Living in New York vs. London

[Simon Majumdar]

To get back on-topic. London parks have pre-processing venison. NYC parks have squirrels. Nothing more need be said.

Hat's off

G.Johnson's first "on topic" comment of the new year

S

[SobaAddict70]

Yes, I was a little confused too.

I'm still waiting to hear why people seem to think that Manhattan is the center of the known universe. There are four other boroughs too, you know.

SA

[Kikujiro]

Could someone take a moment to explain to me why we are comparing one NYC park with eight London parks?  I mean, with that approach, you'll find that sandwiches in London are bigger too.

Because if you want to compare big green areas in the metropolitan centre, NYC has one and London has basically three, all within a few minutes' walk of each other, which are further divided into five named parks. If you want to compare total parkland, JJS had the figures. Simon's right -- this is getting embarrassing. I'd concede now.

[Wilfrid]

Because if you want to compare big green areas in the metropolitan centre, NYC has one and London has basically three...

Kiku, with all respect, you are demonstrating your ignorance of New York. That is simply and obviously untrue. Check my last link.

Edit: Blimey, you need to look at a map of London too. Three big green areas?

Edited January 10, 2003 by Wilfrid (log)

[hollywood]

New York simple has a much larger square mileage of such spaces than London.  You might prefer London styles, as Macrosan does, but you can't overlook that New York has more big parks, and the big ones are much bigger.

Not that it matters particularly.

Los Angeles has Griffith Park which I think is the biggest park inside any U.S. city.

Looks like I may have understated the situation. Here's from a City site:

Griffith Park has 4,218 acres of natural area and is the largest municipally-owned and operated park in the world. This facility offers 28 tennis courts, numerous picnic and sports areas and 53 miles hiking and equestrian trails. In addition, the park contains the Griffith Observatory, Laserium, Greek Theatre, Travel Town, Los Angeles Zoo, Gene Autry Museum, Pony and Train rides, and three golf courses including a driving range.

[macrosan]

I have just been out to buy

Two Mallard

Two red Legged Partridge

1lb of Wild Boar sausages

1lb of Venison in Red Wine sausages

1lb of thick cut Gloucester Old Spot bacon

1/2 of Boar blood sausage

OK, so that's tonight's supper sorted. Now tomorrow lunch ......

[Simon Majumdar]

Actually, it is all for supper tomorrow with my estimable brother. To be preceded by three pints on wallop at The Wenlock

S

[Liza]

Daintily as ever...

I live in NYC though I used to live in London. My biggest problem with London, after the tubes closing, the pubs closing, the meagre whisky pours, and the food running out - the chilliness of most daily interactions.

In New York, I have *my* newspaper guy, *my* breakfast guy, my health club 'buddies'. In any weather, I know conversations will be started, jokes exchanged, pleasantries passed on line at the supermarket, side by side on the subway, waiting for the 77th Street farmer's market to open at 10am on Sunday. I find people here more open to the humor of daily life and willing, some might say hoping, to share in it with others, even if they're strangers.

[GordonCooks]

I envy the fact you have all of Europe practically at your doorstep.

Gordon, I sincerely hope that is intended to be ironic

What's ironic about a 50.00 ticket that gets me to Paris for the weekend. All 50.00 does for me is get me to Kennedy a hour late.

[g.johnson]

For the record. NY has approximately 26,138 hectares of parkland, London has 30,205. These are official figures.

Er, is anyone disputing JJS's figures?

[stellabella]

Liza, every time I am in NYC, if I happen to be standing on a corner looking around, or reading a subway map, someone stops and asks me if I need directions. In London, on the other hand, people stop and ask me for directions. I would like to add, as far as friendliness goes, New Yorkers have the reputation of not being friendly, but I think they're as friendly as the friendliest people anywhere. Londoners are friendly once you know them, but seem less likely to start up a conversation in an anonymous public setting--except pubs, of course!

[SobaAddict70]

We're not disputing them.

We're disputing the notion that many ppl seem to have that CP is the only park worth talking about in the context of New York City parks. CP may be the largest park in Manhattan, but its not the largest park in the city (it may be the most well-known though). That honor goes to Pelham Bay Park, which according to official figures, has over 2000 acres and is clearly NOT located in Manhattan.

Re Washington Square Park et al., these are not "vest pocket parks". They're full fledged parks but with a different and neighborhood feel than CP. You may think of them as vest pocket parks or open space on a square block. Clearly, residents of the Village (and other areas), thousands of NYU students and other ppl such as myself have a different opinion.

SA

Edited January 10, 2003 by SobaAddict70 (log)

[Kikujiro]

Because if you want to compare big green areas in the metropolitan centre, NYC has one and London has basically three...

Kiku, with all respect, you are demonstrating your ignorance of New York. That is simply and obviously untrue. Check my last link.

Edit: Blimey, you need to look at a map of London too. Three big green areas?

Wilfrid, I'm glad you haven't been away long enough to forget the correct use of the phrase 'with all respect'.

With all due respect, I was comparing 'big' areas 'in the metropolitan centre'. For the sake of convenience I am defining that as essentially W1/SW1/NW1/WC1/2 in London (maybe 5/6 square miles), and lower Manhattan in NY (in fact we have to go all the way up to 110th St to include all of Central Park, so a considerably bigger area). In very-central London, there are three big green areas: Regents Park, Kensington Gardens/Hyde Park, and Green Park/St James's Park. There are lots and lots of smaller ones. I am not counting squares and not extending as far as the river south or Hampstead north.

I'm staring at a map of Manhattan and apart from Riverside and East River Parks, which would mean defining 'the metropolitan centre' of NY far more extensively than we have done for London, I can only see little squares, and a much smaller number than London has in its centre.

Thus it seems to me that we have established that London's park coverage is greater both in the tourist/metro centre and, per JJS's figures, for the cities overall. It's possible you may have a version of the city that lies between these two. Or I suppose you may have some investment in a more generous definition of 'metropolitan centre'.

I can't believe I have wasted an hour on this puerile argument, but if you want to continue it, or if you're still confused, please go ahead

Edited January 10, 2003 by Kikujiro (log)

[Wilfrid]

For the record. NY has approximately 26,138 hectares of parkland, London has 30,205. These are official figures.

Er, is anyone disputing JJS's figures?

He may be confusing his hectares with his acres. Since a hectare is less than half an acres, his figures are not consistent with those of the New York Park Department.

What I am disputing, in a rather hyper and obsessive way, is Kiku's ability to count parks in the metropolitan areas of London and New York. Prospect Park? Bronx Park? Hampstead Heath?

C'mon, what else you got?

Edited January 10, 2003 by Wilfrid (log)

[Liza]

Re parks: Anyone else enjoy the free kayaking available all summer at Pier 26 on the Hudson River? Or the miniature golf; or the free movies at pier 14; or the fact that you can stroll/run/bike from lower Manhattan all the way up the George Washington Bridge uninterrupted?

[Beachfan]

Having been to London recently but not often I'd say London has without question

Theatre (if only for the price)

Cheese (If only for Neil's Yard)

Indian restaurants (if only for .... just about every concievable reason)

Pubs (if only because of the historical ones)

I didnt see any clear edge to London on any other categories. I'm surprised about the safety issue; is this true in the tourist areas/West End too? I walked around blissfully naive at all hours.

PS For me, a non meat eater, there is no comparison between NY and London restaurants at all levels, save the overwhelming Lonon superiority of Indian food.

[SobaAddict70]

With all due respect, I was comparing 'big' areas 'in the metropolitan centre'. For the sake of convenience I am defining that as essentially W1/SW1/NW1/WC1/2 in London (maybe 5/6 square miles), and lower Manhattan in NY (in fact we have to go all the way up to 110th St to include all of Central Park, so a considerably bigger area). In very-central London, there are three big green areas: Regents Park, Kensington Gardens/Hyde Park, and Green Park/St James's Park. There are lots and lots of smaller ones. I am not counting squares and not extending as far as the river south or Hampstead north.

I'm staring at a map of Manhattan and apart from Riverside and East River Parks, which would mean defining 'the metropolitan centre' of NY far more extensively than we have done for London, I can only see little squares, and a much smaller number than London has in its centre.

Thus it seems to me that we have established that London's park coverage is greater both in the tourist/metro centre and, per JJS's figures, for the cities overall. It's possible you may have a version of the city that lies between these two. Or I suppose you may have some investment in a more generous definition of 'metropolitan centre'.

I can't believe I have wasted an hour on this puerile argument, but if you want to continue it, or if you're still confused, please go ahead 

For the umpteenth time, MANHATTAN IS NOT THE TOTALITY OF NEW YORK CITY!!!!!!

Right, whatever.

Ok, I really have to do some work now.

SA

[Wilfrid]

Kiku, what is "puerile" is your assumption that "NYC" and "Manhattan" can be substituted in propositions without affecting the proposition's truth value. We wouldn't be wasting time if you expressed yourself carefully. Of course there are fewer larger green areas in Lower Manhattan than in the London postal districts you defined. And so what?

[Kikujiro]

For the umpteenth time, MANHATTAN IS NOT THE TOTALITY OF NEW YORK CITY!!!!!!

Soba, the area I was comparing Manhattan to in London is a tiny fraction of the city.

[SobaAddict70]

*beats his head against a wall*

[Wilfrid]

Because if you want to compare big green areas in the metropolitan centre, NYC has one and London has basically three, all within a few minutes' walk of each other, which are further divided into five named parks.

I would like to formally ask you to amend the above post accordingly, so that we may retain an accurate record for posterity.

[Kikujiro]

Kiku, what is "puerile" is your assumption that "NYC" and "Manhattan" can be substituted in propositions without affecting the proposition's truth value.  We wouldn't be wasting time if you expressed yourself carefully.  Of course there are fewer larger green areas in Lower Manhattan than in the London postal districts you defined.  And so what?

Wilfrid, I was answering your question: "Could someone take a moment to explain to me why we are comparing one NYC park with eight London parks?"

Which I only started doing in response to Mogsob's statement, "I would suspect that Central Park is larger than Hyde Park + St. James' Park + Green Park".

I'm unaware where I have substituted 'NYC' for 'Manhattan' or vice versa. I may have said 'centre', which I have defined very tightly in both cities. I don't think the comparison is meaningless, although it is far from the only one possible.

[Kikujiro]

Because if you want to compare big green areas in the metropolitan centre, NYC has one and London has basically three, all within a few minutes' walk of each other, which are further divided into five named parks.

I would like to formally ask you to amend the above post accordingly, so that we may retain an accurate record for posterity.

Which part would you like me to amend?

[yvonne johnson]

I was listening to public radio (there's a point: BBC wins hands down; while we're on the media, British newspapers are better; tv, UK wins by miles) the other day and it must've been a historian or urban planner talking, but he said the mark of a civilized city was its ability to get people to the airport quickly via public transportation, and so on this front London with its Heathrow Express (14 mins into central London) wins; in NY it can up to an hour in a cramped taxi; taxis: black cabs are far superior to yellow ones.

Back to food. Play my old record again: Vegetables taste so much better in London. They actually taste of something. There's no really good mutton here. Ditto pork with crackling.

Restaurants - High end ( Daniel,RHR )  NY without a second's hesitation.  Mid range ( Blue Hill, St J's ) NY again.  

I was a bit surprized by Simon's comments. Blue Hill over St John? I think it's debatable at the high end too.

[Wilfrid]

Which part would you like me to amend?

Perhaps replace "metropolitan center" with something like "metropolitan center (by an eccentric pinprick definition which relegates Hampstead and a third of Manhattan to the suburbs").

You have certainly demonstrated that the bit of London where the parks are has more parks than the bit of New York where the parks aren't. Incidentally, you might want to reconsider your notion that Central Park is in Lower Manhattan.

I was working with what I thought was a roughly acceptable definition of London and New York as, in each case, the entire city. But thanks for helping me out of my confusion.

Edited January 10, 2003 by Wilfrid (log)