Mr. Postman states that at different times in the history of the U.S different cities have been the focal point of the nation's spirit. He then goes on to give three examples, Boston for the revolutionary age and Chicago for the industrial age. He then states Las Vegas should represent the Entertainment age. But why not L.A? L.A is the entertainment capital of the world, after all.
Just a few links to reinforce my point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_shows_set_in_Los_Angeles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_in_Los_Angeles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_set_in_Los_Angeles
The studios of prominent TV shows like The Tonight Show and Dancing With the Stars are situated in LA, and so many movies are filmed here. There are many recording studios here as well. LA is also the home of many well-known sports teams, such as the Dodgers, LA Kings of the NHL, the Clippers, the Lakers(subordinate to the Celtics), The USC Trojans, The UCLA Bruins, and the Galaxy of MLS. My point is I can't help but wonder if LA would make a better candidate to represent the Entertainment Age. After all, Las Vegas is dedicated mostly to the art of gambling. LA to the media and entertainment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I do not agree you with you Raul G.,
ReplyDeleteYes L.A. is an entertaining place of business and show business and hard work and making a pay check...but Las Vegas takes the cake in my opinion. L.A. is more of a "watching" kind of stimulation, where things are "filmed" and "recorded" to "watch" but Las Vegas is more interactive, with, yes, gambling and money but with live shows you can actually attend and theme parks for family and activities, museums and themed art shows. L.A. I think is more T.V.-ish and busy and Las vegas is the place to go to have some real fun and tourism. I guess what I am proposing is that if I had to choose where I'd like to vacation to have a great time for a week (between L.A. and Las Vegas) I'd choose Las Vegas. Where things happen there and stays there.
"live shows you can actually attend and theme parks for family and activities, museums and themed art shows"
ReplyDeleteAll of which are not absent from LA.
I agree with you Raul. I have not quite
ReplyDeleteunderstood as to why Postman keeps referring to Las Vegas whenever he gives an example of a place of entertainment and show business. If one asks a foreign tourist where the entertainment capital of the United States is, I am pretty confident that the tourist would say "Los Angeles!" or "Hollywood!" or to be even more specific, "Universal Studios!" I concur with Breahna that Las Vegas offers numerous comedy shows, circus performances, indoor arcades and theme parks. But so does Los Angeles. It is sensible to say that southern California citizens like ourselves would choose to visit Las Vegas over Los Angeles simply because we are basically already here! Disneyland, Universal Studios, Columbia Pictures, and Hollywood are only a few miles away. In my opinion Los Angeles, which covers Hollywood, one of the biggest entertainment destinations in the world besides Bollywood, should be given credit for being a huge part of the entertainment world.
I agree with you Louise Angeles, I am not from California and I have only lived here for a couple years but just because I am already here doesn't make it any more exciting, though. But But I see your point of view and can agree to an extent. I love Bollywood and it should be noticed for a chunk of entertainment age just as much as L.A., although L.A. is fairly popular.
ReplyDeleteAs for Raul, yes all of what I've said is not absent from L.A., but Las Vegas is just too different in my opinion. I respect your opinion, I just don't fully agree, that is all.
I agree with you Raul. As I was reading this section, I was expecting Los Angeles to be mentioned rather than Las Vegas. I was quite shocked when I turned the page and Postman had moved on from the subject with the name "Los Angeles" no where in sight. Many times when I have family from out of the country visit America, destinations that come to their mind include Disneyland, Los Angeles, and Hollywood. As a fellow Southern California resident I sound biased, but because I do come from the Los Angeles, I can honestly say that Los Angeles is truly an entertaining city.
ReplyDeleteAt first I agreed with you Raul, but as I reread the section on the influential cities I understood Postman’s reasoning. Postman’s book is based on entertainment right? And he says, “Las Vegas is a city entirely devoted to the idea of entertainment”. You never hear of people who dream of moving to Las Vegas to become chemical engineers. People move to Las Vegas for the entertainment. And although Los Angeles offers a lot of material to the entertainment world, I think that Los Angeles has a lot more to offer than simply entertainment. Los Angeles is not dedicated to only entertainment because L.A. has a stronger influence in the political, economical, and social worlds than Las Vegas.
ReplyDeleteSo I guess my main point is that Las Vegas specialized in entertainment because it had to. Without entertainment Las Vegas would not be much of a city. While on the other hand Las Angeles, although having a strong influence in the entertainment world, plays an important part in the political, economical, and social areas of life, and so did not, and does not need to focus all of its attention on entertainment.
I agree. When I think of Las Vegas, my mind begins to think of boring hotels with adults gambling, drinking and smoking. It may be entertaining to adults. But, children and teens? No! L.A. is the entertainment central. L.A. is more family friendly than Vegas.
ReplyDelete