Quote:
Originally Posted by kool maudit
calgary has more and taller office towers than montreal. it is just that they sort of sprout from this weird plain of little houses.
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3948/15558202891_06739d8e23_h.jpg
there is not a single spot in this photos foreground that i can imagine would be nice to walk through, but the clump of skyscrapers is taller and more densely packed than is montreal's.
while i also like skylines that give a sense of rising from a sea of urbanity, that's not inherent to the judgment of skylines. copenhagen has no skyline but its residential weight-on-the-ground is more substantial than that of montreal.
no skyline at all here, but no residential area of montreal gets up to this scale:
http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y403...57_4238604990017034173_n_zpsd6397cf4.jpg |
Ha, I recognize that European and almost feminine point. If I recall correctly, you're originally English-speaking but also from Montreal which is some of the most Euro-like cities in NA. And you've spent quite some time in Europe by now. That explains your kind of point to me.
Indeed, nice looking women are nothing physically crushing but are more impressive when you take a look at them up close. A bunch of European cities are girly in that respect. So must be Montreal compared to other major Canadian cities.
An ambitious skyline is more of something manly. It's about showing off one's strength and muscles. Then Montreal does need more testosterone, I think, while Calgary needs more makeup these days. The best would be to show up both girly and manly like a tranny.
And really, NYC is the closest to that ideal worldwide.
Prev
Linear Mode
