Why is London the world’s greatest city?
The Evening Standard (3.7.2015, above) comments that ‘In the course of that contest the two cities have sought advantage on every possible measure. London usually lost out on the height of its buildings but gained on street-level hipness. Their restaurants used to be better, now ours have nudged ahead. When it came to theatrical vitality, Broadway and the West End have alternated the lead — and each other’s shows — with each season.’ Even the trashy photo used to illustrate the article, with its out-of-true verticals, makes a vital point which the text misses: London has a consistently-higher visual landscape quality than NYC. Central Park is great and landscape architects are improving its waterfronts. London’s urban landscape is much more varied and has many more pleasures for the pedestrian – but London also needs heavy investment in landscape architecture to maintain its landscape lead. It is time for London to resume its place as a world capital for landscape architecture
Tom Turner
An incredibly doubtful, vainglorious article, what on earth is the “greatest city”. This is infantile male posturing at the urinal, look mine is bigger than you are, I am king of the castle. Gadzooks they are metaphorically duelling. Who will prick t’other with their poignard .
Both New York and London are large lively cities. London is older, New York is newer. New York is colder in winter, London is milder. So what! And what has this article to do with landscape architecture?