Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] New Orleans.. RIP?

["Paul Slusarz" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jonathan King" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
To: "MLUG Off-Topic Discussion" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 10:35 AM
Subject: Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] New Orleans.. RIP?

: I'm not a fan of "historic value" because it leads people to
a weird
: kind of nostalgia that can doesn't really help much as the
world spins
: on.

The whole science of studying the human past could be summed up
that way ;-)

: When I lived in Pittsburgh, people talked about the Historic
: Value of the rusted hulks of abandoned steel mills.  And,
sure, one or
: two of them were worth preserving, but most of it was just
taking up
: space and oozing heavy metals into the soil and the river.

There's value in the stretch of a landscape itself. St. Louis
riverfront for instance the large part has a turn of the
century industrial look to it, that'd be good to preserve. I'm
aware that in 1901 every city's riverfront looked like that,
but how many cities managed to preserve that look 100 years
later? I don't know if this applies to Pittsburgh mills or not,
since I've never seen them.

: I'm kind of a free market guy in this regard.  What cities do
people
: actually like to go to on vacation?  On that scale, N.O. >>>
St. Louis
: > (KC, Houston).  Maybe more people go to Houston than I'm
imagining,
: but N.O. is a *top* tourist draw,  and that means that people
aren't
: putting it in the same category as KC, STL, or Houston.

I disagree. Another unique gem on US soil is Cahokia (near St.
Louis), and it doesn't get much tourist attention. While we're
at underappreciated gems in St. Louis, whoever gets a chance
should drop by St. Louis basilica for the mosaics.

Paul


_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion