Most interesting British city (that isn't London)

I’ve gone for the biggest population stats I can find and excluded any cities that could be considered part of somewhere else, so apologies to Bradford, Wolverhampton, Croydon and the others that didn’t make it. The cut off’s a bit arbitrary – I set it at about quarter-of-a-million, but included a few others which are either isolated or have some other feature of historical interest. In the case of Derby that’s Brian Clough – David Pleat wasn’t quite enough for Luton.

I put Dublin on the list because: ‘British’ as in British Isles; it was a British city once, anyway; and it’s got a decent chance of winning this. Hey, it’s all the same thing anyway. Cork’s there to keep Dublin company and because it meets the criteria for exceptions, except that I know genuinely not a thing about it – hoping someone might be able to convince me of its interestingness.

Interesting can mean anything you like - history, the people, local culture, cuisine(!), a nice place to go on holiday. I don't mind, I just want to hear about anything that makes these places good. Or awful.

David Pleat wasn’t quite enough for Luton

Luton has lots of other interesting things to recommend it, you know. There's the Arndale Centre, and the Galaxy Entertainment Complex, and the racial tension.

I've visited 3 of these - none for more than about 24 hours - and I live in the UK. I suppose exploring the Uk is something to do in retirement, if I can afford the train fares by then.

I've lived in two, and visited eleven of the others. Glasgow wins by default (though it is great in its own way, I have become a bit jaded about it over the years). Have had good nights out in Cardiff, Manchester and Edinburgh though.

Portsmouth/Southampton

uh, when did this happen?!

Well, it didn't actually happen, but there were plans to classify them as a single urban area (called Solent City or South Hampshire, or something like that) in the 70s. I gather that they're pretty close in geographical terms, if not in sentiment.

it's ok, they're both boring as hell

Think of the history then: the Normandy Invasion Force set out from Portsmouth, and Craig David's from Southampton

not bournemouth, not cardiff

Where's Leicester you fucking bastard?

I suppose exploring the Uk is something to do in retirement

Also this is crazy talk.

So anyway I'm boycotting this poll.

Of the ones I have visited: Edinburgh.

I have been to 16 of these (some of them very briefly or a long time ago, however) but only really know 3 or 4 of them well enough to vote. Or maybe "interesting" means having some selling point that would leap out at me even about the ones I don't really know.

about quarter-of-a-million, but included a few others which are either isolated or have some other feature of historical interest

You could almost argue that all the small ones have some historical feature, having been made cities in medieval times for having a cathedral or big pompous university thing (no Wells, no credibility! Er, OK, maybe Bath or Canterbury though...)

There's a clear winner here folks, and in true Derren Brown style I shall now insert some subtle subliminal messages.

Is it Newcastle, Huey?

Strange but true: when I was 14 my family's summer holiday was two nights in Stoke and two nights in Sheffield.

There are some terrible, terrible cities on this list, but also some great ones. The question is rilly whether I feel the need to represent for my adopted home town or for somewhere boringly obvious.

Anybody who votes Derby or Stoke is fucking high btw.

Visited at least 21 of these, am I a winner? Voting for Edinburgh, 'cause.

All the list, except Belfast, Dublin, Cork, (theme there?)

Derby (can't remember, might have), Aberdeen.

OK, 30 on the list, so I have 25.

Where's Leicester you fucking bastard?

Aw no, that's a terrible typing mistake on my part - I have Leicester (330,574) right in the middle of my shortlist as well. It was even the real reason for having Derby, in that I didn't feel I could exclude it when Nottingham, Leicester and Coventry all made it. Very sorry.

Sheffield vs Oxford vs Manchester vs Liverpool vs Glasgow vs Edinburgh vs Bristol for me. Can't really make a decision out of that lot.

Cambridge is disqualified for having virtually nothing of interest that doesn't revolve around the university - Oxford at least feels like a real place.

Also wtf is Dublin doing in here?

Winning by about 20 votes is my guess.

Tell you what, I'll include Leicester in the playoff between London and the winner here. London v Leicester v Teesside.

Might as well include Rockall while you're on then.

Cambridge & Norwich on the list but not York? really?

I've gone for adopted hometown loyalty here.

I voted for Hull cos yeah I love this city.

Voted for Bristol but my feeling for it is more "least boring and bad British city"

Sheffield and maybe Nottingham are the only non-coastal cities I could vote for in good conscience, altho I'm still fond of Birmingham.

I just need someone to complain about Sunderland now, please.

where is sunderland, you bastard

Treating Bradford as part of Leeds or Wolverhampton as part of Brum is scandalous, btw.

Like Wolverhampton could win this thing on their own.

Yeah but it's not as if most of these have a cat in hell's chance, I just think individual places ought to be acknowledged. Wouldn't vote for Wolverhampton, but wd def. vote Bradford over Leeds for example.

I put Dublin on the list because: ‘British’ as in British Isles;

Does this make Irish people British then?

Dublin's not really expecting to win, it's just happy to be there. If it gets a few votes it'll be off to Disneyland and then off to take Harry's Challenge afterwards.

Yeah but it's not as if most of these have a cat in hell's chance, I just think individual places ought to be acknowledged. Wouldn't vote for Wolverhampton, but wd def. vote Bradford over Leeds for example.

― Halt! Fergiezeit (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 23 September 2009 09:10

Having lived in both I'm really curious why you would choose Bradford over Leeds

Old-fashioned bias against gentrification, mostly.

would u really vote bradford though?

No, but it'd be above Leeds if I had a long list.

Sheffield and maybe Nottingham are the only non-coastal cities I could vote for in good conscience

Your cheque's in the post, Noodle.

Adopted home town loyalties aside, I have no hesitation in voting for Birmingham. I love Birmingham, I do.

I've always like Nottingham tho mike, living in the flattest city in the world makes me appreciate an appropriate degree of contour in other places.

I like Sheffield for the same reasons.

(as an aside ... I didn't learn how to do a hill-start until about a year after passing my driving test)

Cork has phenomenal food and an amazing indoor market right downtown near the river but it's, er, not quite in Britain is it?

Matt DC I don't know how you imagine Oxford is as "interesting" as Glasgow.

xpost

We have a family joke about "Hull legs" when confronted with walking uphill anywhere else.

Matt DC I don't know how you imagine Oxford is as "interesting" as Glasgow.

― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, September 23, 2009 10:53 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

hmm, gee, i don't know.

Cambridge is disqualified for having virtually nothing of interest that doesn't revolve around the university - Oxford at least feels like a real place.

um waht?

oxford: defunct car industry (fascinating!)
cambridge: non-defunct tech industry

im putting on for mah cities.

Your case could be stronger.

never been to:

Swansea
Stoke
Newcastle
Middlesbrough
Hull
Edinburgh
Coventry
Cork
Cardiff
Blackpool
Belfast
Aberdeen

Actually the three I have the most affection for are Glasgow, Sheffield and Bristol. Bristol probably the most but on the other hand, hey centre of the slave trade and all that.

I'm leaning towards Sheffield even though it's a long time since I've been there it was great at the time and it has a better musical heritage than Glasgow.

Have only been to:

Reading
Portsmouth (but not Southampton)
Oxford
Leeds
Dublin
Cardiff
Brighton
Bournemouth
Blackpool
Birmingham

Of those probably like Dublin best but not voting that just cos feels wrong in "British" poll.

The problem is, the vast majority of my experience of visiting cities in the UK has been touring, so my views of cities are very much slanted by how good a gig we had there. So I'd probably vote for Nottingham or Hull based on those experiences - which I know are not representative at all of what the city is like.

(In fact, the more boring and awful the city, the more likely the gig is to be good, as people are so bored that they go wild at gigs simply because something FUN and EXCITING is actually happening.)

Quite fond of Norwich for its picturesqueness. And Sheffield was ugly as sin but there was so much going on there in the way of having a good time! Oh, I don't know.

Your case could be stronger.

― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:11 AM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

well, i guess i just find the training ground of the british political elite/the centres of its intellectual life/the home of modern science/the location of some of the nation's most beautiful buildings interesting is all [shrug emoticon]

Is there anywhere on the list less interesting than Reading? A place whose major selling point is that you can get to London quickly.

It's gotta be better than Stoke, right? Stoke did deprive it of Dave Kitson recently though.

Reading has the festival... oh wait, no, that's not a plus point, is it?

i guess i just find the training ground of the british political elite/the centres of its intellectual life/the home of modern science/the location of some of the nation's most beautiful buildings interesting is all

don't forget Clowns Cafe (probably a Costa now)

it has, um...

(will get back to youse...)

I've never actually been to Stoke but it has a terrible accent and all the people I met from there at uni pretty much acted like they were talking about being back in 'Nam whenever they mentioned it.

Cambridge is too twee.

I've always wanted check out Bristol for more than a week or two, like spend a good chunk of time there. I have no idea why.

not compared to glasgow amirite?

xpost

Bristol is pretty fucking awesome, has a decent music scene, and in the Clifton Suspension Bridge has my single favourite structure in the UK. Something about the university and its students is particularly insufferable though.

Reading has a Abbey, what Henry tried to knock down. Oh, he mostly succeeded true. Not done many weddings there recently...

i like bristol. i think the slave-trade stuff counts as "interesting" too.

Great memories of living in Manchester and like to go back when I can so

1. Manchester
2. Sheffield
3. Cambridge
4. Glasgow
5. Leeds

only 7 i haven't visited (Swansea, Norwich, Hull, Cork, BoMo, Belfast and Aberdeen) and i'm pretty srue i'm going to hull and norwich in the next few months...

torn between glasgow, edinburgh and oxford i think.

feel bad that two former capitals are less interesting than stoke :/

I grew up in Sheffield. It's not somewhere I'd want to live again, but it's got to be high up on any measure of interestingness.

Bristol music scene is pretty awful imo. It is a great town though, and completely mad with it. Lived there on and off for a couple of years, and it's always struck me as very, very weird and unlike any other place in the UK.

Agree that Oxford is more of a city with a university, and Cambridge is a university with convenient shopping, but tbh, while it's a lovely place, there's not a lot to even Oxford apart from the University.

Leeds is the worst place in the world and I'm glad to see no one mentioning it other than in the context of giving Bradford a bad name.

I voted Sheffield with Bristol close second.

Haven't been to Swansea, Plymouth, Coventry, Brighton, Boro, Aberdeen or Belfast.

Norwich is the only one apart from London I've lived in. I grew very fond of it, so I voted for it. If I was being more objective I'd probably say Glasgow.

Kate/Masonic, when did you play in Hull, and where?

bristol is awesome

At the Adelphi, of course, and way back in the early 00s. Mostly 01/02 I think. Just one of the most enthusiastic venues ever.

zomg, a CarsmileSteve.

I've lived near Oxford most of my life; it is a nice place and I'm still not tired of it but probably not the most interesting anything. Kind of remarkable if you bear in mind that it's more on a par size-wise with Swindon or Bracknell, but can't compete with the big cities. I just like it that way, is all.

Apart from that I know Belfast fairly well, Bristol and Dublin a bit, Cardiff and Sheffield a little but it's been a decade since I went to those.

From that list, Bristol and Sheffield seem like good places that I'd like to know better, but maybe I will rep for Oxford or Belfast for sentimental reasons, and also cz it seems Belfast isn't going to get many votes otherwise.

Glasgow (1,750,500)

^^^is this population btw? cuz

List seems to be allowing bigger cities to subsume entire surrounding area, so Manc is actually Greater Manc and Birmingham is the West Mids

scrap this poll: geography GCSE FAIL

Portsmouth/Southampton ? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Newcastle/Tyne & Wear
should be:

Newcastle & Gateshead
Sunderland

xpost The Adelphi is indeed ace. I don't take it for granted but am always disappointed that other cities don't seem to have an equivalent.

Middlesbrough is a town, not a city

as is Reading and Blackpool

Where's Leicester you fucking bastard?

Aw no, that's a terrible typing mistake on my part - I have Leicester (330,574) right in the middle of my shortlist as well. It was even the real reason for having Derby, in that I didn't feel I could exclude it when Nottingham, Leicester and Coventry all made it. Very sorry

I forgive you - it just goes to show that Wogan's description of us the "Lost City" still holds true. Not that it would have got any votes other than mine - and I suspect I only find it interesting because local history is my hobby (and defending the place is the bane of my life).

In light of the apology I have now voted - for Birmingham. Much as I love Glasgow, Manchester, Bristol, etc.

Best brum quote...
"One has no great hopes from Birmingham. I always say there is something direful in the sound."
I'm pretty sure I went there thinking that (I went to live there in 1982) but as soon as I saw the Pre-Raphaelite collection and walked the canal I fell for the place. And it's got a lot better since then.

Reading and Blackpool are different places, they're not even close. GSCE FAIL MARTIAN !!!

An amazing history, great art, music, architecture, friendly people - it's got the lot. Vote Birmingham.

Voting Leeds

Bristol really is lovely, I would stay here for a long time if I could. But yeah, students insufferable and sadly I think this means the music scene/nightlife doesn't need to try as hard or anything that tries to be different dies.

For this reason I reckon Manchester look intersting plus I had the time of my life when I was up there.

Haven't spent time at many others on that list though (where's Exeter? It's interesting if you like crystals and posh hippies)

don't forget Clowns Cafe (probably a Costa now)

It was still "Clowns" a few months ago.

Yeah, Birmingham is surprisingly, um, pretty alright!

I'm particularly annoyed that it was Leicester I missed as I took major umbrage myself at Sebastian Faulks citing it as laughable recently (to be fair I think he was trying to defend it in a hamfisted metroplitan elite way)

is there really nothing in the entire west yorkshire apart from leeds?

i saw sebastian faulks at the jerusalem tavern the other day. xpost

ooh, vic, i went to leicester the other day...
did yer?
yeah. i'm not going there again!

he was being interviewed and looked very annoyed when about 7 people fraffed around for 15 minutes trying to shoot a footage of him reading a book (he had to hold that book and pretend to read it for all that time).

i went to the midlands with my wife last month
leicester?

i can't think of a punchline

No, she came back with me

Or something like that.

I would answer - "Yes, that's right and we very much enjoyed the new shopping centre and historic New Walk." - but it wouldn't have got much of a laugh.

Glasgow (1,750,500). ^^^is this population btw? cuz
List seems to be allowing bigger cities to subsume entire surrounding area, so Manc is actually Greater Manc and Birmingham is the West Mids

That's right. I've taken the biggest population I could find. Glasgow and Manchester suffer particularly in official figures as the administrative city misses out a lot of suburbs which have different councils, then there are other towns which are joined on, and then more towns which are a really short distance away. Both are arguably even larger if you take local transport infrastructure as a benchmark.

This is particularly important to Glasgow, which looks similar to Edinburgh in official figures, but is actually about four times larger.

is there really nothing in the entire west yorkshire apart from leeds?

Bradford (and more specifically Saltaire)!

I couldn't find a Liverpool figure that included The Wirral.

o hai!

just passing, our work servers fell over yesterday and when they came back i couldn't get into gmail, yahoo or fb, so i've ended up back here, do they think i'm going to do WORK or something????

i quite like leicester.

I'm particularly annoyed that it was Leicester I missed as I took major umbrage myself at Sebastian Faulks citing it as laughable recently (to be fair I think he was trying to defend it in a hamfisted metroplitan elite way)

I missed this and would probably have taken umbrage too. Why was he trying to defend it (even hamfistedly)?

West Yorkshire is pretty much one contiguous urban area + some dales/Peaks:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/01/West_Yorkshire_County.png/800px-West_Yorkshire_County.png

e.g. by contrast, s yorks is about the same size, but only rotherham/sheffield have merged.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3d/South_Yorkshire_County.png

oh lol hueg

sorry, can a mod replace that with this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3d/South_Yorkshire_County.png/800px-South_Yorkshire_County.png

Unless someone can tell me something interesting about Leicester I'm going to point and laugh at people getting annoyed about it's non-inclusion.

leicester has http://www.spacecentre.co.uk/Page.aspx/1/Home/, which is awesome.

Leeds. Because everyone else hates it. And because I loved it when I lived there. And still happily revisit.

"we hate leeds" sung heartily by both fans at the sheffield derby last weekend. touching moment.

I'm going to point and laugh at people getting annoyed about it's non-inclusion

I'm used to it.

Leicester is interesting, obviously, but then so is every single place on this list. How interesting depends on your partiuclar interests I should imagine.

Leicester also has crisps and cheese. winning combination.

Penistone

Ned, Faulks's recent mention of Leicester here. I grew up there and am glad to see your affection/love for the place; have often defended it from the usual cheap lols.

Oh, so that's where he said those beastly things about the Koran (rather putting his mild crack about Leicester in the shade).

That interview is laughable, through no fault of Faulks.

Faulks’s manly shoulders...women swoon at the sight of Sebastian in full sail, white shirt billowing around his tall, romantic form... It is no discomfort to sit close and listen to that soft baritone and gaze at his melancholy eyes...

I love how this thread proves that when it really comes down to it, everywhere in the UK is just a little bit shit.

penistone for the painfully alone

brighton is quite nice actually

all aboard the penistone express

I like exeter too

where's best for curry?

uh

jamestown? gibraltar? hong kong? sydney? nowhere in canada or the united states that suited?

brighton is quite nice actually

Brighton is quite nice but aside from the beach, the pavilion, the arts scene, the gay scene, the piers, the "personalities", the pubs and the clubbing, I'm not sure you can really call it interesting.

Oh and the whole smuggler heritage that it's got going on is pretty sweet too.

sorry, i'm in the middle of an indignant rant here, d'you mind?

British as in British Isles. I think we're all aware that Ireland isn't part of Britain, so I went for the shorter title. I doubt this poll is going to form basis of a claim for sovereignty, so let's be relaxed about it.

Hey, it’s all the same thing anyway

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/images/2007/05/18/thatcher1.jpg
http://www.aidan.co.uk/md/IrlDubCustHseFlag3X09.jpg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41324000/jpg/_41324307_thatcher.jpg

anyway, i might just try to convince you it's cork, if i don't go for edinburgh myself.

far as i'm concerned ye can have dublin back, they never really wanted out anyway.

Almost voted for Cork on the strength of Mrs V's hilarious Cork accent impersonation.

it's probably accurate, so.

word to the wise, though- really, the answer is galway, notwithstanding it BEING IN ANOTHER COUNTRY

but the answer is galway.

can't believe thatcher took down my tricolour. that bitch don't quit.

Denying you the oxygen of publicity, obv. Next step is your posts have to be typed by an actor.

we wool nivver sirondur

anyway voted edinburgh cos isn't edinburgh lovely? i mean, really lovely? like a big galway, imo.

tourists

i might just try to convince you it's cork

By all means. I need to know more about it, and "Cork has phenomenal food and an amazing indoor market right downtown near the river but it's, er, not quite in Britain is it?" has already whetted my appetite.

cork's got a vibe, maaaan. and murphy's for about €3 a pint, and the whole thing is built on the most ridiculous fucking hill. i was scared to walk it after a few pints of murphy's (€).

(€3)

Frank and Walters and people saying "the ree the roo" afaik.

and this pub

http://vfi.ie/images/dynamic/pub/medium/260120091204_Tower-Bar-001.jpg

which has a monastic tower in the garden out the back, and murphy's at less than €3 a pint.

and the rest of it looks like this:

http://www.algarvebuzz.com/images/cork_ireland.jpg

and yeah the food, absolutely.

That Faulks interview may be what led to this poll, now that I think about it. By all means make the point that fetishising an infallible, immutable text is no ideal for living - but do not suggest that making sure Martin Amis doesn't snigger at you is a better one. I've been in a mood for celebrating the opposite of these guys ever since.

A couple of further points:

- I considered Exeter (106,772) as an exception but it was a little too small. Gloucester and Ipswich missed out similarly. Cambridge only gets in because of the university.
- I should've included York though - I excluded it partly on size, partly on proximity to Leeds. But I forgot that it was an important religious and transport centre, and the viking museum really should've swung it.
- Blackpool's there because it is apparently part of a bigger urban area with Fleetwood, Lytham St Anne's and a few others. Plus I always feel sorry for it, it's such a mess.

Where's Northampton?

just North of Milton Keynes!

(I would have voted for it, had it been on the list)

Bristol is pretty fucking awesome, has a decent music scene, and in the Clifton Suspension Bridge has my single favourite structure in the UK. Something about the university and its students is particularly insufferable though.

― Matt DC, Wednesday, 23 September 2009 10:32 (7 hours ago) Bookmark

lol I went to Bristol. Agree about the city though.

well, i guess i just find the training ground of the british political elite/the centres of its intellectual life/the home of modern science/the location of some of the nation's most beautiful buildings interesting is all [shrug emoticon]

― history mayne, Wednesday, 23 September 2009 10:20 (7 hours ago) Bookmark

Extremely boring place to grow up in, in my experience.

All places are boring to grow up in imo.

Kate, you can't vote Northampton as the most interesting, but it is interesting.

Actually that's not true, but I think there comes a point in yr teens when you think that wherever you are is really boring.

Northampton, Swindon, Luton, Milton Keynes - these are the very definition of towns to me, not cities. That's why they're not there. But then I've never been to any of them, so I could very well be wrong. If I am, tell me why!

(Reading, Stoke and Middlesbrough are too, I guess, but turned out to be surprisingly large)

York is a lovely place with a ton of decent restaurants and pubs, but it also has a pub which hosts a club night DJed by Rick Witter, so FAIL on the culture front. The Viking museum is dull as shite though.

the railway museum is ace though.

ugh how can you put dublin on this list? i work for an organisation with "british" in the title and every single day it reminds me how wrong I was to ever think britain and ireland are basically the same.

british national party?

http://www.bwajakarta.org/pics/BWABanner.jpg

Extremely boring place to grow up in, in my experience.

― Neil S, Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:42 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

nah, awesome places to grow up in.

trumps: glasgow, bristol, newcastle, brighton

dumps: leicester (tho i wld like to go to ultima thule some day), birmingham (but I haven't been back there in 20+ years) and coventry (spent some time there abt 8 years ago, absolute wasteland, oxford (after stratford-upon-avon poss my most hated city in britain - no decent fuckin record shops)

hated edinburgh the first cpl times i went there, has grown on me more on subsequent visits (have never been there while the fest is on, tho)

Calling Brum a dump and then saying you haven't been there for 20+ years. Fail.

And Stratford Upon Avon is not a city.

My parents took me to Birmingham for a holiday once, 20+ years ago. At the time, that was tantamount to child abuse, but several friends live there now and I hear good things and would like to go back and visit now.

i went to birmingham twice in the 1980s for (gd help me) comic bk conventions. not, admittedly, the best way to see the city (any city) but my main memory is of trudging round ugly motorways and flyovers and drinking in really horrible fucking boozers. did have a GREAT curry one evening, tho. i will be spending an afternoon in birmingham in a cpl of weeks, changing trains, and am looking forward to seeing the city again - like ailsa, ive heard gd things from ppl.

apols to stratford upon avon for misreppin it, but like oxford (and york and edinburgh and london and rome and) it is full of horrible venal ppl selling shit to nitwits and tourists, might as well be a city

was in birmingham last year....worst place i've ever been in my life, horrible concrete jungle.

bristol struck me as nice when i was there. kind of liked cardiff too tho perhaps six nations grand slam was an influencing factor. love glasgow, edinburgh pretty but dull, manchester/liverpool both seemed decent but not there for long.

think of the balti tho xp

was in birmingham last year....worst place i've ever been in my life, horrible concrete jungle

Let me show you round next time.

Since I have little loyalty to any of the others and Ned believes in it so strongly I've decided Im votin for Birmingham. You're alright with a sympathy nod, eh Ned?

Manchester gets it, with Sheffield, Glasgow, Edinburgh, York, Newcastle, Oxford and Bristol contending. Cork is lovely but its in Ireland wtf. Leeds looks shit and has little atmosphere but it's pretty busy and can be a good night out (+Chapeltown carnival) so I can appreciate why ppl like it w/out agreeing, &there's no way it represents all of West Yorkshire.

was in birmingham last year....worst place i've ever been in my life, horrible concrete jungle.

same as this, same as that. sorry ned!

I just think it's a really lazy response to any place ("it's shit, it's a dump"), but with Birmingham it's extra lazy. I'm guessing the bit you think is the "concrete jungle" (probably the High Street north of the Rotunda and round Martineau Square and Priory Square) but even only a hundred yards from there is some of the finest architecture in the country (around Colmore Row) with a lovely understated cathedral (with stained glass windows by Burne-Jones). Walking up Colmore Row to Chamberlain Square there is the the amazing Council House, art gallery and museum and Town Hall, all stunning buildings with not a gram of concrete on them. If you want concrete then there's Madden's library (which I like as well). 15 minute walk tops, dispel any notion of concrete jungleness, and I haven't even really started. The city has 2,000 listed buildings, it's got history everywhere you look and (you know the old cliche) "more canals than Venice". Of course if I was actually from Birmingham I would probably rubbish the place but I'm not so I can behave like a misty-eyed stan to and sundry.

"Madin's library" (the american football player never designed anything afaik).

(christ, I take these things too seriously)

Nah you right, Birmingham is pretty dece and whilst this is no place to descend into pro/con Loldon hatery it is, y'know, a thousand times more of a city than that shitehole.

I'd just pipe up for Coventry. Not because it's particularly lovely in any way. Like quite a few cities and towns, certainly in England, it's ruined by a ring road and post war development (obv it needed developing, but wow, you really fucked up, post-war Coventry architects - unless you like elevated bomb shelters).

But it does have a strange fascination. The area inside the ring road (fairly small) is really fractured into ruined spaces of the old Coventry and empty urban regeneration restaurants and cafes that no one can afford to go to, or indeed wants to go to. The effect (on me at least) was like walking round some cack Portmeirion.

There is an excellent second-hand book shop at one end of the town, next to a not-at-all bad medieval pub as well (lots of rooms and low eaves).

But this 'interesting' thing is a bit of a red-herring possibly. Everywhere's interesting if you find out a bit about it (even new towns - why they exist, who is supposed to live there, why that architecture is the way it is). But if I were to choose my favourite it would be Edinburgh in a flash.

The topography is so wonderful - the Firth of Forth and Arthur's Seat, the elevated old town and the rational lines of the new town. One of the seats of the European enlightenment, one of the capitals of European rational thought, and, whenever I've been, extremely convivial.

And perhaps most of all, where a lot of other cities fail, it doesn't have that God awful pedestrianised central shopping precinct that makes a mockery of a relatively unassuming but perfectly decent place like Derby (can a city be good because it is close to some lovely countryside?) and is heartrendingly foul in a place where you can see the vestiges of great civic pride (Newcastle - is it Pilgrim Street, that lovely curving downward arc? Lovely light as well in Newcastle, possibly just pipping Edinburgh in fact).

Have liked Manchester whenever I've been, but just don't know it well enough to properly get a feel for it - seemed to be full of stuff to do, which is clearly a good thing. (Although I stood next to Mark E Smith in a Derby pub once as he was praising Derby to the landlord - 'Yeah, I like Derby, I like Derby. Derby's great - nothing to do there, it's perfect.')

There's also a fair amount of the old Coventry about - if you can be bothered to search it out. I'd defend the precinct as well but it was ruined a few years ago by the insertion of the Cathedral Lanes Shopping Centre (which really is an eyesore and blocks out the view from the precinct of the old Cathedral spire - which was crucial to the original plan for the precinct) and some really horrible escalators.

Also visit the indoor market before they pull it down. Even though it was only listed a few months ago the council wants it to go. It's got East German Socialist murals people!

by the insertion of the Cathedral Lanes Shopping Centre

Yes! I hadn't been there before that. It's a real blight. Shame.

I'm a great fan of Birmingham, haveing been there for work and fun a good few times over the years, but I think saying that the architecture around Colmore Row is "some of the finest in the country" is making the word "some" do a lot of work.

Also Noodle Vague: what do you mean? Italicising the word "city" doesn't much help me understand why you don't think London's one. Like you I'm not especially keen on having a pointless pro- or anti- London debate (um also you'll lose obv) but defining what you mean might help this one along past "it's horrid!" / "no it's not!".

Glasgow (1,750,500)

What? Where are these extra million or more Glaswegians hiding?

I've just been to Blackpool, and it was like the 1970s were still going, so I'm voting Blackpool. As long as Edinburgh doesn't win, I'm 'appy.

I have to go to Birmingham for work on a semi-regular basis. It is a hole.

And I say that as a Northampton fan!

and a Hull fan! (the Seaquarium!)

Where hasn't Dundee been included?

Why, I mean

Liverpool.

Not just home town loyalty either.

how would you know that?

(I mean how do you know it's not just home town loyalty? that's got to have some effect on your choice)

I put Dublin on the list because: ‘British’ as in British Isles

Uh...

... I assume this has been covered upthread by the Irish contingent

http://www.ppdmc.org/music-%20A%20Nation%20Once%20Again.jpg

watch em, scots- they're fucking backsliding.

Just to add to the Coventry love, the Cathedral is really stunning- one of the most beautiful "modern" buildings in the UK imo and absolutely worth a visit if yr ever in the area.

Tim I don't think it's mad controversial to think of London as a set of disparate villages that have swollen together, and whilst this is arguably true of a lot of cities, to my mind that feeling colours London way more than other large European capitals or most of the cities in the UK.

Not that that is entirely a bad thing, either, but I'm explaining my feeling that Birmingham is a more organic (w)hole than the capital.

ok i'm pretty dumb and all but i don't really get "a set of disparate villages that have swollen together" as an idea of london-- do you mean like the bits that used to be suburban that were swallowed up and built together in the victorian era?

man that sounded passive aggressive - i meant, maybe i'm missing something obvious.

i just think of "london as a series of villages" as more a popular idea than a reality - small shopping areas centred on tube stations can create the effect of 'this used to be a village' w/out such a thing ever having been.

Think about it this way - even the core "bits" of Central London - Westminster and The City - were separate cities as recently as the middle ages. Having been separate for so long, the different bits have very much preserved their own "character" so that places that are very close together on a modern map can feel like totally different cities. The successive waves of absorption have all enclosed other bits, but when something was a separate entity for so long it will always preserve that feeling.

Well put, and that's one of the best things about London IMO. None of the grand planning of e.g. Paris or Vienna.

Thread titled "Most interesting British city (that isn't London)" ends up being about London... 'nuff said?

I'm going for Liverpool and that is hometown loyalty, in the doubly-removed semi-pro plastic-Scouser sense that (i) I'm actually from over the water and (ii) it has grown in stature and specialness in the 16 years since I left the area.

xposts yeah but Westminster and the City don't feel like different cities? The whole of London is patchwork and mishmash, you don't get sustained parts with an individual character.

geographically, london is a different kind of place to all the cities on this list, not just in degree but in kind. i guess that has to do with why they started calling it a metropolis in 1800 or so, when westminster got subsumed.

(I mean how do you know it's not just home town loyalty? that's got to have some effect on your choice)

― What are the benefits of dating a younger guy, better erections? (darraghmac), Thursday, 24 September 2009 10:19 (58 minutes ago)

How do I know? Because I say so! I may fail significantly at knowing how my mind works on many fronts, but I know that this wasn't the only reason I made this particular choice. Yes, it has some effect, but it's not the whole of my decision.

Liverpool is interesting because of its rich history, its diversity, its down-to-earth-ness, its difficulties... all kinds of things.

I think saying that the architecture around Colmore Row is "some of the finest in the country" is making the word "some" do a lot of work.

I don't understand this statement. Would "there is some extremely good architecture in the Comore Row area." be better?

I see all my stanning is for nothing though as Kate is back to calling it "a hole" only a couple of posts on. Surely we should try a bit harder than that (this is I Love Everything after all - call me an old romantic if you like). The mere fact of the best collection of Pre-Raph stuff in the country should "interest" Kate surely?

Birmingham is also the best at saying "fucking hell".

Where are these extra million or more Glaswegians hiding?

Been through this upthread, but they're in places like: Rutherglen and Bearsden, which are obviously Glasgow but not part of the official figures; then there's Paisley which is actually joined on; beyond that, towns like Coatbridge which you could probably hit a golf ball into from Glasgow; and a load of places not much further out than those. It's a pretty big population, it just doesn't show up officially.

As a rough rule-of-thumb, if you can have a decent night out in the city and be tucked up in your bed by midnight, you count. I think that's pretty fair. Newcastle wouldn't even make the list otherwise.

good baltis, i hear.

xpost

That Coventry/Edinburgh post ^up there^ is fantastic by the way, everything I was hoping for from this thread. Many thanks, Gamaliel.

Been through this upthread, but they're in places like: Rutherglen and Bearsden, which are obviously Glasgow but not part of the official figures; then there's Paisley which is actually joined on; beyond that, towns like Coatbridge which you could probably hit a golf ball into from Glasgow

By what criteria is Paisley part of Glasgow? Where does this info come from? LOL Coatbridge!

Right, according to Wiki, this is "Greater Glasgow", which includes Motherwell and Airdrie - which is absolutely preposterous. Motherwell and Airdrie have got nothing to with Glasgow!

And, even them that only tots up to 1,199,629!

You could probably do this for every city in my list, you know.

TBH this Reading, etc. (369,804) seems pretty wrong as well. Is this including Bracknell, Wokingham & Maidenhead or something?

lol xpost

Maybe, I know more about Glasgow though, horrible thought that someone might end up in Airdrie and think they're in Glasgow *shudder* (xxxp)

Yeah, 'Reading, etc.' includes all sorts of stuff. Who am I to deny Wokingham representation?

John Redwood?

Would "there is some extremely good architecture in the Comore Row area." be better?

Yeah, it would. I wouldn't necessarily agree with you, not being a fan of that kind of Victoriana, but yeah. I am very fond of the Cathedral.

I really, really like Birmingham but the charm it shows me is more about the feel of the place and the way it goes about its business than the built environment, I guess.

(Your "2000 listed buildings" stat is interesting: how does that compare to other cities of a similar size?)

I think Bath has one of the highest concentrations of listed buildings — according to Bath and Northeast Somerset council website, it has over 6400 listed buildings (from grades I, II*, and II). Population is less than Coventry.

oh wait, was that original post referring to Birmingham having 2000 listed buildings? I must've read something wrong.

so replace coventry with birmingham obvs

I'm not going to get in a dick waving competition about numbers of listed buildings. My only reason for stating that number is that these are buildings "of interest" at the very least. And it doesn't matter whether you like Victoriana or not. I'm just trying to show that calling the place a "concrete jungle" or "a hole" is silly. And irritates the hell out of me (as if you couldn't tell).

Dude, our Birmingham clinic is in a LISTED BUILDING. It's still an ugly hole.

xpost hey man, it wasn't my intention to start anything, I was just responding (kind of) to one of the previous posts. I like Birmingham too. lots of trees and friendly people, etc. some crap bits, but every city has them. Birmingham just seems to attract more hatred than a lot of others for some reason.

Hey man, you're the one who started in about numbers of listed buildings, and this thread is comparative by nature.

I just think you're defending Birmingham the wrong way!

(that was an xpost also)

I would recommend a line more like: Bath (to take the most recently-quoted example) is a hole, a horrible, mean, parochial little town which happens to have quite a lot of very pretty bits but also has a grievously inflated sense of its own worth. Birmingham, on the other hand, is an interesting, interested, diverse and outgoing major City which doesn't make much noise about how good it is but gets on with getting on and does a surprising amount of good, vibrant stuff. It's not necessarily the prettiest, though it has its moments.

Birmingham just seems to attract more hatred than a lot of others for some reason.

I think partly cos it still wears a lot of its 60s Modernism on its sleeve. Which is a plus imo.

that place where they found all the gold in staffordshire, that's my new favourite british city.

I think by this poll's criteria Staffordshire is in Birmingham

But Birmingham is in London

london, birmingham, it's all the same thing really.

btw i worked with a guy called kevin who was from hull, do you know him noodle vague?

Was that gold in Lichfield? Lichfield's quite a charming lickle place, or used to be.

I don't know. I did used to know at least one Kevin. How old is this dude?

old, he must be in his forties.

short enough guy, but kinda tough.

Birmingham just seems to attract more hatred than a lot of others for some reason.

West Midlands is not exactly the bonniest region of England, bits I've been to

fisherman/trawlerman. spoke with a hull accent.

Probably not then. Ask him if he misses American Chip Spice.

Birmingham used to be Warwickshire afaik which is why the proper Black Country does not include it.

I would recommend a line more like: Bath (to take the most recently-quoted example) is a hole, a horrible, mean, parochial little town which happens to have quite a lot of very pretty bits but also has a grievously inflated sense of its own worth. Birmingham, on the other hand, is an interesting, interested, diverse and outgoing major City which doesn't make much noise about how good it is but gets on with getting on and does a surprising amount of good, vibrant stuff. It's not necessarily the prettiest, though it has its moments.

― Tim, Thursday, September 24, 2009 4:56 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

what are these ridiculous and vaguely worded judgements founded on?

what the fuck, for example, is an "outgoing" city?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAfRzbC3nLc

Well everybody in this shit is v. outgoing.

the kind of city you avoid like fuck at a party

(Warning: may feature scenes of political correctness gone mad.)

They are founded on my impressions of the place(s) in question. Aren't impressions of cities by their nature a bit vague?

Outgoing = interested in what goes outside the City limits, is what I was getting at, I suppose. I didn't mean to make you angry.

I voted for Portsmouth. I've been there twice in recent months and have been very pleasantly surprised by it. It has the wonderful Historic Dockyards which comprises HMS Victory in which Nelson defeated the French at Waterloo, Henry VIII's Cutty Sark, and HMS Warrior, the first coal fired ship but which also retains its masts and sails. The yard also has a number of impressive museums and interactive spaces and it sits within the Royal Navy's dockyard within close view of the UK's aircraft carriers (when I was there the second time all three were there), destroyers and frigates. There is a lovely walk from the impressive and modern Spinnaker Tower along the coast in an easterly direction which passes Spice Island (where the Press Gangs started from and where the old pubs are still open for business), along the old fortress walls to where Nelson sailed out to meet the Victory for his voyage to Waterloo. From the pebbly beach below the wall you have a clear view of the Isle of Man and the British batteships cruising into harbour and the sailboats cruising around the Solent. The city centre is also pleasant and Portsmouth is a nice place to go out in in the evening; friendly people, good fare. It compares well to places like Bournemouth which is shabby and run down with nowhere to eat out, and to Poole which is really nice and posh but with a more sedate and recreational relationship with its coastline than Portsmouth. Portsmouth isn't as fun to go out in as Brighton but it is good enough to compete with most British cities. Portsmouth is my choice for greatest British city in the British Isles.

As for greatest British city, that's a different question to the one of which is the greatest British city in the British Isles (which is, as I set out above, Portsmouth).

In my view there are a number of contenders for best British city in the world: New York, Bombay, Singapore, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Dublin, Melbourne, Buenos Aires, Cairo ... the list goes on.

I feel slightly disingenious to put New York on that list. I think it's fair to say that the Dutch, the Irish and the Germans had as much to do with the development of that fine city than the British. That's why I can't vote for New York as the best British city in the world.

I think I'd vote for Hong Kong over all. It is situated in one of the most beautiful natural harbours in the world. It has the beautiful mountains and setting of Rio but it has the wonder of Kowloon opposite the jewel of Hong Kong Island. Also, Hong Kong hasn't been disfigured with the horrid 1960s constructions that have defaced the length of the Copacabana in Rio. Instead Hong Kong is a apace aged nightscape which calls to mind the very best in human ingenuity, creativity and vision. It houses one of the powerhouses of the world economy. And it the one true meeting place for east and west. Hong Kong is the greatest British city ever built.

Good stuff Red. I warmed to Portsmouth when I saw MOTD2 spending the day with some fans recently - they seemed quite warm-hearted.

I've visited Sheffield and Leeds in recent months and I thought both places had done a good job at renovating their city centres. Sheffield has more inherent advantages since it's situated on a hill and so the walk down to the train station is quite a pleasant meandering one passing tasteful fountains and the like. The Winter Gardens is also one of the most imaginative and beautiful buildings in Europe. Leeds has also been tastefully restored in spite of its flatlands and lack of views. The main area in which Leeds falls down, in common with many British cities, is that it becomes a no-go zone on Friday and Saturday nights in the city centre. On my last visit I witnessed some appallingly violent behaviour from young thugs outside nightclubs.

I think Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Dublin and Bath are very obvious candidates in the running for best city on the British Isles. However, Portsmouth surprised me, as set out above, and so gets the nod.

Birmingham is also an underrated city. It makes up for its small city centre by having some nice outlying areas such as Edgbaston and Harbourne. It's also the best place in Britain to go and sample the excellent Pakistani and Indian eateries in and around Edgbaston. It's a pity it's lost its manufacturing base. It must have been a place to behold 200 years ago.

I'd like to have more of a view on Manchester. Although I've visited on several occasions I can't really get a handle on the place. People seem nice and nothing in the city really offends me. But neither nothing really appeals to me or gets me going. There's nothing really memorable about it.

Liverpool on the other hand at least I have some views on. It's a total dump. I went up there 2 years ago and went around Anfield and was shocked to see all the houses boarded up and boys' trainers tied to telephone lines along the streets (apparently that represents territorial claims by gangs). I was also appalled at the state of the pavements in the city centre. The slabs were all wrecked and broken with rainwater hiding underneath ready to splash you as each slab upended. There was also a dearth of places to eat in the evening. I was disgusted at the fact that the original Cavern had been demolished and there was some crap replica a few hundred metres along the street. Supposedly the best hotel in the city was also a great disappointment. It was very tired and could have done with a clean and a lick of paint or two. Fellow guests were partying so hard in the room above that there was a serious leak of water into the room. The only good thing about Liverpool is the old dock area where Tate Liverpool is. The restaurant in there was nice. Other than that Liverpool was the most disappointing place I've visited in Britain that I can remember.

shocked to see all the houses boarded up and boys' trainers tied to telephone lines along the streets (apparently that represents territorial claims by gangs)

Lots of Glasgow is like this too.

I didn't think much of Nottingham. The thing which etched itself on my mind was the number of junkies in the city centre hassling you for money, many of them very aggressive and menacing. I'd hope to avoid going back to Nottingham.

I alluded to Brighton earlier. I really liked it. The Lanes was a nice spot to meander through to find a nice place to have lunch, or a nice bar to have a drink. There was always plenty going on at the beach, unlike Bournemouth where there is just litter, garbage and drunks. In Brighton there is always interesting stuff like a bikers convention or something of the sort. Friendly people. Also a lot of 30 and 40 year olds - energetic but with some focus unlike adolescents. So lots of interesting small businesses like interesting eateries, clothes shops, music and furniture stores. It seems to basically be a place with some community spirit and cohesion where people take pride in being a part of the place and trying in their own small way to add to it and to improve it before they move on. There was also a nice sort of undercurrent of friendliness in the place, probably a result of the strong gay culture there. And of course the pier was nice. I'd definitely like to return to Brighton again soon and that must be the mark of a good place, somewhere that could be home.

(apparently that represents territorial claims by gangs).

This is a myth.

I didn't think much of Nottingham. The thing which etched itself on my mind was the number of junkies in the city centre hassling you for money, many of them very aggressive and menacing. I'd hope to avoid going back to Nottingham.

I don't know if I'm just lucky but I've been there many times and have never had this happen to me. Nottingham has a bit of a reputation due to some over enthusiastic gangs a few years ago, but it's really quietened down recently. It has a really good arts cinema and some nice eateries.

I think of Nottingham and particularly Sheffield as Britain's invisible cities - nothing ever seems to be centred there (or at least reported as such), I don't think they're terribly well-connected to the rest of the country in transport terms, and yet they're actually pretty big places and on the odd occasion I do speak to someone with a view it's generally pretty positive. I'd like to know a bit more about them.

At least I remembered to include them though - still sorry about poor old Leicester.

Which city is Bradford supposed to be a part of in this poll?

Leeds/West Yorkshire. But go on, tell me something new about Bradford that isn't police shootings or simmering ethnic tension.

xxp, Sheffield has pretty good transport links. It's right next to the M1 (I think three junctions are "Sheffield") and the southern tip of an extremely densely populated area (everything going from Yorshire to London goes past Sheffield). Leeds has better links to Manchester for serious freight traffic via the M62, it is true, but then Sheffield has better links to the Peak District, which is nicer than Manchester anyway. Sheffield is a Cross Country station (as is Leeds) and it has direct rail journey to most (all?) of the biggest cities in the UK, unlike Nottingham.

Sheffield isn't really known for hosting anything (other than the snooker), but it did very well out of the World Student Games in 1991, and got the now-mandatory ~10,000 capacity arena before pretty much every other city in the UK, and it has a stadium about the same size as Ibrox and Wembley for concerts too. Michael Jackson, Rolling Stones, U2, etc. all played there. If a massive act is only playing three or four venues in the UK there's a pretty good chance one of them is Sheffield.

As RedRaymaker noticed, the city centre, in addition to benefiting from interesting geography, also did extremely well out of the millennium stuff and is my favourite in the UK (although fuck me it was grim until the mid-90s).

Bradford has http://www.nationalmediamuseum.org.uk/, which is awesome and features in my favourite childhood memories.

> Sheffield isn't really known for hosting anything (other than the snooker)

ha, i was going to say exactly this.

am fond of sheffield but haven't been for years (and then only 3 or 4 times). am thinking of popping up again to visit friends and see the new car park (!)

nottingham and leicester were busrides away from university and i'd visit about once a month for 3 years (leicester more so because of gigs at the charlotte and uni and poly - nottingham was impossible to get back from after 7 but the late trains from london would get to leicester about 12 and loughborough about 11 minutes later so...)

derby was as close as nottingham but the lack of a direct train meant it may as well have not existed.

Sheffield has pretty good transport links.

That you can leave somewhere easily to go somewhere else does not make, I think, a great case for the initial somewhere. Some curious definitions of "interesting" being presented in this thread.

Bradford has Saltaire village within it's environs, which is a world heritage site and features the 1853 gallery at Salts Mill with its collection of Hockneys.

(I know you said other stuff, and put forth a pretty convincing argument for Sheffield as interesting, just thought I'd pull that one out of context.)

xpost to self and caek

@ RedRaymaker: Anfield is one of the most deprived areas in the city. As for the pavement slabs, never been a problem for me personally! And as for there being a dearth of places to eat, where on earth were you looking?!
http://www.restaurant-guide.com/uk+north-west+merseyside+liverpool~4.htm

Judging Liverpool by the lattice of rundown terraced streets that surround the football stadia in L4 is a bit like writing off London based on a walk from South Bermondsey station to the New Den to see Millwall.

Voted Manchester, only cos I went there and had a nice time this weekend.

I like those streets, though it is shocking to see whole areas boarded up. They seem like real places, by which I mean that there's a link to the historical communities that were there not long ago and which we like to pretend aren't part of us. I find it hard to quantify exactly what I mean and why I feel strongly - I suppose my mum grew up somewhere similar, and not respecting them feels belittling somehow. It pains me that government policy has been to bulldoze such places, it seems so obviously a mistake.

I'm not making an argument for the authenticity of deprivation or anything, they desperately need spruced up - and if they were, they'd make far nicer small homes than would 2-bed apartment blocks. I wonder whether there's a style of living that they might engender too, and whether any thought's been given to whether that might be a useful thing. Certainly much of the replacement stock doesn't seem to have had much thought at all.

On a Liverpool flipside, I was there for a day out with Mrs A a few weeks back and we walked from Albert Docks all the way down the waterfront promenade to Grassendale Park; talk about a hidden gem, that area has some of the best preserved (and most beautiful) Victorian houses I've ever seen.

And re your point above, Ismael, I totally agree - there are many areas of Salford and other M/cr surroundings that are on very similar lines (ie. good, solid two and three bed terraces) that are just boarded up and awaiting the wrecking ball. This is whilst the last ten years have seen enormous chipboard and tin towers spring up all over Manchester city centre. An interesting local, and I am sure not unique, attempt to do something with these is:

http://www.urbansplash.co.uk/chimneypotpark/

xpost re Nottingham: The junkie beggar situation in the city centre was decisively addressed about three years ago - although I never once found any of them aggressive or menacing, despite being approached several times a day for a long time. I also disagree re. transport links: we've got the M1, we're on the St Pancras main line, and road/rail connections are generally good. We punch above our weight for retail and culture - and particularly for live music, although it remains true that no act from Nottingham ever makes it big nationally - and the city centre has remained compact and vibrant, partly due to a long-standing policy of not devolving to out-of-town retail parks, and partly due to good public transport/park-and-ride arrangments and an efficient new tram system. Drug-related gang crime has been a problem in the past, and aggressive weekend binge-drinkers remain a problem, but we don't deserve the reputation we've been singled out for - that's lazy journalism for you!

Those Salford houses look great. I think what I like most about those old terraces and tenements is the really dense streetscape that results - it makes for really interesting & stimulating walking (thereby improving quality of life, even just a little bit) in a way that modern designs rarely manage.

Absolutely agree that being close to a motorway is not interesting or important of itself (see, e.g. the M4 corridor) and I think Nottingham is hamstrung by problems other than its rail connections, but I was responding to Ismael's "I don't think they're [Sheffield and Nottingham] are terribly well-connected to the rest of the country in transport terms, and yet they're actually pretty big places" comment, because Sheffield is among the better connected cities on this list.

that's to Upt0eleven, btw

I find it quite amusing that RedRaymaker should choose to bemoan Nottingham's junkie problem right next to praising Brighton. Having moved a year ago from the former to the latter, I can tell you that there are way more visible junkies in Brighton. On the other hand, if you can avoid the hen/stag parties, there is a general air of friendliness around here that there doesn't seem to be in many other cities.

In the end I voted for Nottingham simply because I love the place, even though I'm aware that the poll called for 'most interesting' rather than 'favourite'.

I know nothing about these cities. However, voting is a sacred duty. Therefore I will sell my vote to anyone who makes an attractive offer.

I still feel I know very little about Nottingham, even allowing for Mike's efforts above. I'm guessing that it must have a rich and varied history, from Robin Hood through to the Victorian era (it wouldn't have its famous football teams and test cricket without it), and the university has a good reputation I think, but it never features on the news or anything. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't recognise it from any picture other than the stadiums. I wasn't slagging it off and wouldn't deny it interestingness on that basis, they're the types of place that can be most fun to explore.

Nottingham is definitely interesting. It's got caves under a shopping centre for heavens sake.

http://shelley.bump.us/trip/May28/the%20trip%20to%20jerusalem%20inn%20nottingham.jpg

"What is very unusual about the place is that part of the pub is hewn out of caves set at the foot of the Nottingham Castle rock" - instinct tells me this place must be tourist trap hell, but a pub made out of caves is undeniably a curiosity

Also: if all those trainers over telegraph wires aren't there to mark territory, what the hell are they for?!

Actually, the Trip isn't as bad for tourists as you might think - it's quite frequently just a cool place to go for a drink. Also: don't clean the ship!

The Trip's a lovely pub, although I regret the recent introduction of museum-like info panels.

I'd been meaning to revisit to make a point that caek sort of hinted at - the poverty of the natural settings of our cities. Obviously a Rio or San Francisco would be a bit much to ask, but I don't think many of these could be described as picturesque. Edinburgh I suppose, and Sheffield does look nice on the telly. Leeds too maybe, though I've only passed through it on the train.

The others do seem mostly to have been plonked down with little regard for the scenery. Dublin could have a stunning setting with its bay and all, but you'd never know it while you're there.

The location of Bristol, perched right on the Avon Gorge, is pretty stunning.

edinburgh has a great setting, as you say. the rest of the uk is kinda flat, though, really.

dublin's got the hills and a bay, but again it's a pretty gentle slope, you're not going to see very much of the bay from anywhere in the city, and the hills are only....ok

Not having a river running through the centre and having a train station instead fatally ruins Edinburgh for me

that was weird, yes. i assume there was a river there at some stage? what did they do, add a powdered train station mix?

I haven't been to Bristol, but I'm hearing nothing but good things. I saw a really old map of Edinburgh from the days when the entire city clung on round the castle - where the station is now was marked 'canal', but the commentary suggested it was actually a giant communal cesspool.

I forgot to mention Glasgow too - seen on a clear day, from some of the high ground to the south of the city, it can be staggeringly beautiful.

Bristol is probably even more dramatic than Edinburgh in terms of topography, but once you're away from the city centre/Clifton/hotwells, it's fairly dull.

Regarding Edinburgh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nor_Loch

Witch dunking - over 300 suspected witch trials are documented at this site, as commemorated by a plaque on the castle esplanade, and it is possible that many more went undocumented. In many cases, these "trials" would have been fatal, and the suspects thus acquitted.

nicely played

i was in uni in nottingham and loved it - although i spent a lot of my time on campus as it's beautiful there and has about 14 bars on site. city centre is pretty and there are some great places there, and ROCK CITY is there ffs.

and there are like 3 pubs there or something that claims to be the oldest pub in britain or something including the trip above

nottingham campus is nice

and there are like 3 pubs there or something that claims to be the oldest pub in britain or something including the trip above

It all depends on how you look at it.

http://www.fatbadgers.co.uk/Britain/old.htm

I don't think that setting aside Lanarkshire Zone and Paisley from the definition of "Glasgow" makes much difference to Glasgow's interestingness, as (broadly speaking) Lanarkshire and Paisley are pretty much a perfect example of post-industrial collapse, though the former could be interesting to someone keen on the study of religious bigotry (don't know much abt Paisley on that score).

So, taking Glasgow as, y'know, Glasgow city - the area within which you don't have to pay a boundary - it's still pretty interesting. There's only a few remnants of the city prior to its tobacco boom but what is left the Cathedral and Provands Lordship are as interesting (and less time consuming) than Edinburgh's Old Town. Architecturally speaking, Glasgow is the boys: Mackintosh (better as an architect than a designed, imo), and Greek Thompson, and the warm red and sandy sandstone tenements, the grand, prideful City Chambers (with nod to the role of the Americas in the mini-Liberty at the front elevation's apex), Leitch's industrial Ibrox Stadium, and so on right up to the menacing, squatting, brutalist Sheriff Court building (which I flat out love).

In terms of social/economic/political history, there's much that's interesting, the first growth of the city (much like Liverpool) as a mercantile centre for the Colonies, the second growth through heavy industry and shipbuilding, tanks in George Square, razor gangs and urban decay. There's also the fact that Glasgow, much more than Edinburgh, has drawn for people from the rural areas - the Cleared families either making their way to or through Glasgow. Glasgow as way station and destination for the swathe of Scots from the North (partic. the North West and Western Isles), which has meant that Glasgow has managed to keep alive a type of Scottishness which is much better rooted in the history of Scotland than Edinburgh's twee George IV pandering.

But really the thing that makes Glasgow interesting is the fact that the haphazard patchwork of decay and gentrification means you can walk in three minutes from douce tree lined street to waste ground surrounding nearly abandoned high-rises - all types of people rub up against one another all the time in Glasgow, which helps smooth off the prejudices and make living there surprising and pleasant.

interesting interesting interesting

Not having a river running through the centre and having a train station instead fatally ruins Edinburgh for me

Yeah that is a problem. They do have THE SEA instead though.

Paisley isn't the hotbed of backwards bigotry that certain parts of Lanarkshire are. It is, however, a total shithole, albeit a shithole with some very nice buildings hidden away in the general mankiness. Has bugger all to do with Glasgow, like, they might as well be on different planets (possibly because anything good to do in Paisley has been subsumed by people choosing to do it in Glasgow instead - eating, drinking, theatre, arts, shopping).

Though I guess the destruction of its satellite towns could be seen as something else interesting about Glasgow, if you don't have the misfortune to live in one of them.

That sort of thing, ailsa, is why I made the poll 'most interesting' rather than 'best' - I was hoping to find out what made each of them unique, rather than just good for a night out or whatever (though that's part of it too, obviously). It's interesting to me at least that taking maxi-views of Glasgow or Portsmouth seems to be provocative, whereas no-one gives a toss about Bournemouth.

Not really sure about the satellite towns thing, whether it's the type of industry that was there, or maybe the M8 making them easier to miss out. I don't know if other cities have similar dynamics. Paisley does seem to be an especially tragic case, the more so because there's plainly a degree of pride still there, even as the place has been gutted out.

I'm basing the satellite towns thing purely on Paisley, because I live near there. Lanarkshire towns do seem not to fall victim so much - I wonder if Clydebank/Dumbarton are the same - near enough Glasgow to not have to have their own identity because everyone just goes to Glasgow for stuff instead. Saying that, Clydebank has the shipyard heritage, Lanarkshire has mining - Paisley's golden age of industrialism (weaving) is much further into its past, leaving it with nothing in the way of a heart at all. From what I can tell, these other places have a distinct identity, despite being as near to Glasgow as Paisley is.

God, I live in the worst place in the world. I'm depressing myself now!

you don't live in hull

C'mon, trainers are on phone wires so you can't get them down.

Was really looking forward to seeing Leicester do terribly in this poll, for shame! Gigs at the Charlotte indeed. Now its closed down, Leicester is ridiculous now for having NO decent medium sized venues - goes from shitty venues upstairs at pubs straight to De Montfort etc - strange to see some bands playing places that are patently too small for them given lack of alternatives.

Nottingham has been both excellent and horrible for me, not fond of it atm, although it definitely has its highlights. Seems like Leicester + to me, in all the ways that entails.

Went to Sheffield last weekend, was quite nice, city center seems to be comprised entirely of university. I liked the architecture.

There have been trainers on telephone wires everywhere I ever lived (including Surrey, dahling). Isn't it just what kids do to other kids?

Kids that sell SMACK, yeah

when you said Gigs at charlotte i kept thinking this place, which also sadly is closed down

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3342/3262919401_471ff53b64.jpg?v=0

(even though it's on whitfield rather than charlotte)

Love all the bladerunner shit they've put round Sheffield train station, it's a pretty great way to enter the city w/park hill flats looming behind.

http://www.culture24.org.uk/asset_arena/0/83/1380/v0_master.jpg

Voted Glasgow, though I am somewhat biased as I was born here, live in the city centre, was brought up a couple of miles outside the city.

yeah, i remember being away for about 6 months while they did up that area, and coming back to visit my folks, and my mind was blown. it's mental.

xp

Sheffield has done some really great things with its town centre, the bade, the peace gardens, winter gardens, I'm interested to see what the new development on the site of cole brothers is like next time I go back.

Ha, I had a very similar experience coming back for the first time after I finished uni there, at night all lit up it felt like I'd come forward 50 years.

leicester charlotte reopening soon btw. it'll still be a shithole though.

Remember seeing the Scissor Sisters play there and remark how they were fond of this dark, dank little place with sweat dripping off the ceiling because it reminded them of the shitholes they used to play in New York. Heh.

Question for Americans and other foreigners - do any of these places, other than Oxford and Cambridge, have any sort of profile outside the British Isles? Sometime I meet people who say how much they love the place and it turns out they've only been to London plus Killarney, St. Andrews or Stratford (the Shakespeare one).

I voted Edinburgh in the end, because it's probably the most spectacular to look at. There's a(n extinct) volcano, a castle on a hill (which is another extinct volcano), and loads of stuff - what's not to like? (Actually, what's not to like is the endless kilt shops for tourists). But I was struggling very badly to form any kind of opinion of most places. I've never been to (unless you count whizzing through on a train / in a car) Swansea, Reading, Plymouth, Nottingham, Middlesbrough, Glasgow, Derby, Dublin, Coventry, Cork, Cardiff or Aberdeen. I've seen a little of Stoke, Sheffield, Oxford, Norwich, Newcastle, Leeds and Hull, but not for a long time and I don't remember anything much about them. As for the rest:
Portsmouth - big glass tower! old ships!
Manchester - football! red bricks everywhere! trams! affleck's palace in the early 90s! the whole city centre appearing to have been redeveloped every time I go there!
Liverpool - more red bricks! racist taxi drivers! the This Morning weather map in the dock!
Cambridge - old university buildings! a canal!
Bristol - clifton suspension bridge!
Brighton & Hove - the sea! the zap club in the mid-90s!
Bournemouth/Poole/Christchurch - featureless bungalow-filled suburbia!
Blackpool - extremely tacky!
Birmingham/West Midlands - that selfridges building and that bull!
Belfast - bombs and murals and armoured cars and soldiers! (this was pre-ceasefire)

Remember seeing the Scissor Sisters play there and remark how they were fond of this dark, dank little place with sweat dripping off the ceiling because it reminded them of the shitholes they used to play in New York. Heh.

I was at the same gig! Jake Shears specifically compared The Charlotte to CBGBs.

I voted Edinburgh in the end, because it's probably the most spectacular to look at. There's a(n extinct) volcano, a castle on a hill (which is another extinct volcano), and loads of stuff - what's not to like?

... the people who live there?

same for everywhere else on the poll, tbh

No, I don't agree with you there

No Exeter, no credibility.

It has to be Dublin - I don't think there are any more good times to be found in another British city

The days of good times are long past ;_;

On the mainland they certainly are - in Dublin, they continue long into every night of the week. This is why it has no competition

Some Dubliners aren't that great at partying, it seems

vote edinburgh for a free sb

I'm sure someone has said this already, but Dublin and Cork are not British cities.

Even Belfast, while part of the UK, is not on the island of Britain.

Nope, nobody mentioned that.

Most interesting British city (that isn't British)

less of a problem than including hull on a list of 'interesting' cities tbh

Starship: "We Intersting City (that isn't hull)"

must... not... bite...

only memory of exeter is a bird shitting on my brother's head, one of the most sweetest moments of my childhood

uh -most

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Righto, last day today. No mentions whatsoever for Plymouth or Swansea. Almost nothing for Cardiff, Newcastle or Belfast. Surely Belfast at least must be interesting? The images that first come to mind are partly troubles, but mostly later series of 'Why Don't You?'

I once drove through Belfast. There didn't seem to be much happening apart from a Tuileries Garden style ferris wheel, bad accents and it looked a lot like Glasgow (motorway ploughed through the city centre). The wall murals were the most interesting part.

Newcastle is a homely kind of a place. I went to St James's Park which was a red brick and reminded me of Highbury. Everyone here sounds like they're from a cartoon, which has to be a good thing - amusing, at least.

When was this? I was there last season and thought it was a horrible ground, far too big and open - the opposite of Highbury. We were in the second back row on a snowy, windy day and it was like watching from a mountaintop.

I realised that I hadn't actually voted myself. After some thought, my vote goes to ... Liverpool.

I went for it because it's always the odd one out. Sometimes that's spectacular, like The Beatles springing out of drab post-war Blighty; sometimes horrifying like its feral youth going haywire earlier or worse than anywhere else's. Sometimes it just seems perverse - constructing the finest football dynasty over the exact period of the game's nadir (and then choosing to celebrate it by having a pop at Everton). Or Militant really going for it after the game was obviously up.

Even Liverpool's currently being a dump (only partly true) fits the pattern, because it seems at least a good ten years behind the regeneration of the rest of the country, now setting itself up just in time for the recession.

I'd've been happy voting for any of the four big trading ports here (Liverpool, Glasgow, Dublin; and Manchester was an inland port, wasn't it?). I certainly feel immediately at home in all of them. I think simple size has a lot to do with that, and that they were big successes in Britain's industrial past, currently my favourite historical era. So they all have some great architecture, although the three British ones have certainly lost a lot to bad development. Liverpool seems to have fared worst - the vast empty lots give the place a weird half-finished feeling. I've just started reading Paul McCartney's (auto)biography, and the description of the city's destruction right up to the late 70s is pretty heartbreaking. It seems odder and more alien than the others, so there you go.

I suppose I should acknowledge that when it comes to feelings of separateness, Dublin obviously beats the others - seeing as it actually is separate and everything. But that just makes Liverpool seem odder, somehow - why it should produce the separateness, the famous sentimentality, the accent that sounds like nowhere else, I don't know. Plenty of other places have produced something great from their particular mix of people (I like calumerio's description of Glasgow's), maybe Liverpool's mix is just like nowhere else's. The crossroads of the British Isles and all that. Not just of the Isles either - its history as the main port to the Americas is pretty exciting too.

Even getting there makes it feel like another world to me. The moors or strands or flats, or long suburbs, that you pass depending on your route, seem to go on for far longer than they probably really do, so that it feels to me more like arriving on an island than just another town. McCartney describes when he moved out to Speke as a nipper, saying he felt like Christopher Columbus at the edge of the world. I like how Liverpool is the centre of gravity in that train of thought, that in actual fact he was probably a good stretch closer to the rest of Britain didn't matter. It seems a fitting mentality for an interesting place.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Ya dancer!

Oxford (143,016) 1
Cambridge (113,442) 0

HA

yas.

I'm reasonably fond of Manchester but it's a shit city. Just sayin'.

I meant to vote for Belfast and forgot. Sorry Belfast ;_;

(though mainly this thread has made me feel unqualified to vote, as I've visited almost none of these places recently and extensively enough to comment. I don't think Belfast is really the answer to the question, but 0 votes and Fioninha's comments seem rather harsh)

x-post

Local pride compels me to challenge that statement - if I was able to perform the bendy-kneed Manc swagger I'd be doing it right now, hopefully in a more intimidating manner than dear Liam.

It's such an incoherent city tho, sure there are good and interesting places, but Manchester always feels like a sprawling hodge-podge of dull speckled with fun. And it's been hanging on to a faded cultural indie cache that really finished about 1992.

I'm coming to love those 'motorways ploughed through the city centre' since I read a piece eulogising that crazy stretch of the M8 through central Glasgow. It's quite an experience. Birmingham scores high here too.

Newcastle too!

reading someone wank about it is probably worse than living with it but not much

xpost

In the end I voted Aberdeen because it is the one city in the UK that I have been to that neither looks nor feels like it is part of Britain, which makes it alien, weird and, uh, interesting.

xp to NV, why 1982? The Inspiral Carpets didn't get going until 1983.

Aberdeen deserves it's vote for Footdee which is at the very least quite interesting. Also awesome windswept beach virtually empty for most of the year.

Virtually empty because fucking freezing!

I've wanted to visit Aberdeen since I was a kid and I read the entry at the beginning of the Children's Britannica. Also lol background radiation, yes?

I once walked along Aberdeen beach in April and the cold was incredible, but I still loved it. I lay down in the dunes in my huge overcoat and wooly hat and watched the world go by (the world being, in this instance, one man and a dog). The huge blocks of flats you can see on the other side of the road only add to the sense of otherworld-ness.

I once got sunburn in Aberdeen in April.

Also lol background radiation, yes?

Some of my favourite places are near nuclear power stations, Dungeness, Thorpeness...maybe not Sellafield.

Well nuclear power stations tended to get built in out of the way places hence wild picturesqeness I guess. But my understanding re: Aberdeen is that granite tends to kick out a lot of radiation?

Yes, are there any nuclear power stations near Aberdeen?

Not unless they're keeping it secret.

And, of course, in terms of gaiety, joie de vivre and the general warmth and friendliness of its citizens, Aberdeen makes Edinburgh seem like Rio in carnival time

speaking as a misanthrope i can dig that

many x-posts

hanging on to a faded cultural indie cache that really finished about 1992

There is undoubtedly still a rich vein of professional Mancunians who will give the rallying cry of Roses/Inspirals/Mondays until the grave (and they're often the ones who get the most represented in the media), but show me another city with an equivalent musical heritage where this kind of trading on former glories doesn't exist.

Beyond the clichés there's a shedload of good bars, brilliant pubs, and decent clubs that you'll never hear Fools Gold in. There's also a proper range of gig venues so Manchester very rarely gets missed off tour dates. And there's almost 100,000 students here, so there's masses of smaller events and nights that take place outside the city centre.

In terms of "proper" culture, I think we do pretty well: Some excellent galleries, good theatres, nice architecture (often shoulder to shoulder with tat, I'll admit), plus this year's Manchester International Festival had a superb programme.

All in all, I think "shit" doesn't really do the place justice. But I am, admittedly, totally biased. This was a good poll though, and some great stuff on this thread.

"Shit" was overstepping the mark I agree, but as an outsider to both I don't think it's a patch on Liverpool. Also I'm bitter cos the Dutch Pancake House has gone.

hanging on to a faded cultural indie cache that really finished about 1992

Whereas Liverpudlians are famed for looking forward and never dwelling on the past

Liverpudlian rose-tinted glasses seem more comical and therefore more ignorable.

Can't disagree with you there

who was the mystery hull voter then?

also calling Manchester shit is so wrong when Leeds exists.

x-post

I repped for Liverpool upthread, which in some areas of M/cr would have me horse-whipped through the streets.

If you ever come back, and if you want a dining experience almost as peculiar as the DPH then check out the Armenian Taverna some time.

Hull voters = you?, me + a.n. other

xpost

OK just checked out the Armenian Taverna menu and anywhere that serves "Chef's Lavish Bread" needs visiting.

Also some bastard bulldozed Tommy Ducks = Madchester why you break heart?

I get the impression that Manchester is close to the kind of critical mass that turns a city into an exciting destination for its modern self, rather than for e.g. historical reasons. Like Dublin managed about a decade ago, and Barcelona a little before that. Things like party conferences and the bbc, while dull in themselves, are pointers in that direction. Not sure what kind of exciting centre that'd be exactly, probably not a tourist one.

If we're talking interesting Armenian restaurants maybe someone could tell me if the one in Edinburgh (mentioned in this thread)(and which I now learn is called Armenian Aghtamar Lake Van Monastery in Exile) is still going? Because that is one interesting place.

x-post

Ismael, you make a very interesting and valid point there. Part of the reason it's taken so long to cast off the Madchester tag (other than the old guard here still chuntering on about it) is that I don't think M/cr reveals much of what makes it special on first impressions - the city centre is mainly unlovely to look at, the weather *is* usually pretty overcast (thanks to The Pennines), and for a few years the cultural direction felt vague at best. None of this helps to make it a tourist destination as such, and frankly I don't think the place really needs casual tourists - the shops, restaurants and bars are absolutely hammered at all times already.

Being optimistic, I'd hope that investment and effort goes towards making it more of a cultural destination. The MIF was a critical and (crucially) a commercial success - it'll be interesting to see whether the further influx of media people with the BBC expansion means that this success is built on.

I don't think M/cr reveals much of what makes it special on first impressions

This is true of so many UK towns and cities. You just have to make a bit of effort (or in the case of Manchester go and have a look at the amazing town hall).

This result pleases me. That stretch of the M8 can be jolly useful for hopping on and off of, by the way. Admittedly it depends on the traffic.

That armenian taverna looks great! Never noticed it. Manchester's incoherence is a plus in terms of interest at least. I would be surprised if a visitor was wowed by Manchester, but its got a weird sort of relaxed comfort about it & the people are great.

you should have grown a pair and included London on this, the south has had a shit showing here.

London gets enough attention, I can buy any newspaper any day of the week if I want to hear about London minutiae. I just wanted reasons why all these other places are good, or at least interesting in their own right. If I had included it, pretty sure we wouldn't have ended up talking Norwich (not that we did anyway). I am surprised Brighton didn't do a bit better though, I'd've thought it would pick up a few London proxy votes.

I'm pretty happy with the way it turned out. Other than Leicester, I should have included York - I forgot that it's an important religious place (transport as well I think). Possibly Exeter too, but going by the showings of Plymouth and Bournemouth people aren't that into that part of the world. Maybe one day, if I ever get round to doing that winner v London runoff.

I ought to have called it 'British & Irish cities' too - I knew people would get a bit annoyed, but I didn't think it'd actually make people change their votes. 3 for Dublin is all wrong.

Exeter looked pretty interesting on our brief 2 hour visit in the pissing rain last month.

I don't think that setting aside Lanarkshire Zone and Paisley from the definition of "Glasgow" makes much difference to Glasgow's interestingness, as (broadly speaking) Lanarkshire and Paisley are pretty much a perfect example of post-industrial collapse, though the former could be interesting to someone keen on the study of religious bigotry (don't know much abt Paisley on that score).

When it comes to bigotry and sectarianism I certainly wouldn't bracket Paisley with the likes of Lanarkshire. Paisley's more like Glasgow, perhaps because there's more Catholics? Or just less of a smalltown mentality?

Plenty of ppl love the southwest just not so much for its cities (besides Bristol). York is/has been more interesting than most of these cities, one of the best tourist destinations I think. I would be curious how London would have changed it.

Well done to Glasgow!

In an earlier post I commented that there were trainers on telephone lines in Anfield, well I saw this interesting video on the phenomenon in New York:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8334137.stm

I still contend that this is not a phenomenon. There was a pair of trainers on a wire outside my primary school. There is a pair of trainers on a wire at the end of my street right now. I have seen pairs of trainers on wires regularly in the intervening years. I think it's just that many people don't look up much.

When we're done with this, can we investigate single shoes lying on the sides of motorways?

Ah, New York looks great in that film. It's true that people don't look up much though. I was out for a walk last week and was taking photos of fallen leaves when I was startled by a shout from above. It was a teenager perched on a branch high above me. He was waiting to ambush his brother and I was getting in the way. For all I know, I might be spoiling aerial high jinks every time I leave the house.

People don't look above shop fronts. It's a real pity because they're missing out on the history of the place. Especially true in London, but pretty much every city as well. Even Leicester.

That's quite a good little film in that it shows that the sneakers mean pretty much anything you want them to mean.

I like the vestigal adverts you see sometimes, painted high on gables. They seem ancient, Edwardian or Victorian even. I wonder how the paint has endured so long?

Oh yeah, I love that too.

People don't look above shop fronts.

Real talk. There's a lot of spectacular architectural history going on on the second storey of high street shops that a lot of people never notice.

Glasgow mostly gets good if you look up. I used to work across from an amazing building that had lovely detailing that I would hazard a decent wodge of cash on no-one actually ever noticing (I was on the third floor of the building, the good stuff in the opposite building was directly across from me). I'd walked past it for years and never really looked myself, and I love old Glasgow buildings!

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/42/123339393_25cde55a1e.jpg?v=0

http://www.glasgowguide.co.uk/GG-ORG/ez/glasgow_clydeport1a.jpg

Nice. It disappoints me that modern buildings (the ones I notice anyway) seem to be deliberately featureless, and often on an inhuman scale. Modern business districts are not going to be interesting places to discover in a century's time.

The building I used to work in, across from that nice one, looks like this :-(

http://www.baesystems.com/static/bae_cimg_pes_atlanticquay_latestReleased_bae_cimg_pes_atlanticquay_Web.jpg

I wonder how the paint has endured so long?

Lead?

@NedTrifle Yes, Aghtamar Lake Van Monastery is still going! One of my pals booked a table last November. Here's the review so you know what to expect :) http://www.jemmaeatworld.com/2011/08/aghtamar-lake-van-monastery-in-exile/