Submitted by john, Jan 16, 2007 13:30

Are you seriously basing the whole of New York's and Los Angele's architectural existance on the success of buildings by two of the most publically pedestrian and popular architects of our time? That seems beyond extremely shallow, as a way to justify your opinion that LA is architecturally more "bold" and "imaginative" (Uh- I suppose you could be on to something as the LA area does house Disneyland). While you seem correct in your basic knowledge of the difference in the two cities as in - LA: Horizontal and NY:Vertical; It seems incongruous to me that you are attempting to compare these city's architecture as if it were apples to apples. (And even irresponsible to further this "comparison" by citing only Gehry and Meier??)

Please, if you want to express your personal disdain for NY and your personal opinion that LA is urbanistically and archticturally superior...Just say so!

OR... provide me a much more compelling and convincing argument that shows you've thought about this in an unbiased way - as an apparent ex-New Yorker.

PS...Are you sure you think NewYork has nothing to offer Architecture, as a whole, as equivalent as Gehry's Venice Beach house???

PSS.. in defense of LA, is Gehry and Meier the best you can come up with that defines LA as an architectural landmark? Come on! what about the Test Case Houses?, Richard Nuetra et.al...You need to do your city a bit more justice than allowing Meier and Gehry to represent its Architectural significance!!

-A New York Architect

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.