Was going to do Reykjavik Toronto memphis new York then fly back elfs was a mare to try and book in flights to and from memphis were more than London to usa
Unfortunately if you've travelled significantly in Europe then US cities really don't compare very well - I guess our respective ideas of 'history' are a few centuries different.
You don't even have to travel that significantly. There's a "historic" town just outside Washington called Alexandria. It's actually well worth a visit. But everything there is newer than Charlton House.
I've been to both Philadelphia and Washington on the same trip - I didn't really get on with Philadelphia but I put that down to being worn out after a couple of weeks of travelling around. The history's fascinating, though - it makes more sense when you're there, and it does help you understand why "being American" is the nearest they get to a state religion. (I couldn't help sniggering at the Liberty Bell, though, because the Liberty Bell tune is played on a loop - otherwise known as the theme to Monty Python's Flying Circus.) Washington's great - again, it's a fascinating place, and on my first night I ended up out on the piss with some paralegals in the Adams-Morgan district. The time I was there coincided with one of the early Tea Party rallies which was... interesting.
Both cities are worth at least two or three days to explore in their own right. If I had to choose between the two, I'd go for Washington, but if you're short for time and on a day trip, plump for Philly and the historical stuff.
OP has been Boston loads of times I believe but otherwise then city would be ahead of the other two.
All US cities have their own character and I guess it comes down to what you want to get out your visit. For instance Memphis is a dump bit of you are in to the whole Sun Studio and Elvis thing it comes at the top.
San Diego is my fave US city, with Dallas, Chicago and Austin all up there.
You'll probably have to trust me on this, but Omaha doesn't have its own character. It hasn't even bothered to borrow one from another city.
Nothing against those you've mentioned but generally I seem to much prefer some of the smaller US Cities. In no particular order, Key West and St Augustine (both Florida), San Antonio (Texas), Charleston (South Carolina), Portland (Maine, although the Oregon one is okay too) River Island (Illinois), Sacramento and Palm Springs (California) St Louis and St Joseph (both Missouri) spring to mind.
Personally, if I was in New York State anyway and I hadn't been, my priority would be to head up to the Niagara Falls, maybe with a side trip to Lake Placid. But not sure you'd want to be doing that in December!
San anthonio, Texas is a great city, really pretty river walk in the centre, with a British pub if you're feeling homesick!
My personal belief is that the best parts of America aren't in the big cities with the tourist attractions but rather smaller cities and even better the small towns and country side. Places like Savannah, Charlestown, telluride, Taos, Burlington, Portland Oregon, Maine coastline, California coastline and the national parks in California, Montana and Utah. For example one of the best vacations I have ever had was hiking during the day in glacier national park while staying in a nice little town called whitefish Montana
This. California countryside/coastline (Pacific highway) is stunning and Montana is beautiful and imo is the state with the friendliest people.
Montana only has 6.5 people per square mile, so they're happy to see anyone, especially in the winter.
OP has been Boston loads of times I believe but otherwise then city would be ahead of the other two.
All US cities have their own character and I guess it comes down to what you want to get out your visit. For instance Memphis is a dump bit of you are in to the whole Sun Studio and Elvis thing it comes at the top.
San Diego is my fave US city, with Dallas, Chicago and Austin all up there.
You'll probably have to trust me on this, but Omaha doesn't have its own character. It hasn't even bothered to borrow one from another city.
Nothing against those you've mentioned but generally I seem to much prefer some of the smaller US Cities. In no particular order, Key West and St Augustine (both Florida), San Antonio (Texas), Charleston (South Carolina), Portland (Maine, although the Oregon one is okay too) River Island (Illinois), Sacramento and Palm Springs (California) St Louis and St Joseph (both Missouri) spring to mind.
Personally, if I was in New York State anyway and I hadn't been, my priority would be to head up to the Niagara Falls, maybe with a side trip to Lake Placid. But not sure you'd want to be doing that in December!
San anthonio, Texas is a great city, really pretty river walk in the centre, with a British pub if you're feeling homesick!
My personal belief is that the best parts of America aren't in the big cities with the tourist attractions but rather smaller cities and even better the small towns and country side. Places like Savannah, Charlestown, telluride, Taos, Burlington, Portland Oregon, Maine coastline, California coastline and the national parks in California, Montana and Utah. For example one of the best vacations I have ever had was hiking during the day in glacier national park while staying in a nice little town called whitefish Montana
This. California countryside/coastline (Pacific highway) is stunning and Montana is beautiful and imo is the state with the friendliest people.
Agreed, I would like to retire to the central coast in California. It's just incredible, forests and mountains that go right down to the sea. There are stretches up here in Oregon like that as well.
Regarding the history aspect, I agree, if you're into history most of the states aren't really the place to go, at least not most big cities (Philly and Boston would probably be the exceptions). Being a Californian, we have no concept of history for a variety of reasons, and the notion that places like Philly or DC do feels quite foreign to me (having lived in London, I think of the Tower of London as proper history and the Liberty Bell as a broken bell).
That said, @cafcfan has a good point that there are some places that possess and/or recreate some quite interesting times in American history. That said, like Colonial Williamsburg or St. Augustine they're oftentimes a bit out of the way, and the history they possess oftentimes have quite the dark side.
On the original post, I would lean toward DC as I feel like there's a lot going on there and when I'm there (and it's been twice as an adult, both times for work), it has a feeling like it's its own little world akin to Vegas or parts of Los Angeles. But I'm no expert, and both places are roughly equidistant between where I live and London, and they're clearly more foreign to me than they are to some of you.
Comments
I've been to both Philadelphia and Washington on the same trip - I didn't really get on with Philadelphia but I put that down to being worn out after a couple of weeks of travelling around. The history's fascinating, though - it makes more sense when you're there, and it does help you understand why "being American" is the nearest they get to a state religion. (I couldn't help sniggering at the Liberty Bell, though, because the Liberty Bell tune is played on a loop - otherwise known as the theme to Monty Python's Flying Circus.) Washington's great - again, it's a fascinating place, and on my first night I ended up out on the piss with some paralegals in the Adams-Morgan district. The time I was there coincided with one of the early Tea Party rallies which was... interesting.
Both cities are worth at least two or three days to explore in their own right. If I had to choose between the two, I'd go for Washington, but if you're short for time and on a day trip, plump for Philly and the historical stuff.
Regarding the history aspect, I agree, if you're into history most of the states aren't really the place to go, at least not most big cities (Philly and Boston would probably be the exceptions). Being a Californian, we have no concept of history for a variety of reasons, and the notion that places like Philly or DC do feels quite foreign to me (having lived in London, I think of the Tower of London as proper history and the Liberty Bell as a broken bell).
That said, @cafcfan has a good point that there are some places that possess and/or recreate some quite interesting times in American history. That said, like Colonial Williamsburg or St. Augustine they're oftentimes a bit out of the way, and the history they possess oftentimes have quite the dark side.
On the original post, I would lean toward DC as I feel like there's a lot going on there and when I'm there (and it's been twice as an adult, both times for work), it has a feeling like it's its own little world akin to Vegas or parts of Los Angeles. But I'm no expert, and both places are roughly equidistant between where I live and London, and they're clearly more foreign to me than they are to some of you.