<p>“I don’t get your point. Are you imagining there isn’t major league baseball and storied baseball franchises in the Midwest? Boat tours? World class art museums? Tall Ships? Beaches and amusement parks? World class museums other than art museums? Interesting, historic, walkable neighborhoods? Train stations? Nonstop flights to Europe?”</p>
<p>That’s exactly what a lot of New Yorkers think -that these things aren’t there. They really don’t get it. If they’re well traveled, they’ll know better. I love the irony of “I’m so sophisticated” combined with “I’m not aware of cultural amenities anywhere other than NYC.”</p>
<p>That’s so weird (and that attitude totally does exist, I’m not disagreeing). I’ve never lived outside of New England and live in Boston right now – and I’m dying to visit Chicago for its vegan restaurants – one of the most well-known vegan restaurants in the country is there.</p>
<p>What’s even more ironic is the belief in some parts there that economic/financial success can only be had in certain industries, most notably those that recruit from a small handful of universities also on the East Coast. There’s nothing “diverse” about that attitude.</p>
<p>If you’re really not aware that one could be quite successful going to, say, a big 10 state school, or in industries other than banking, then guess what? You’re pretty darn unsophisticated and you’re nowhere near as worldly as you think you are. Please, there are people in the Midwest who could buy and sell these people before breakfast.</p>
<p>My daughter attended a prestigious summer dance program on the East Coast last year. She was astonished by the provincialism of some of the kids she met from the Northeast. She found them not at all open-minded or “worldly” in any way. They were far less-traveled than she (even though she comes from a place with no direct flights overseas–perish the thought!). My son and a friend had a similar experience several summers ago at a camp in northern California. In both cases, some of their peers seemed completely ignorant about the entire swath of the country between the coasts, and were pretty patronizing about my kids’ Midwestern roots. Many of them had not traveled or experienced the variety of people (in terms of ethnic and cultural diversity) my kids encounter in their day-to-day lives. I know these are only a few examples, but hopefully they serve as a counterpoint to people such as NewHope who think they can learn everything they need to know about an entire region of the country by reading the small type on a cereal box. :)</p>
<p>bclintock, I am not a New Yorker. I have, however, lived in both the greater NYC area and in Chicago, as well as Boston, and various other places in the US and elsewhere. </p>
<p>New York has more theater at more levels than any other place in the USA. I’m not talking about Broadway alone. I’m talking about Off Broadway, Off Off Broadway, and so forth. Playwrights Horizons alone–which most tourists have never heard of-- has more quality theater than 95% of other cities in the US. </p>
<p>New York has more dance at a higher level than any other place in the USA, possibly the world. Denying this is ridiculous. New York has more major art museums and galleries in a wider range of styles than any other city in the USA. And on and on.</p>
<p>This doesn’t mean that the Art Institute is not a great museum, or that the Chicago Lyric Opera isn’t good, or that the Chicago Symphony isn’t one of the great ones or the Joffrey isn’t good. But the AI goes up against the Met AND the Frick AND MOMA AND the Whitney AND the Guggenheim AND… The Joffrey and Hubbard Street goes up against the NYCB (arguably the #1 company in the world) AND the ABT AND Twyla Tharp AND Mark Morris AND Dance Theater of Harlem AND countless others.</p>
<p>It is not that the rest of the nation is a cultural wasteland. But give me a break. Let’s not be silly.</p>
<p>How often do you take advantage of those things from Maine, though? You’ve got to go a reasonable distance; so how is that different from the person in the Quad Cities who goes to Chicago for cultural events?</p>
<p>steve MA–you were right and I was wrong about NewHope. I didn’t get that anyone would think a celebrity sighting would be better than a welcoming neighbor. I’m taking the good neighbor any day. And I’d be happy taking a walk or picking apples instead of what one could do in NYC (also a great place, but not the only great place). Even when I was 17 and in NYC for an internship, I couldn’t believe the ignorance about the midwest.</p>
<p>What on earth does Maine have to do with NYC? I never said anything of the sort.</p>
<p>It’s a 6-hour drive from here to NYC. A year or so after moving here I finally gave up my 4th-row center Saturday night subscription seats at the NYCB: it was just too much of a pain in the ass to get there.</p>
<p>I’m just saying that people are making asses of themselves trying to deny that NYC has broader and deeper cultural offerings than the rest of the country.</p>
<p>Yes, provincialism is rampant everywhere, and nowhere more than in NY. So what?</p>
<p>BTW, I said that Maine has a lively cultural life. But I would be a blithering idiot if I tried to pretend that it even faintly approaches what is available in NYC. What we do have is a reasonable amount of cultural life paired with a low-pressure, physically lovely environment. There are always tradeoffs. There is more economic activity on the drive in from OHare than in the entire state of Maine.</p>
<p>@Consolation. Please. The Chicago Symphony Orchestra is widely regarded as the best orchestra in the United States and one of the leading orchestras in the world. It is one of several American orchestras more highly regarded than the New York Philharmonic.</p>
<p>Chicago also has more than one art museum, in case you didn’t know, as well as fantastic public art and some of the best urban architecture in the country.</p>
<p>Chicago has a thriving theater scene and a vibrant dance scene. There is more ballet in New York, I’ll grant you that. Fortunately ABT and City Ballet tour the country for those of us in the “sticks.”</p>
<p>In the end, though, does it matter that one city has the “best” or “most” cultural amenities, or simply that it has what its residents and visitors want and need to become and stay culturally stimulated and open-minded?</p>
<p>Sally, I am quite well acquainted with Chicago, thank you. Sorry that I didn’t list every single cultural institution in the city. Chicago has a lot to offer, culturally. Pretending that it has more than NYC is not sensible, however. More to the point, as you suggest, it is not a competition. </p>
<p>As I said provincialism is to be found everywhere.</p>
<p>Where did I say that the offerings in NYC were more accessible or affordable than elsewhere? I did not. In fact, I think I made it quite clear, using the example of my area, that there are trade-offs involved. NYC is extremely urban, expensive, and crowded. Some people find it worth it. Some do not.</p>
Strongly seconded. I moved 2500 miles across the country for grad school, and it was one of the best decisions I’ve ever made. It was a total culture shock and a great learning experience. I’ve made friends here from NYC, Zurich, Chicago, Toronto, Istanbul, and many smaller places around the country, and moving here was a paradigm shift for all of them too. It’s good to get out and stretch your wings a bit.</p>
<p>Not sure what all of the quibbling is about. New York City is the leading hub for culture in the US, and it rivals London and maybe Paris for the most cultural in the world. Chicago offers plenty to satisfy almost anyone, though, and many call it NYC without the pretense. In any case, Chicago is no more representative of the flat, boring parts of Missouri than NYC is of upstate New York or rural New Hampshire. I’m amused by the provincialism comments. Does anyone remember this New Yorker cover?</p>
<p>For 99% of people, the distinction between the theater, ballet, and art available in NYC and in other major cities is irrelevant. They aren’t taking advantage of these things beyond maybe a few times a year. There are few people who are “exhausting” Chicago’s theater scene, for example. It’s kind of like the whole HYP/other elite schools discussion-maybe HYP offers 30,000 opportunities; other elite schools offer 25,000, and no one person cn take advantage of all that many.</p>
<p>I think first the op should look at the grad schools and see if they’re a fit. Then worry about where he/she ends up. I wanted to go to University of WI or University of MN more than anywhere but I was offered assistanships at University of Georgia and University of Nebraska. Visited Georgia in April when the azaleas were blooming and that sold this midwestern heart. While I now live back in the midwest I loved my time in the deep south. My advice would be to see where your acceptances are, what you are offered and then go visit. Who knows what might steal your heart.</p>
<p>@Pizzagirl: But for some (many?) people on this site, reducing everything to a “best” list is essential to happiness–whether it’s the “best” city or college or anything else. For some reason, it seems to make them think all is well with the world.</p>
<p>What I think is amusing is people who diss the Midwest but fall all over what I consider pretty remote and unimpressive places. Northampton, MA is the prime example. Looks like plenty of small towns everywhere, including the Midwest.</p>
Count me as one. There’s no question whatsoever that Chicago, Dallas, LA, Seattle, Minneapolis, St Louis, and probably Des Moines would have all the theatre I’d care about (which isn’t much - although I went to a melodrama at Ft Robinson Nebraska that I enjoyed) and the tiniest town in Iowa has all the ballet I’d ever care to see (zero). I doubt I’m alone in this. I’d much rather go to the mountains, beach, go for a hike, etc. than the aforementioned. But I realize that some people love nothing more than going to the theatre, ballet, concerts, etc. and for them being located someplace with an adequate number and variety of venues to satisfy would be important but even at that, ‘adequate number of venues’ doesn’t equate to ‘most number of venues’ since most people wouldn’t frequent all of them anyway. It might be an interesting statistic as to what percentage of NYC’ers actually go to more than a single play in a year (or even go to a single one for that matter).</p>
<p>It comes down to different strokes for different folks and there’s nothing wrong with that and the way it should be (you wouldn’t want everyone to move to NYC any more than I’d want everyone to move to where I am). There’s no way I’d move to NYC but I realize many people love it there and wouldn’t want to live anywhere else. However, I know this because I’ve been to NYC many times, I’ve traveled to many places, I’ve lived in many quite disparate locations, so I have points of reference, I’ve been able to figure out what attributes appeal to me regardless of what attributes appeal to others. In the OP’s case, the OP clearly desires to have these other experiences in order to expand the OP’s horizons and eventually figure out what works best for the OP personally.</p>
<p>@Consolation:
May I say that it’s very “white” of you NYC guys to let your shows travel so that we, “in the boonies” can see them. My D and I scored tickets to the "Book of Mormon, (something we couldn’t have done until maybe 2015 in NYC.) We also loved the Susan Sherman show which is now at our local art museum. So don’t worry. We see a lot of what you see. </p>
<p>And may I also say, that there is tons of stuff that winds up in New York that started in
regional theater or dance companies. May I suggest you get tickets to “Chinglish” which premiered in Chicago and I saw at the Berkeley Rep which was fabulous. It’s coming to Broadaway. We who don’t live in NYC are happy to share with NYC the stuff we saw first and loved. </p>
<p>(@Bclintonck: We saw “A Year with Fron and Toad” at the Children’s Theatre Compalny
which went to Broadway. Fabulous show and fabulous repetory company.)</p>
<p>NYC is a great cultural center but you can live in lots of places and have more NYC caliber fabulous cultural opportunities than you could ever take advantage of. And if you think the Berkeley Rep or the Guthrie Theater is not up to NYC standards you’d be mistaken.</p>
<p>I actually read all these posts. (Having a swingin Saturday night…) I’m from Chicago, I’m with Pizzagirl - it’s hard to sit there politely when New Yorkers are being superior. It’s old and it’s tiresome. I knew a woman in college who landed in St. Louis as a 24 yr old and has stayed there for 30 years. She’s a poet and playwright, and has become a cultural big frog in a manageable pond. All the arts are completely accessible to her and she takes full advantage. Why do you need 3000 theaters when you can only sit in one seat at a time? And you can actually help write the plays?? How great is that?</p>
![http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4d/Steinberg_New_Yorker_Cover.png]Map](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4d/Steinberg_New_Yorker_Cover.png%5DMap){kind=link}
