CHICAGO | General Discussions

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by Halsted & Villagio

All jokes aside, Chicago’s skyline is most definitely iconic, and one of the most recognizable in the world. Period. With that nonsense out of the way, let’s move on to the question of uniformity.

Personally, I find a skyline far more interesting and DYNAMIC if it has varying forms of architecture. See Chicago... see New York. Versus, say, Miami which has a very monochromatic skyline which I find quite boring. Same for Houston and Atlanta. No offense to those cities as they have fine skylines — but far from “dynamic” or very interesting skylines in my opinion.

Diversity and dynamism is what sets New York and Chicago’s skyline apart from just about any skyline in the world.

Miami is boring and sterile modern. If there was an entire city that was purely deco/gothic skyscrapers, it would be much more interesting. Traditional architecture to me looks better on the individual level but MUCH better as a uniform presentation across an entire city. A city of all modern glass or concrete just looks lifeless.