juliet: (Default)
[personal profile] juliet
(pinched from [livejournal.com profile] mr_tom - the BBC's top 50 places to go before you die)

(bold - been; italic - would like to go)
1 The Grand Canyon
2 Great Barrier Reef
3 Florida
4 South Island
5 Cape Town
6 Golden Temple
7 Las Vegas - but I didn't like it at all.
8 Sydney
9 New York
10 Taj Mahal - amazing. I expected it not to live up to its billing. It does. It exceeds it. Literally breath-taking.
11 Canadian Rockies
12 Uluru
13 Chichen Itza
14 Machu Picchu
15 Niagara Falls
16 Petra - utterly fantastic
17 The Pyramids
18 Venice - but only for a day on an orchestra tour, would like to go back
19 Maldives
20 Great Wall of China
21 Victoria Falls
22 Hong Kong
23 Yosemite National Park
24 Hawaii
25 Auckland
26 Iguassu Falls
27 Paris
28 Alaska
29 Angkor Wat
30 Himalayas
31 Rio de Janeiro
32 Masai Mara
33 Galapagos Islands
34 Luxor
35 Rome - I love Rome.
36 San Francisco - on a very short list of Cities That Aren't London That I Would Live In.
37 Barcelona
38 Dubai
39 Singapore
40 La Digue
41 Sri Lanka
42 Bangkok
43 Barbados
44 Iceland
45 Terracotta Army
46 Zermatt
47 Angel Falls
48 Abu Simbel
49 Bali
50 French Polynesia

Date: 2003-11-21 06:03 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] valkyriekaren.livejournal.com
I think it's a bit depressing that none of them are in the UK!

I've been to Paris and Rome, that's about it. Never been out of Europe, see.

Date: 2003-11-21 06:09 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hoiho.livejournal.com
Well, quite. But, then, it was for a British audience. On a world scale, surely both London and Edinbiurgh are up there with San Francisco, and Barcelona?

Date: 2003-11-21 06:18 am (UTC)
vampwillow: the virtual me (redhead)
From: [personal profile] vampwillow
I suspect that UK 'World Heritage Sites' like Stonehenge would also have been on there if it wasn't aimed at a UK audience.

San Francisco is also on my very short list of other cities I would be happy to liev in (and weirdly, Zurich is another although not on the list and *totally* different!(

Date: 2003-11-21 06:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hoiho.livejournal.com
I suspect that UK 'World Heritage Sites' like Stonehenge

Edinburgh's Old and New Towns are a UN World Heritage Site.

Full list of UNESCO World Heriatage sites (http://whc.unesco.org/nwhc/pages/doc/mainf3.htm)

Date: 2003-11-21 06:18 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] valkyriekaren.livejournal.com
Maybe they should to a seperate one for 50 places in the UK to visit. London and Edinburgh should certainly be in there, and I'd put in a vote for the Northumberland coast (including Holy Island) and the Lake District.

Date: 2003-11-21 08:07 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] beingjdc.livejournal.com
See I've been to all those places, and they're great. Add into the list Sandaig (not been), and bits of Ireland, and the far South-West, and Blackpool, and the Pennine Way.

Stupid 50. I've been to Paris out of that list, and it was rub. There is a lifetime of experience in these islands.

Date: 2003-11-21 12:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the23.livejournal.com
there is a lifetime's worth of cool stuff to see, but i would recommend living abroad to anyone. it gives you a better sense of britain's societal shortcomings.

Date: 2003-11-21 12:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] beingjdc.livejournal.com
... and where would you suggest going instead? I'm firmly happy to defend these islands as the best place to live in the world, so this could be fun.

Date: 2003-11-21 02:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the23.livejournal.com
i think you are missing my point here. i'm not saying it isn't the best place to live, although to say that it is i'd have to have lived in all the places that seem like they could be decent first (scandinavia, australia, new zealand, south africa, us, canada, ireland, etc.).

rather my point is that the experience of living abroad (rather than experiencing foreign countries through travelling) is invaluable because it makes one realise that things don't have to work the way they do in britain.

i came to america expecting it to be moronic, but on balance it seems to me that a lot is preferable here. the most obvious example is that the streets are much safer and burglary is very rare. on balance i would rather live in britain and i will return (hopefully in the next year or two), but with a completely different worldview than i had when i left.

my main reason for returning is that i deeply wedded to the culture i grew up in (mostly sporting as far as i am concerned) - it certainly isn't because there isn't socialised healthcare here or that people have guns or any of what scares british people about america (although i do think the foreign policy is reprehensible). i suppose if i had grown up in oregon and then moved to england for a few years i would probably want to return to oregon. it's that much of a toss up.

Date: 2003-11-21 12:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the23.livejournal.com
london is more analogous to new york. in both places you just want to shout to everyone 'slow the fuck down!'

Date: 2003-11-21 06:19 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] catsgomiaow.livejournal.com
DUDE i am so with you about the Taj Mahal! i nearly cried!

apart from that, only rome, venice and paris. i didn't like paris at all though - everyone there seems to be very rude!

Date: 2003-11-21 06:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ghoti.livejournal.com
I have been to none of those places.

I can't say it particularly bothers me, either, although there are places on the list that OI would like to visit. I've been to other beautiful places; I live in one.

Date: 2003-11-21 07:14 am (UTC)
From: [personal profile] abi
You've made the right decision on Barcelona. I've been a couple of times, it's a bit shite. I also agree with you on San Francisco - lovely lovely place.

Date: 2003-11-21 08:33 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] feanelwa.livejournal.com
Oh, yes. Grand Canyon +++ to say the least. And the Mesa Verde which is just...how did they do that?

The Taj Mahal, I must see when I can afford a plane ticket. And the Golden Temple.

I am fairly surprised that Angel Falls is so far down - maybe the whole "In the middle of a forest full of deadly things" makes it a bit less must-see than all the others, in case you start there and get ill/dead for long enough that you never get to see the rest.

Las Vegas though was just too much stuff to go into one head at one time. A week later, I got my hearing back...

i wanna go to finland

Date: 2003-11-21 12:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the23.livejournal.com
only been to two of those and they both pissed me off - new york and florida. i lived close (by american standards) to niagra falls for years, but never bothered to visit the tourist trap.

i think i'll visit alaska before i move back to terrorise all y'all. should make it down to san francisco too. the only pull of sf is the weather as far as i'm concerned. otherwise iceland/auckland/sydney/cape town/rome seem interesting to me. eastern europe doesn't get much of a look in.

January 2026

S M T W T F S
    1 23
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags