Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka
Allan Gardens is neat but I wouldn't exactly describe it as a tourist attraction. Neat to walk around in for a half hour or so.
The last page or so exemplifies something that happens here quite a bit - hand-wringing and worrying that Ottawa isn't cool enough or that enough tourists visit or what others think of Ottawa. The best cities to visit are the ones that don't care about what others think about them. Do we think New Yorkers stay up at night wondering how best to appeal to tourists? Londoners? Parisians? The value of going to those cities is that you're getting a unique, city-specific experience. Ottawa doesn't have to be any of those places but it doesn't need to pretend like it needs aquariums or hanging gardens or whatever else just to look better to outsiders. Do your own thing, find out what Ottawa actually is, and people will come and visit it for that.
Tourists and outsiders can tell when a place is 'forced fun'.
|
I agree with you that we should built attractions for the locals primarily. But in my opinion, Ottawa is a tourists destination. So we can't neglect them for the success of these spaces. If you want really cool big attractions such as an aquarium, do you think the local population will be big enough a market to keep it profitable?
I would want an aquarium or a giant indoor botanical garden for myself to visit, not for being a flashy tourist destination. But I think we have no choice to include them as part of the conversation so that these projects succeed.
Threaded Mode