Back from Chicago. I am now officially looking for a big city that's land locked and is not located on the shores of an ocean. And yes, I count lake Michigan as an ocean because its just plain stupid to name a water body as large as that , a lake. I have visited San Fransisco , Boston , NY City , now Chicago, Orlando. Okie so the last one doesn't count, but I have to show the numbers to make my point, so I'll keep it there. Apart from the ocean view, there are very many things that are common to these cities and especially the downtown areas. Each has a couple of really really HIGH rises, which invariably have an observatory on the 86th, 91st ,106th floors, take your pick, with a breathtaking view of the surroundings for nocturnal and general viewing pleasures. Each has a huge public open space, NYC has central park, Chicago has Grant Park which the respective locals claim to be the best ever in the history of mankind. Each has a boat cruise that goes around the city inducing ohhhs and ahhhs from the unsuspecting commuters for the absolutely amazing skyline that the city has to offer. And all of them claim to be the hubs of culture and trade, every last one of them people. The unseen, namely the LA's and San Diego's and Seattle's might be no different either. But I guess its the subtle differences in this similarity that attract the hoards of tourists to throng to these cities. NYC has its times square. San Fransisco has its Golden Gate Bridge. Chicago has its Navy Pier.
I just can't stop myself from making this comparison now. Even if this just stems from my inner vice in proving that why India is better. Indian cities, Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata, Bangaloroo or whatever its name is ,are poles apart from each other in all respects. Though each of them is a cosmopolitan with people of all backgrounds calling it their home every one of them has its own distinct localized influence. May it be with the dialect, the food, the commute or the people themselves. Mumbai has its bhel puri, bambiyaa slangs ,and the infamous locals. Delhi has its chole bhature, its clean hindi obscenities, and the deadly blue line buses. Kolkata has its macher jhol, nomoshkaar, and the trams. So on and so forth. They are all so different and so rich in their own distinct cultures.
Coming back to Chicago though. It indeed is a beautiful place and I liked it a lot. The current visit was an official trip but it also was a reconnaissance mission on behalf of my strategic command post in jersey city, read my wife. The foot soldier had gone to scout for locations to plunder in Chicago and the foot part was proved right to the T. I am literally half an inch shorter than my original height due to all the walking that I have done in that one afternoon and evening. I stand now at 5' 11 and a half ''. Yes I am not a 6 footer now.
PS: Neha dearest ignore the strategic command post line, you are no tyrannical general. I don't know who wrote that part. I love you!!
I just can't stop myself from making this comparison now. Even if this just stems from my inner vice in proving that why India is better. Indian cities, Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata, Bangaloroo or whatever its name is ,are poles apart from each other in all respects. Though each of them is a cosmopolitan with people of all backgrounds calling it their home every one of them has its own distinct localized influence. May it be with the dialect, the food, the commute or the people themselves. Mumbai has its bhel puri, bambiyaa slangs ,and the infamous locals. Delhi has its chole bhature, its clean hindi obscenities, and the deadly blue line buses. Kolkata has its macher jhol, nomoshkaar, and the trams. So on and so forth. They are all so different and so rich in their own distinct cultures.
Coming back to Chicago though. It indeed is a beautiful place and I liked it a lot. The current visit was an official trip but it also was a reconnaissance mission on behalf of my strategic command post in jersey city, read my wife. The foot soldier had gone to scout for locations to plunder in Chicago and the foot part was proved right to the T. I am literally half an inch shorter than my original height due to all the walking that I have done in that one afternoon and evening. I stand now at 5' 11 and a half ''. Yes I am not a 6 footer now.
PS: Neha dearest ignore the strategic command post line, you are no tyrannical general. I don't know who wrote that part. I love you!!