I saw that on a trip when I was an immature 13 so it still had a “tee hee” factor for me.
I’ve seen many of the monuments in this thread, and I wasn’t disappointed in any of them.
One attraction that did have me saying “That’s IT?!!” was Tara in Ireland. It’s the basis of the name of the plantation in Gone With The Wind. I’d read about it in Celtic stories and myth. It’s an ancient center of government and hall of kings.
We got there and saw — a few hills. No structures. A couple of entraces to underground chambers (themselves really small), that were barred. And a hill with a standing stone in the top. Which turned out to be a replacement.
there was an old church with a slideshow nearby, but (apologies to whatshername0 there didn’t seem to be any THERE there.
Other Irish sites were well worth the visit – Newgrange, Rock of Cashel, Gallarus Oratory. But if you hadn’t heard or read of Tara beforehand, you’d never think that the degraded hills there had any significance.
Did you at least get to see the basement?
Marc
I’ve seen the Alamo several times. Maybe it’s just because I’ve had to go there every time we visit Texas since I was a baby and so I automatically associate it with being very very bored, but I hate it.
The St. Louis arch I just don’t get. It’s fun to go up in it and look out, but I wouldn’t travel to St. Louis to see it.
The Sears Tower. woohoo, a big tall building. look at it, it’s… wait for it… TALL. what else is special about it? well, it’s… REALLY tall. It’s the sourt of tourist attraction where the kids are done after about four minutes but the parents somehow manage to fill two hours.
No, please don’t take one of those infernal helicopter rides, which ruin the experience for everyone else. They should have been banned years ago.
I’d much rather hear you say, “The Grand Canyon just didn’t do it for me”, and not go back, then to have you ride in one of those godawful 'copters.
When I first began working in and around DC, I was significantly underwhelmed by the Washington Monument. I expected it to be far taller and striking. From the east end of the Mall around the Capitol, it’s a toothpick.
Over time, and with familiarity, I’ve gotten to the point where I find it to be pretty cool. It’s still not as tall as I’d hoped, but for a simple obelisk, it has presence.
One DC site that I can’t stand, and just want to yell at tourists for gawking over, is the White House. Gates obstruct the view and keep people much too far away on both the North and the South Lawns, and the building’s architecture really isn’t very impressive, anyway. It’s white, it has columns, it’s not remarkably different from old Classical buildings on dozens of East Coast college campuses. What’s worse is that, of the two views, the South Lawn is far better, with a fountain and nicely framed by trees, but most tourists opt to view the North Lawn, presumably because it’s the front door of the structure, and they have this delusion they’ll gey-it ta see ta Prezeedent. Hell, the Old Executive Office Building next door is far more impressive to look at.
The Alamo’s church was never finished. And the mission compound has, of course, had a checkered history, although urban development destroyed more than Santa Ana did.The Second Flying Company of Alamo de Parras tells more of the story.
The other San Antonio missions give more context. Our Texas missions were not strung out like the ones in California; several in San Antonio had been moved from East Texas. If you’ve visited East Texas & The Hill Country, you probably understand why.
The Alamo’s position in the center of San Antonio shows the historical roots of the city. Next time you’re there, drop by the Menger Hotel–right next door!
I first visited just after seeing Disney’s version of Davy Crockett’s life. But the Alamo did not disappoint. Seeing something so ancient (by Texas standards) and so “Catholic” stuck in the middle of a Texas city gave my little heart a thrill. There was more history behind my state than was evident in my little ex-town on the Old Galveston Road.
Disneyworld.
I was ten years old when I went and I clearly remember thinking, “this place is awful and I want to go home”.
What, I’m not entitled to an opinion in this thread?
Thanks, ferret herder–I still get twitches thinking back on our ill-advised visit to the House On The Rock. Jesus christ, the endless maze of collected crap you had to go through to escape! There was no way out but to go through it all.
I feel like a heel admitting it, but I really didn’t care for the WWII memorial (recently built in DC). it’s all so… I dunno, orderly? It’s like, “Oh, look, a column with a state’s name on it. And there are 49 more just like it. This side is for the Pacific theater…and over there, its perfect twin, the European theater…” It’s as if everything had its little marker, its little slice of representation within the design, but there is so much sameness. It’s nicely designed in that it is appealing to the eye, and the contrast between the light stone and the metalwork is nice, but it didn’t convey any real sense of meaning to me, and I think that’s unfortunate. And in a real twisted sense of irony, it reminded me of that documentary “The Architecture of Doom” which depicted how Hitler wanted orderly, rigid, classical architecture to convey his values for his vision of Germany. Yikes.
Sounds like the place has been let to go (heh!) downhill since Jordan sold it in 1988. I’ve been there - ca. 1983 - well before the “Infinity Room” was added, and evidently before the great cramming-in of stuff and tacking-on of outbuildings. Too bad. It was an interesting place back then.
You’re not alone, I felt rather underwhelmed when I saw it. In fact, before I went to DC this last time, I read that the monument cost something like $197 million dollars to build, so my expectations were high. It’s neat, but that thing sure as hell ain’t $197 million dollars neat. I can’t find the numbers now, but the USMC Memorial by Arlington (which I think is a very cool memorial) was much, much, much, MUCH cheaper. So was the Vietnam and Korean War Memorials.
And you also aren’t the only one who thought, “Man, this construction and rigidness sure is reminiscent of something else I recall seeing from the war. . .”
Without a doubt, the biggest waste of time and money I have ever spent. It is god-awfully expensive, hot, humid, and everything is miles apart. The lines are long and the rides are short and boring for anyone who has ever been to another amusement park. The characters and buildings are cheesy. I spent over $2000 taking my two daughters there for five days, and the last two days we just spent at the water park.
For what it’s worth, I agree. I still love it and everything but it’s nothing special for me.
The Statue of Liberty, in New York, was definitely not overrated to me. I went on the ferry tour and got chills just looking at it from some thirty feet away in the water.
The attraction is what they’ve taken out of the tar pits, not the pits themselves. Did you go to the museum? It’s not huge, but it’s pretty unusual.
I’m amazed by some of the comments in this thread, totally amazed.
How can people not be impressed by:
The Grand Canyon
The Sistine Chapel
The Pyramids
Maybe, for whatever reason, people have over-hyped these places in their minds. Or maybe people have become conditioned to and spoiled by the simple, instant rewards that dominate our society.
The Grand Canyon is a sight to behold, but it’s truly jaw-dropping when one considers its age and the process of its formation.
The Sistine Chapel is a work of genius, yet it really comes into its own when we also consider the history behind its completion and the stories it portrays.
And The Pyramids? Well how can anyone NOT be blown away by them? I mean, come on: millions of blocks of stone. Older at the time of Christ than Christ is now (think about that). Built by hand with only simple machines (unless you are into the whole “alien thing”).
Sorry for ranting, but I find this thread so deflating. It’s just that I can’t get past the idea that we’re all a little anesthetized by the “Bruckheimer Film” cocaine highs that dominate our society…
I enjoyed Rushmore tremendously. And I think Americans would be shocked to discover just how much human impact on the West is the result of attracting tourists. Colorado’s Royal Gorge Bridge is one example, and there are many others.
I guess because I’ve done a lot of traveling and because I’ve spent my adult life in media, I’m used to seeing landmarks not appearing in reality the way they appear in their promotional materials. Rushmore wasn’t a disappointment, however, because we took the guided tour that takes you up under the figures and around to the sculptor’s studio. To me, it was impressive from all angles, and we got lots and lots of photos.
I dunno, HelloKitty, what would you want them to do with the blasted rock? Visit Crazy Horse, which you mentioned, or Stone Mountain, Ga., and all of the blasted rock is still on-site. At Stone Mountain it was used to line a large pool at the base of the monument (of course, there was a lot less rubble than at Rushmore.) Interestingly, the same sculptor, Gutzon Borglum, did both sculptures.
I have a theory about why a lot of Americans are underwhelmed by famous landmarks. I think it’s because the greatest number of people live in large cities. I mean, if you’ve grown up in the shadow of the World Trade Center or Sears Tower, it’s gonna’ be hard to impress you. I never got to see the WTC, but I’ve been in the Sears Tower and it blew me away. (Insert Chicago joke here.) On the other hand, maybe I’m just easy to impress.
But you have to make extreme efforts to get down there. Either hike down and back in a day, if that’s possible, or be prepared to camp there, which means you have to carry your equipment. And the hike back can be dreadful if you need to keep a brisk pace.
Of course there are the burros, but you have to reserve those far in advance, and most visitors haven’t done that.
If only there was a way you could hike down and not have to hike up.
First thing I thought of when I saw the thread title was “Mt. Rushmore!” So it doesn’t surprise me that I’m at least the fourth person in the thread to say it belongs in the thread.
Went there, said to myself, “It looks just like the pictures,” and got back in the car. Five minutes was enough. Good thing I didn’t go very far out of my way to see it.
I’ve gone there a few times now, because it’s easy to get to if you’re bike-riding around the monument areas of D.C. on a weekend morning. It’s got a definite “generic monument” feel to it.
They’ve got the state/territory markers in a big oval, and at each end of the oval, they have one of the big-ass European/Pacific Theatre markers. If there was any connection between states of the U.S. and the theatres of war, that would make sense, but of course there is none, so it doesn’t.
Four or five blocks west on the Mall are the Vietnam and Korean War memorials, both of which put the WWII memorial to shame. The Korean War memorial is one of the few that I always make sure visiting friends get to see.
Actually, we like seeing the Hollywood Sign from far away because that means the smog isn’t too bad today.
Once we were driving on one of the Hollywood Hills canyon roads and somebody who lived at the end of the road had put up their own miniature Hollywood sign, duplicating the positioning of the letters exactly.