How do we lose the 'boring & dull' stereotype?

[Will]

If we are going to be pedantic, then Melbourne is 3.46 times larger than us. Regardless, it does not devalue my arguement. Melbourne is still much larger than us, and is thus not comparable to us.

But then Melbourne and Adelaide were similar sizes not that many years ago...A simple comparison on "lessons learned" is in order i believe...

Wayno, I think you have confused Brisbane or Perth with Melbourne, because like Rev said, we haven't had a similar population to Melbourne since the 1840's.

[Wayno]

Wayne - I fear it is too late. Adelaide / SA does not have the money (either in Government coffers, or in private businesses) to salvage the situation. Notwithstanding current efforts to increase population.

The ability (and willingness) of the Govt to spend cash is indeed the major component here, hence there being so much interest in the flow-on benefits from the emerging mining/defence industries. However, the cultural/image benefits from those industries (that is, when people will actually start noticing the impact and feeling proud about it) is still a couple of years away.

In my opinion, there is no "big bang" approach to losing the boring/dull stereotype, just lots of incremental steps. The question being how many increments are required before the stereotype starts to fade?

[Wayno]

If we are going to be pedantic, then Melbourne is 3.46 times larger than us. Regardless, it does not devalue my arguement. Melbourne is still much larger than us, and is thus not comparable to us.

But then Melbourne and Adelaide were similar sizes not that many years ago...A simple comparison on "lessons learned" is in order i believe...

Wayno, I think you have confused Brisbane or Perth with Melbourne, because like Rev said, we haven't had a similar population to Melbourne since the 1840's.

yep, my mistake. Still, lessons can be learned from everywhere - big or small...

[rhino]

If we are going to be pedantic, then Melbourne is 3.46 times larger than us. Regardless, it does not devalue my arguement. Melbourne is still much larger than us, and is thus not comparable to us.

But then Melbourne and Adelaide were similar sizes not that many years ago...A simple comparison on "lessons learned" is in order i believe...

Wayno, I think you have confused Brisbane or Perth with Melbourne, because like Rev said, we haven't had a similar population to Melbourne since the 1840's.

Hmmm......that would make me the Reverand Rhino?

[Will]

Such comparisons are unhelpful. In fact they are quite stupid. You are conviniently forgetting that Melbourne is 4 times larger than us!

:wank:

Er Will, you need the comparison. There is no darkness without light; no hot without cold. How else do you think people come to the conclusion that Adelaide is 'boring and dull' - they are comparing it with something. And most punters are comparing it with Melbourne because most of the punters have been there.

Would you care to list other urban agglomerations of Adelaide's population and population densisty ? Would comparisons with those places be acceptable ?

I do not deny that people, particualrly the young compare Adelaide to Melbourne. But just because people do so, does not mean it is right. It is unhelpful, self-defeating and masochistic to make such comaprisons because we will always come second. And this does not mean Adelaide is a bad city, it is simply a reflection that a city which is 3.46 times larger than us will have a larger population to warrant more shopping, entertainment and sporting venues. Not to mention a larger economy and tax base from which to build infraestructure. Likewise if you were to comapre the general 'buzz' of Melbourne to that of a city like Paris or London, Melbourne would come second too. Likewise at the other end if you were to compare the general 'buzz' of places like Canberra to Adelaide, Canberra would always come second.

It is ridiculous to compare things which belong in different categories to each other.

If you can't resist making comparisons, at least compare us with cities our size; i.e. Brisbane, Perth and Auckland in our region and places such as Edmonton, Winnipeg and Austin in North America.

[Will]

Hmmm......that would make me the Reverand Rhino?

[Wayno]

I do not deny that people, particualrly the young compare Adelaide to Melbourne....

It is ridiculous to compare things which belong in different categories to each other....

If you can't resist making comparisons, at least compare us with cities our size; i.e. Brisbane, Perth and Auckland in our region and places such as Edmonton, Winnipeg and Austin in North America.

I'm far from young, but also feel it appropriate to make comparisons to other cities larger than Adelaide - Melbourne included. Why is this wrong? all depends what we (or I in this case) personally want Adelaide to become.

Don't get me wrong, attempting to clone melbourne is not what i want (and we've all seen enough reference to federation square on S-A to last 5 lifetimes). It simply makes good sense to compare yourself against what you like, borrow ideas, be innovative, and play a niche game that exploits your own assets...

[Will]

I do not deny that people, particualrly the young compare Adelaide to Melbourne....

It is ridiculous to compare things which belong in different categories to each other....

If you can't resist making comparisons, at least compare us with cities our size; i.e. Brisbane, Perth and Auckland in our region and places such as Edmonton, Winnipeg and Austin in North America.

I'm far from young, but also feel it appropriate to make comparisons to other cities larger than Adelaide - Melbourne included. Why is this wrong? all depends what we (or I in this case) personally want Adelaide to become.

Don't get me wrong, attempting to clone melbourne is not what i want (and we've all seen enough reference to federation square on S-A to last 5 lifetimes). It simply makes good sense to compare yourself against what you like, borrow ideas, be innovative, and play a niche game that exploits your own assets...

I am not saying don't get inspiration from other cities. What I am saying is dont make silly and sweeping comparisons such as comparing the nightlife, shopping, infraestructure etc with places that are much larger than us.

[Dr Rudi]

I do not deny that people, particualrly the young compare Adelaide to Melbourne.
If you can't resist making comparisons, at least compare us with cities our size; i.e. Brisbane, Perth and Auckland in our region and places such as Edmonton, Winnipeg and Austin in North America.

Er, WIll. It's not about being unable to resist comparisons. You started this thread lamenting the 'boring and dull' stereotype. That comes from a comparision (whether you like it or not). Your best ideas regarded height limits and council amalgamations. There is no evidence to suggest that those factors lead people to the 'boring and dull' conclusion. (Read the reports). And, without saying it yourself - you must be making a comparison with other cities on height limits and local government arrangments.

And the comparisons won't always have Adelaide second - it depends on what we're assessing. The lifestyle (if you want relaxed, comfortable and an easier pace); housing affordability; and lower living costs are all factors on which Adelaide would come first. But in choosing a city in which to live, how do those factors stack up against work and career opportunities, job mobility, a broad range of social and cultural activities?

The research shows that people living in Melbourne or Sydney want all the things those cities offer, without the problems. You can argue whether they are right or not to make that comparison - it doesn't matter - it's called consumer choice.

As for Perth and Brisbane (since you are allowing these comparisons) - both have much better transport infrastructure than Adelaide. Brisbane is a seriously happening place, and even if you dismiss the 'Brisvegas' tag as being slightly tacky, it does mean that it is neither dull nor boring. Perth has a real vibe of activity, even if I find it a bit 'insular' as a City, but you can't help but notice there is plenty happening there.

Please understand, it's not the buildings, it's what's in them. Businesses to give those young people their first, second and third jobs so they don't move interstate. We don't need a Guggenheim, you need the art work in the building to get people to go. I travel interstate to see theatre, art, and music performances - I don't go because of the builing it's in - I go because it's happening there.

[Will]

I do not deny that people, particualrly the young compare Adelaide to Melbourne.
If you can't resist making comparisons, at least compare us with cities our size; i.e. Brisbane, Perth and Auckland in our region and places such as Edmonton, Winnipeg and Austin in North America.

Er, WIll. It's not about being unable to resist comparisons. You started this thread lamenting the 'boring and dull' stereotype. That comes from a comparision (whether you like it or not). Your best ideas regarded height limits and council amalgamations. There is no evidence to suggest that those factors lead people to the 'boring and dull' conclusion. (Read the reports). And, without saying it yourself - you must be making a comparison with other cities on height limits and local government arrangments.

And the comparisons won't always have Adelaide second - it depends on what we're assessing. The lifestyle (if you want relaxed, comfortable and an easier pace); housing affordability; and lower living costs are all factors on which Adelaide would come first. But in choosing a city in which to live, how do those factors stack up against work and career opportunities, job mobility, a broad range of social and cultural activities?

The research shows that people living in Melbourne or Sydney want all the things those cities offer, without the problems. You can argue whether they are right or not to make that comparison - it doesn't matter - it's called consumer choice.

As for Perth and Brisbane (since you are allowing these comparisons) - both have much better transport infrastructure than Adelaide. Brisbane is a seriously happening place, and even if you dismiss the 'Brisvegas' tag as being slightly tacky, it does mean that it is neither dull nor boring. Perth has a real vibe of activity, even if I find it a bit 'insular' as a City, but you can't help but notice there is plenty happening there.

Please understand, it's not the buildings, it's what's in them. Businesses to give those young people their first, second and third jobs so they don't move interstate. We don't need a Guggenheim, you need the art work in the building to get people to go. I travel interstate to see theatre, art, and music performances - I don't go because of the builing it's in - I go because it's happening there.

I'm not really sure what you are arguing. I started this thread as a brainstorming initiative to generate ideas as to how we can improve our image.

However the general vibe I am getting from your posts is that every city in Australia is better than Adelaide. In fact you have not offered solutions, just criticism as to why you don't like living here. Which begs the question, why are you still here?

[rhino]

I'm not really sure what you are arguing. I started this thread as a brainstorming initiative to generate ideas as to how we can improve our image.

However the general vibe I am getting from your posts is that every city in Australia is better than Adelaide. In fact you have not offered solutions, just criticism as to why you don't like living here. Which begs the question, why are you still here?

Will, that's rather unfair. Dr Rudi has said several times in his few posts that to improve our image, we need to improve what goes on inside the buildings, rather than just build new buildings.


"I travel interstate to see theatre, art, and music performances - I don't go because of the builing it's in - I go because it's happening there."

"Why not spread some of the load of 'mad March' throughout the year? Couldn't Womadelaide work in October ? Where are Adelaide's exlcusive art seasons ? Art Deco - part of Melbourne's 'Winter Masterpieces'. Vanity Fair photographs ? Canberra only. The Archibald Prize tours regional Australia - and not Adelaide. Monet and the Impressionists from Boston Gallery ? Sorry, Sydney only. Tracey Emin - sorry, Sydney only. So, let's shift a few existing events in the calendar, and let's get some exclusives to Adelaide."

What are these, if not "ideas as to how we can improve our image"?

People are not going to come here to look at buildings. They are going to come to experience something. The V8 Supercar race is an example. We don't need a big new racetrack, just a brilliantly run event. Womadelaide doesn't need a purpose-built venue, it's the event itself that makes it great. Dr Rudi is saying that rather than build things to make people want to come here, we should get them here by offering top quality in the events that bring people to the city. It's a brilliant idea for how to improve our image. More events, and run them well.

[Will]

Where has this notion come that I am proposing building 'iconic' buildings?

I have not made such a statement, hence the reason why I am confused as to the direction this debate is taking. I have made a sugestion to build a Guggenheim Museum, however at no point did I state that people would come to Aelaide to admire the structure. People would come to admire what is inside the museum. I never stated otherwise.

[Will]

People are not going to come here to look at buildings. They are going to come to experience something. The V8 Supercar race is an example. We don't need a big new racetrack, just a brilliantly run event. Womadelaide doesn't need a purpose-built venue, it's the event itself that makes it great. Dr Rudi is saying that rather than build things to make people want to come here, we should get them here by offering top quality in the events that bring people to the city. It's a brilliant idea for how to improve our image. More events, and run them well.

Well if that is what Dr. Rudi is saying then I agree with him. However he has a rather negative way of saying it.

[rhino]

Where has this notion come that I am proposing building 'iconic' buildings?

From here. OK, you're saying we need to update the photo, but why? To show that we have more buildings here now.

The single most effect way is to have a continually changing skyline, or at the very least, some regular updates. The fact that the view from Montefiore Hill has barely change since the 80’s is the main reason why interstaters think Adelaide is dull. The skyline is dull and boring – the city is dull and boring. It is the only view that they associate with the place.

I agree. That is why it is imperative that this image be removed from the main Adelaide page on Wikipedia:



It should be replaced by an image taken from a viewpoint which better reflects the density of the CBD but also features some of the new buildings which have gone up (which aren't seen from Light's Lookout).

TooFar's notion that "The single most effect way is to have a continually changing skyline, or at the very least, some regular updates" is flawed. People are not going to come to Adelaide to check out our continually changing skyline. We have to bring them here to experience something, which will then make them want to experience something else, and then something else ....

[Will]

Where has this notion come that I am proposing building 'iconic' buildings?

From here. OK, you're saying we need to update the photo, but why? To show that we have more buildings here now.

The single most effect way is to have a continually changing skyline, or at the very least, some regular updates. The fact that the view from Montefiore Hill has barely change since the 80’s is the main reason why interstaters think Adelaide is dull. The skyline is dull and boring – the city is dull and boring. It is the only view that they associate with the place.

I agree. That is why it is imperative that this image be removed from the main Adelaide page on Wikipedia:



It should be replaced by an image taken from a viewpoint which better reflects the density of the CBD but also features some of the new buildings which have gone up (which aren't seen from Light's Lookout).

TooFar's notion that "The single most effect way is to have a continually changing skyline, or at the very least, some regular updates" is flawed. People are not going to come to Adelaide to check out our continually changing skyline. We have to bring them here to experience something, which will then make them want to experience something else, and then something else ....

The reason for this thread is to brainstorm ideas on how to lose our negative image, and not 'how do we attract more tourists to Adelaide'. (although bringing more tourist to Adelaide is a great idea, but not the focus of this thread)
I, at no point have suggested that people will come to Adelaide to view our new buildings. The reason why I suggest removing that photo is because it was taken in 2007, and the problem is that it could have been taken in 1991, and bar the change in signs on some buildings, the skyline looks the same! This generates a negative image for the city, because people will assume that because the skyline has not changed the city must be backwards, stagnated and dull. I strongly believe that Perth's modern and dynamic skyline subcontiously saves people from calling Perth dull.

I understand that people do not travel to marvel at new buildings. But what I do understand is that people's perceptions about a place are influenced by what they see. The fact that our skyline from Light's Lookout has changed very little since 1991 unfortunately re-inforces peoples perception that nothing much changes in Adelaide. That is why I think it would be a good idea to replace that photo with one from a vantage point which shows that Adelaide has indeed changed since 1991.