Traveling Light

For travelers who grew up in major urban areas, global cities are instinctive dream-destinations — but my appreciation for metropolitan travel came fairly late in life. Growing up in a mid-sized Midwestern town, my initial association with cities came not from travel, but from Olympic venues and sports franchises. For years I thought Green Bay was a major American metropolis, and — given a choice in my younger days — I generally preferred camping to clubbing. In time, however, my wanderings in North America and beyond taught me to appreciate cities as places where commerce booms, cultures meet, traditions are challenged, lives are reinvented, and the brightest students and artists from the provinces gather to pursue excellence.  Moreover, I discovered that even sitting passively in a city center could provide (in philosopher Paul Tillich's words) "what otherwise could only be given by traveling: namely the strange."

A few months ago, Lonely Planet published The Cities Book, a coffee-table book ranking the 200 best cities in the world.  Paris, New York, Sydney, Barcelona, London, Rome, San Francisco, Bangkok, Cape Town, and Istanbul make up the top ten — and dozens of other cities, from the famous (Los Angeles; Buenos Aires; Tokyo) to the obscure (Nuuk, Greenland; Bled, Slovenia) occupy the rest of the list. 

Naturally, any ranking of world cities is bound to be somewhat arbitrary, and the book makes no claim to methodological inerrancy (the cities were selected by travelers, using an online survey at LonelyPlanet.com). Each city is described in terms of "personality" (using factors like anatomy, strengths, weaknesses, and defining experiences), and the book reads less like an almanac or a scholarly survey than an enticing roundup of possible blind dates.

Indeed, half the charm in reading The City Book comes not in noting its facts, but in pondering its opinions.  Is Vancouver really a better world city than Montreal?  Does Desperately Seeking Susan deserve to be on a list of movies that capture the essence of New York — especially when Annie Hall is absent?  Do virtually unlivable cities like Pyongyang and Khartoum merit their ranking in the top 200?  Can pirated DVDs really be considered one of Bangkok's strengths? 

Since the joy in any discussion of world cities comes in arguing from one's own, subjective experience, here's my quick take on the rankings from The Cities Book:

Agree

Jerusalem

Perhaps because it's not a center of commerce (or perhaps because it's the focus of so much cross-cultural contention) Jerusalem is often left off lists of classic world cities. I was glad to see that it made the top 20 (19th, actually) in The Cities Book.  Jerusalem may be famously revered by three major religions, but you don't have to be religious to appreciate the beauty and historical resonance of this ancient Levantine city.

Moscow and St. Petersburg

These Russian cities (ranked 61st and 57th, respectively) don't often make it onto the itineraries of Europe travelers, but I consider them to be among the most impressive cities on the continent.  Summer is a great time to visit, as Russians out enjoying the warm weather lend both cities' public squares an infectious energy. 

Paris and New York

I avoided these two classic world cities early in my travel career, for fear of disappointment.  When I finally saw them, I wished I'd visited earlier.  Though there can be much to dispute in any ranking system, it's hard to dispute the attractions and virtues that put these two cities at the top of the list.

Disagree

Delhi

Delhi, ranked 60th, is an iconic Indian city — but in my book, it's a bland burg compared to the Hindu holy town of Varanasi (72nd), which is one of the oldest cities in the world.  In Varanasi, the sacred rituals acted out on shores of the Ganges are nearly identical to what visitors saw when India was a contemporary of classical Egypt and Greece thousands of years ago. 

Mexico City

I'm sure Mexico City garnered a 29th ranking due to the fact that it's a quintessential megacity — but for my money, Beijing (63rd) is more dynamic, Seoul (85th) is easier to navigate, and Cairo (32nd) is more hospitable.  Of course, I've never had to drive through Beijing, Seoul, or Cairo, whereas my 2004 Mexico City driving experience still gives me nightmares.

The Cities Book ($50) is published by Lonely Planet.

Next: A literary window on deepest Siberia

Previous: Cheap adventures on the high seas

• Email Story
• Printable View

RECOMMEND THIS STORY

Recommend It:

Not at All Somewhat Moderately Highly Very Highly

Average (Not Rated)

» Recommended Stories