Tell me a more important museum in Rome than El Prado , considered the finest collection of paintings in Europe, or Thyssen gallery. And stop saying that the stones scattered around Rome are a museum themselves , because they aren't. A museum is a building with properly cathalogued art objects following modern criteria in it . In all countries with old civilizations there are ancient stones here and there too, in Mexico, in Peru, etc... Madrid museums are more international because for example in El Prado there are a lot of Dutch and Italian paintings. In Rome there are only things related to the ancient Romans. I think that it's time enough to stop living thanks to what the romans from 2000 years ago did. Since then only the popes did significative things in Rome. If it wasn't for the catholic see Rome would be a small village nowadays. Also the Roman stones only made Rome a chaotic city that can't build an extensive subway network in order to preserve the stones. Madrid on the other hand is much more modern with better infraestructures and better museums at the same time. A city does not need to be old to have interesting museus with artistic treasures. N.Y. has more paintings, sculptures and such in its museums than Rome, and Madrid too. Also, Rome can't be compared to Paris because in Italy itself there are more beautiful cities, practically al northern cities are: Turin, Milan, Genoa, Venice...
Gobal cities and languages
<<Tell me a more important museum in Rome than El Prado , considered the finest collection of paintings in Europe, or Thyssen gallery. And stop saying that the stones scattered around Rome are a museum themselves , because they aren't. A museum is a building with properly cathalogued art objects following modern criteria in it . In all countries with old civilizations there are ancient stones here and there too, in Mexico, in Peru, etc... Madrid museums are more international because for example in El Prado there are a lot of Dutch and Italian paintings. In Rome there are only things related to the ancient Romans. I think that it's time enough to stop living thanks to what the romans from 2000 years ago did. Since then only the popes did significative things in Rome. If it wasn't for the catholic see Rome would be a small village nowadays. Also the Roman stones only made Rome a chaotic city that can't build an extensive subway network in order to preserve the stones. Madrid on the other hand is much more modern with better infraestructures and better museums at the same time. A city does not need to be old to have interesting museus with artistic treasures. N.Y. has more paintings, sculptures and such in its museums than Rome, and Madrid too. Also, Rome can't be compared to Paris because in Italy itself there are more beautiful cities, practically al northern cities are: Turin, Milan, Genoa, Venice... >>
I totally agree
Only El Prado is more important than all museums of Rome... anyway, italy is precious
I totally agree
Only El Prado is more important than all museums of Rome... anyway, italy is precious
I think Rome might possibly be better than Paris. I know. Those are fightin’ words. Maybe I’m still under the magical spell of one of the most amazing cities EVER (Rome, that is), but for the life of me, I can’t help but wonder why the hell on earth Paris is the most visited city in the world, while Rome is in a distant 5th place? That totally baffles the mind. Rome RULEZ – and Paris is totally overrated!!!!!
I hear gasps worldwide coming my direction. Pfff. Bring it on…
This opinion is based on my one week holiday in Rome, which isn’t very long, I realize – while I actually have spent much more time in Paris as a resident. Perhaps if I lived in Rome, I might have the “honeymoon is over” syndrome? Who knows. For now, this is what I think, and I’m sticking to it.
Rome is better than Paris. Why? How?
- Much much more history in Rome.
- Stunning monuments and ancient ruins practically everywhere you go in Rome.
- Friendly locals in Rome. Um, Paris? hahahaha.
- Better coffee in Rome, hands down.
- The weather in Rome kicks Paris’ ass. So very much.
- The Pantheon, The Arch? THE Originals are in Rome!
- Rome has less POO on the sidewalks.
- Rome doesn’t smell like pee probably because guys in Italy use the toilets instead of walls and alleys.
- Michaelangelo.
- Leonardo da Vinci.
- The food in Rome was consistently excellent. Yes, you heard me correctly.
- Happier atmosphere.
- The sea is nearby.
- Great seafood.
- Beauty is everywhere.
- Italian is prettier than French. hee!
- Rome is more relaxed.
- Cafe waiters are nice! OMG what a concept, right Paris?
- I gotta say this: Rome has less B.O.
- Gelato
- Cars stop for pedestrians in Rome.
- The Slow Food movement was founded in Rome.
- The Coliseum in Rome was built in 8 years. How long would it take in Paris?
- No bisou politics. A simple one kiss on each cheek in Italy ‘cept starting on the left side.
- Oh please. This list would take me years to complete.
In defense of Paris, I’ll offer these things: 1) Paris is quieter; 2) Paris has more wifi access; 3) Paris pastries are better except perhaps a simple panna cotta ai frutti di bosco; 4) transportation is more extensive but so what; 5) Paris’ marketing is better, which is why so many more people around the world have been brainwashed believe it is the most beautiful city on earth; 6) Parisian women dress better than Roman women; 7) Paris has more cheese.
I hear gasps worldwide coming my direction. Pfff. Bring it on…
This opinion is based on my one week holiday in Rome, which isn’t very long, I realize – while I actually have spent much more time in Paris as a resident. Perhaps if I lived in Rome, I might have the “honeymoon is over” syndrome? Who knows. For now, this is what I think, and I’m sticking to it.
Rome is better than Paris. Why? How?
- Much much more history in Rome.
- Stunning monuments and ancient ruins practically everywhere you go in Rome.
- Friendly locals in Rome. Um, Paris? hahahaha.
- Better coffee in Rome, hands down.
- The weather in Rome kicks Paris’ ass. So very much.
- The Pantheon, The Arch? THE Originals are in Rome!
- Rome has less POO on the sidewalks.
- Rome doesn’t smell like pee probably because guys in Italy use the toilets instead of walls and alleys.
- Michaelangelo.
- Leonardo da Vinci.
- The food in Rome was consistently excellent. Yes, you heard me correctly.
- Happier atmosphere.
- The sea is nearby.
- Great seafood.
- Beauty is everywhere.
- Italian is prettier than French. hee!
- Rome is more relaxed.
- Cafe waiters are nice! OMG what a concept, right Paris?
- I gotta say this: Rome has less B.O.
- Gelato
- Cars stop for pedestrians in Rome.
- The Slow Food movement was founded in Rome.
- The Coliseum in Rome was built in 8 years. How long would it take in Paris?
- No bisou politics. A simple one kiss on each cheek in Italy ‘cept starting on the left side.
- Oh please. This list would take me years to complete.
In defense of Paris, I’ll offer these things: 1) Paris is quieter; 2) Paris has more wifi access; 3) Paris pastries are better except perhaps a simple panna cotta ai frutti di bosco; 4) transportation is more extensive but so what; 5) Paris’ marketing is better, which is why so many more people around the world have been brainwashed believe it is the most beautiful city on earth; 6) Parisian women dress better than Roman women; 7) Paris has more cheese.
Spanish: 5 cities Madrid, Buenos Aires, Mexico City, Caracas, Santiago
//
Caracas should not be on any list. It's the most horrible city in Latin America, so much dangers and theft, and one half of the city is in poor and ugly slums. yuck
//
Caracas should not be on any list. It's the most horrible city in Latin America, so much dangers and theft, and one half of the city is in poor and ugly slums. yuck
Rome is, of course, an art-lover's paradise, but one doesn't come here for the modern variety. The city just isn't in the same league with Paris, New York, and London, to name the most obvious places, when it comes to the greatest painting and sculpture from the nineteenth century to the present. Although 70% of the world's recognized art is located in Italy, almost all of it is either ancient, medieval, Renaissance, or baroque. From the eighteenth century onward the focus of Europe's artistic creativity moved steadily northward toward cultural climes -- Holland,Germany, England, France -- that were more conducive to artistic freedom of expression, as the need for the patronage of the Roman Catholic Church -- which had sustained Italian masters for centuries, from Giotto in the fourteenth through Michelangelo and then Bernini in the seventeenth -- became less pronounced and the ability to work independently on painting or sculpture developed into the norm rather than the exception. By about a hundred and fifty years ago,the shift had all but taken place.
<<Caracas should not be on any list. It's the most horrible city in Latin America, so much dangers and theft, and one half of the city is in poor and ugly slums. yuck >>
Caracas is the capital of the country with the largest oil reserves in the world if we add heavy and extra heavy oil
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reservas_de_petr%C3%B3leo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orinoco_Belt
Caracas is the headquarter of one of the most important state oil company in the world PDVSA.
http://www.pdvsa.com/
Caracas have a very important oil financial resources, thanks to the oil and gas of course. (remember that Chavez has buy half of argentinian companies....)
Yes, Caracas is danger but New York also is danger, yes " half of the city is in poor and ugly slums" but ALL MUMBAI IS POOR AND UGLY SLUMS and is a Alpha World City.....
Caracas is the capital of the country with the largest oil reserves in the world if we add heavy and extra heavy oil
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reservas_de_petr%C3%B3leo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orinoco_Belt
Caracas is the headquarter of one of the most important state oil company in the world PDVSA.
http://www.pdvsa.com/
Caracas have a very important oil financial resources, thanks to the oil and gas of course. (remember that Chavez has buy half of argentinian companies....)
Yes, Caracas is danger but New York also is danger, yes " half of the city is in poor and ugly slums" but ALL MUMBAI IS POOR AND UGLY SLUMS and is a Alpha World City.....
" Rome is the nicest town in thw world along with Paris. Rome has more artistic and architectonical heritage than any other town in the world. It's a museum on the open air. Uncomparable with the ugly Madrid. "
Well, Rome might be more "cute" or more interesting than Madrid for those who are seeking for "romantic old world ambiances" (that is the reason why it is often compared to Paris on this point), but it is false to say that it has more artistic and architectonical heritage than any town in the word... even in Italy you find cities with more artistic heritage than Rome: Florence, Venice, etc. beat Rome hands up. What Rome has more than all other cities is... its roman heritage: it is where you can find the most amont of antic ruins. But concerning medieval art, renaissance, Rome is beaten by a huge number of Italian and European cities (including many Spanish ones). Not even speaking about the heritage of more modern times (17th, 18th, 19th or 20th centuries) where the heritage of Rome is comparatively to most cities in Europe is quite reduced.
It is not a surprise, because Rome in the recent history have been a capital since a bit more than one century only (and it is not even the biggest urban area in Italy)... Nothing to see with Madrid, Paris or London which have been major cultural, economic, artistic, colonial and political centers for at least the 5 last centuries.
That is the reason why those three cities are today the biggest in Europe and consider major world cities, and not Rome. That is also the reason why each one of these is also a modern cosmopolitan city linked to its former colonial empire. That is why those cities host majors financial centers in Europe (la défense, canary wharf, AZCA), host the major art museums (Louvre, Prado, British museum), or modern art (Beaubourg, Reina Sofia, Tate modern)... or the biggest shopping zones in Europe (Champs Elysées, Gran via, etc). Nothing like that in Rome exist.
Rome is a very beautiful and charming city (there are plenty others often more artistically interesting in Italy) but it clearly doesn't play in the same group than Madrid or Paris, and actually does not really look like the capital of a 60 million people European country, Milan, Turin or even Naples have more a global city status than Rome.
Well, Rome might be more "cute" or more interesting than Madrid for those who are seeking for "romantic old world ambiances" (that is the reason why it is often compared to Paris on this point), but it is false to say that it has more artistic and architectonical heritage than any town in the word... even in Italy you find cities with more artistic heritage than Rome: Florence, Venice, etc. beat Rome hands up. What Rome has more than all other cities is... its roman heritage: it is where you can find the most amont of antic ruins. But concerning medieval art, renaissance, Rome is beaten by a huge number of Italian and European cities (including many Spanish ones). Not even speaking about the heritage of more modern times (17th, 18th, 19th or 20th centuries) where the heritage of Rome is comparatively to most cities in Europe is quite reduced.
It is not a surprise, because Rome in the recent history have been a capital since a bit more than one century only (and it is not even the biggest urban area in Italy)... Nothing to see with Madrid, Paris or London which have been major cultural, economic, artistic, colonial and political centers for at least the 5 last centuries.
That is the reason why those three cities are today the biggest in Europe and consider major world cities, and not Rome. That is also the reason why each one of these is also a modern cosmopolitan city linked to its former colonial empire. That is why those cities host majors financial centers in Europe (la défense, canary wharf, AZCA), host the major art museums (Louvre, Prado, British museum), or modern art (Beaubourg, Reina Sofia, Tate modern)... or the biggest shopping zones in Europe (Champs Elysées, Gran via, etc). Nothing like that in Rome exist.
Rome is a very beautiful and charming city (there are plenty others often more artistically interesting in Italy) but it clearly doesn't play in the same group than Madrid or Paris, and actually does not really look like the capital of a 60 million people European country, Milan, Turin or even Naples have more a global city status than Rome.
Nobody includes Madrid amongst the most interesting and beautiful cities. I'm sorry but some friends of mine from different countries agree with me. Spain is a nice country but Madrid is rathar ugly. The Prado is a nice museum but the town sucks. Most people prefer Barcelona, Seville, Granada, Toledo, Salamanca and so on.
" I think Rome might possibly be better than Paris. I know. Those are fightin’ words. Maybe I’m still under the magical spell of one of the most amazing cities EVER (Rome, that is), but for the life of me, I can’t help but wonder why the hell on earth Paris is the most visited city in the world, while Rome is in a distant 5th place? That totally baffles the mind. Rome RULEZ – and Paris is totally overrated!!!!! "
It is just that Paris and Rome are not playing in the same category. both have in common to be mainly historic cities with a lot of character and specific ambiances that we usually call "romantic". But that stop these.
Rome is a very good city in that way, Paris might not be as much impressive (in your opinion, that still can be subjective), but Paris is much more than that: it is the most populated urban area in all Europe! (12 million people), Rome in comparision seems like a provincial city.
Rome is beautiful but lacks the internationalness, cosmopolitan life, economical importance (Milan is the economical capital of Italy), modernity and the contemporary artistic and cultural influence that Paris have. Paris is not just a "romantic" little city as many people think: if some many people comes to Paris it is for further reasons:
- it is a touristic "romantic" and historic city
- it is a major aerial hub in Europe
- it host the biggest business district in Europe
- It host one of the major historical and modern art museums in Europe
- It has 12 million inhabitants, many comunities from all the world
well, if Paris is so visited it is because it add the touristic attractiveness that Rome has, to the business, modern and international attractiveness that London has. Paris might not be has good as Rome or London in each of these categories (which can be contested), but the fact of accumulating both in one urban area makes it the most visited city in the world.
It is just that Paris and Rome are not playing in the same category. both have in common to be mainly historic cities with a lot of character and specific ambiances that we usually call "romantic". But that stop these.
Rome is a very good city in that way, Paris might not be as much impressive (in your opinion, that still can be subjective), but Paris is much more than that: it is the most populated urban area in all Europe! (12 million people), Rome in comparision seems like a provincial city.
Rome is beautiful but lacks the internationalness, cosmopolitan life, economical importance (Milan is the economical capital of Italy), modernity and the contemporary artistic and cultural influence that Paris have. Paris is not just a "romantic" little city as many people think: if some many people comes to Paris it is for further reasons:
- it is a touristic "romantic" and historic city
- it is a major aerial hub in Europe
- it host the biggest business district in Europe
- It host one of the major historical and modern art museums in Europe
- It has 12 million inhabitants, many comunities from all the world
well, if Paris is so visited it is because it add the touristic attractiveness that Rome has, to the business, modern and international attractiveness that London has. Paris might not be has good as Rome or London in each of these categories (which can be contested), but the fact of accumulating both in one urban area makes it the most visited city in the world.
<<Nobody includes Madrid amongst the most interesting and beautiful cities.>>
I do.
Madrid, Barcelona y Sevilla son las tres ciudades españolas más visitadas en viajes culturales, seguidas de Granada, Bilbao, Córdoba, San Sebastián y Toledo, según el Estudio de Productos Turísticos del Instituto de Turismo de España (Turespaña), dado a conocer en un comunicado.
http://www.hosteltur.com/noticias/12495_espana-madrid-barcelona-sevilla-son-tres-ciudades-espanolas-mas-visitadas-su-oferta-cultural.html
I do.
Madrid, Barcelona y Sevilla son las tres ciudades españolas más visitadas en viajes culturales, seguidas de Granada, Bilbao, Córdoba, San Sebastián y Toledo, según el Estudio de Productos Turísticos del Instituto de Turismo de España (Turespaña), dado a conocer en un comunicado.
http://www.hosteltur.com/noticias/12495_espana-madrid-barcelona-sevilla-son-tres-ciudades-espanolas-mas-visitadas-su-oferta-cultural.html
Madrid not only has El Prado, but many more museums: Thyssen Museum, which is among the most important private collections in the world, Museo Reina Sofía, that hosts masterpieces of contemporary art like "El Gernica", Museo Arqueológico Nacional, with Iberian indigenous sculptures , etc... There is no city in Spain with so many museums.
I agree Caracas shouldn't be on that list, it is a small city, it doesn't get any international events (Unlike Madrid, Mexico City or Sao Paulo), and finally it isn't even a rich city.
Au revoir.
Au revoir.