has made la bigger/more global actually.

For some reason vloggers, influencers and instagram thots all seem to be flocking to LA. But this is nothing new. The city has always been a draw to the vain and delusional.

[LA21st]

Tik tok Made it the American hq for a reason lol.

And there's more athletes living in la than I can remember,
Which Is part of LA's pull.
It seems like every major nba star is in la at this point and fans are very aware.

It all adds up and I doubt young people think la is eroding lol

[Illithid Dude]

Los Angeles for popular culture, New York for high culture. Los Angeles controls the media, music, and social media industries. New York has command over the worlds of Art, Dance, and high fashion - though Los Angeles probably has the most influence over popular fashion, as the headquarters of most American fast-fashion brands are based there and the celebrities that drive the popular conception of style forward live there. Third place would go to Atlanta, which has an outsized influence on music and fashion through it's centrality in hip hop culture. If you are black, you might even put Atlanta as first or second on the list. Miami comes in fourth. The rest is a wash.

[dave8721]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Not eroding at all. LA is the king American city on social media.
To go along with all the hollywood and entertainment stuff.
Social media has made la bigger/more global actually.

LA is still #1 for pop culture (as I said) but its total dominance is not like it was back in the 20th century. Fewer people watch TV, listen to major studio music...etc. Culture is less homogenous than it once was.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by dave8721

LA is still #1 for pop culture (as I said) but its total dominance is not like it was back in the 20th century. Fewer people watch TV, listen to major studio music...etc. Culture is less homogenous than it once was.

Yes, but everyone streams. Which is Hollywood/LA. It's not total dominance, but it's far above anything else.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by Musicman215

OP here, I agree LA is our entertainment capital and center for pop culture but the stuff from LA might not make a lasting effect on the world or America and I feel like recently Hollywood, TV, and pop music have lost some artistic value and creativity. New York and Philly, however continue to produce and develop high culture like classical music, theater, literature, and other types of visual and performing arts. For example Philly's mural program and chamber music series, it doesn't exist anywhere else in the US. Same with NYC's Broadway or publishing industry.

Hollywood entertains the world. It's contributions have already lasted for decades. Not sure what you mean.

Just because you prefer high culture doesn't mean it's more important. I really dont see how the perfoming arts is more important to the average person than Hollywood is.

[ocman]

Originally Posted by Musicman215

OP here, I agree LA is our entertainment capital and center for pop culture but the stuff from LA might not make a lasting effect on the world or America and I feel like recently Hollywood, TV, and pop music have lost some artistic value and creativity. New York and Philly, however continue to produce and develop high culture like classical music, theater, literature, and other types of visual and performing arts. For example Philly's mural program and chamber music series, it doesn't exist anywhere else in the US. Same with NYC's Broadway or publishing industry.

Literature, classical music and theater is in decline and to produce a lasting effect is more challenging than in other genres/mediums. To illustrate, can most Americans name a single living composer (not a movie composer) other than Philip Glass (and he did score for movies as well)? And literature is too dispersed. I don’t see more or less writers coming from a specific city than elsewhere. You just dont move to New York to write a novel anymore. I think it would be hard to argue any of those areas have a stronger staying power with future generations than the mediums that LA dominates. Speaking as someone who dislikes most of what’s out there, television is one area still experiencing a golden age in terms of high value artistic content.

But I think you’re underestimating how much influence LA has in high culture in addition to entertainment. America really only has two art capitals which is LA and NYC, overwhemingly American artists that reach global success come from those two cities. Because LA has entertainment it cross pollinates into the city’s other creative areas as well.

In terms of classical music, there’s really not an orchestra in America that’s as successful or receiving more acclaim that LA Philharmonic right now. It’s become the orchestra with a lot of superlatives (largest budget, highest paid, most profitable, most wanted conductor, most innovative etc). It’s pretty much been said that the West coast (along with exceptional orchestras in SF and Seattle) have been holding the flame for the survival of classical music today as the audiences there tend to be younger and more multicultural. The biggest issue facing classical music right now on the east coast is that audience have stayed white, older and richer and they need to expand out of that when those audiences die off in the coming decades.

[LA21st]

I highly doubt if high culture had a strike of some sort it wouldn't be all over social media like the writer's is. Why? Because people aren't happy their favorite shows and movies are delayed.

It's really all you need to know.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by ocman

Literature, classical music and theater is in decline and to produce a lasting effect is more challenging than in other genres/mediums. To illustrate, can most Americans name a single living composer (not a movie composer) other than Philip Glass (whom I think did score for movies)? And literature is too dispersed. I don’t see more or less writers coming from a specific city than elsewhere. You just dont move to New York to write a novel anymore. I think it would be hard to argue any of those areas have a stronger staying power with future generations than the mediums that LA dominates. Speaking as someone who dislikes most of what’s out there, television is one area still experiencing a golden age in terms of high value artistic content.

But I think you’re underestimating how much influence LA has in high culture in addition to entertainment. America really only has two art capitals which is LA and NYC, overwhemingly American artists that reach global success come from those two cities. Because LA has entertainment it cross pollinates into city’s other creative areas as well.

In terms of classical music, there’s really not an orchestra in America that’s as successful or receiving more acclaim that LA Philharmonic right now. It’s become the orchestra with a lot of superlatives (largest budget, highest paid, most profitable, most wanted conductor, most innovative etc). It’s pretty much been said that the West coast (along with exceptional orchestras in SF and Seattle) have been holding the flame for the survival of classical music today as the audiences there tend to be younger and more multicultural. The biggest issue facing classical music right now on the east coast is that audience have stayed white, older and richer and they need to expand out of that when those audiences die off in the coming decades.

Without going into CvC, this is pretty much all crap.

[proghousehead]

LA. New York is more a global cultural powerhouse whereas LA is culturally king internally.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Musicman215

OP here, I agree LA is our entertainment capital and center for pop culture but the stuff from LA might not make a lasting effect on the world or America and I feel like recently Hollywood, TV, and pop music have lost some artistic value and creativity. New York and Philly, however continue to produce and develop high culture like classical music, theater, literature, and other types of visual and performing arts. For example Philly's mural program and chamber music series, it doesn't exist anywhere else in the US. Same with NYC's Broadway or publishing industry.

You do know that Los Angeles is right there with NYC when it comes to music, theater, etc, had the most museums (with improving quality) and LA is probably the mural / street art capital of the US?

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

You do know that Los Angeles is right there with NYC when it comes to music, theater, etc, had the most museums (with improving quality) and LA is probably the mural / street art capital of the US?

NYC is the undisputed capital of live theater (along with publishing and art auction houses). Its only rival is London's West End.

Music, NYC has the edge. More of the major record labels are based there. It also has more top-notch music schools, most notably Juilliard. LA's certainly no slouch though.

[Quixote]

Add in fashion too. There are only four fashion weeks that matter — Paris, Milan, New York, and London, likely in that order.

But I wouldn't put NYC in the same class as Paris or Milan. The most notable labels to come out of New York are Calvin Klein, Donna Karan / DKNY, Ralph Lauren, Tommy Hilfiger, Michael Kors, and Vera Wang. Of those, all of them except the last sell apparel at outlet stores and any decent department store. There are other high-end haute-couture labels based in NYC, but they aren't household names like, say, Chanel (Paris) or Prada (Milan). Even London has a prestige label like Burberry and Paul Smith.

Many high-end fashion houses have drawn inspiration from LA in recent years as well. Hedi Slimane and Tom Ford live in LA.

Burberry hosts epic bash at Griffith Observatory
Los Angeles Is Becoming Paris Amid the Palms
Tom Ford’s ‘Very L.A.’ Show

[ocman]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Without going into CvC, this is pretty much all crap.

Because you can’t make a case

[ocman]

Originally Posted by Quixote

Add in fashion too. There are only four fashion weeks that matter — Paris, Milan, New York, and London, likely in that order.

But I wouldn't put NYC in the same class as Paris or Milan. The most notable labels to come out of New York are Calvin Klein, Donna Karan / DKNY, Ralph Lauren, Tommy Hilfiger, Michael Kors, and Vera Wang. Of those, all of them sell merchandise at outlet stores and any decent department store. There are other high-end haute-couture labels based in NYC, but they aren't household names like, say, Chanel (Paris) or Prada (Milan). Even London has a prestige label like Burberry and Paul Smith.


Burberry hosts epic bash at Griffith Observatory
Los Angeles Is Becoming Paris Amid the Palms

NY Fashion week has been in trouble for a while. And a lot of that has to do with the lack of anchor labels to maintain its prestige. When the biggest NY brands show up at Ross and TJ Maxx, and you see it on t-shirts, they can’t get that reputation back from overlicensing the brand. Every one of those designers with the exception of Vera Wang (I think), fell into that trap. Of those, Lauren and Klein are really the only ones that maintain some part of their original cache today despite that. And RL decamped his show to LA this year, skipping NY fashion week altogether. Not that it’s specifically American thing. I remember Yves Saint Laurent and Gucci once did that too, pre-Tom Ford. NY is on the fashion calendar, but Paris and Milan really are the only two that matter today. Maybe London for menswear. America just isn’t really a player anymore in high fashion. It experienced a “moment” in the 80s/90s with those labels you just mentioned. But I can’t recall many American-based fashion label that has really hit it big since then on that level. I can think of Tom Ford.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by ocman

The biggest issue facing classical music right now on the east coast is that audience have stayed white, older and richer and they need to expand out of that when those audiences die off in the coming decades.

East Coast traditions and institutions are rooted in a European-style archetype that has finally begun to erode and incorporate elements that blur lines, challenge customs, and merge domains. Silicon Valley, Trump, Harry and Meghan, the pandemic have all played major roles in redefining and/or reinforcing a new social paradigm that reflects asymmetries. "This is the way things have been done for decades/centuries and therefore it's the way we have to do it" is no longer the prevailing school of thought.

It has both benefited and come at the expense of all the major power centers but in different ways.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by ocman

NY Fashion week has been in trouble for a while. And a lot of that has to do with the lack of anchor labels to maintain its prestige. When the biggest NY brands show up at Ross and TJ Maxx, and you see it on t-shirts, they can’t get that reputation back from overlicensing the brand. Every one of those designers with the exception of Vera Wang (I think), fell into that trap. Of those, Lauren and Klein are really the only ones that maintain some part of their original cache today despite that.

Calvin Klein is known mostly for mens' boxer briefs and representing a sort of nostalgia for 90s minimalism. Today, there isn't one freestanding flagship Calvin Klein boutique (there used to be one on I think Madison Avenue several years back). If I want to browse a large selection of Calvin Klein merchandise in person, I would go to the Citadel Outlets.

Ralph Lauren's prestige is somewhat more intact, but its cheaper line "Polo by Ralph Lauren" defines the brand much like DKNY does for Donna Karan IMO. I've seen my fair share of shirts like this:


Source: Macy's

Some of the high-end European fashion houses (e.g. Givenchy) also sell this kind of in-your-face branded clothing (because a lot of people actually like that), but they do so much more sparingly.