Looks like a museum wins out over a sports venue, well at least in this case. Congrats to the city of Saskatoon!
Saskatoon holds only Canadian spot on New York Times travel list
The city of Saskatoon, Sask., is enjoying rarefied air as the lone Canadian city to make the New York Times’ list of 52 places to visit in 2018.
Saskatoon beat out more high-profile Canadian destinations such as Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal on the strength of its new museum, the Remai Modern, and its formidable art collection.
The Times’ interactive feature lists Saskatoon at No. 18, hailing it as a prime destination for art fans.
Yes definitely they value the cranial aspect of travel much more .
Your library background must have fueled your desire to read articles from the NY Times and others . When I was in high school and later in University I would go to the Magazine /Newspaper resource area of the library to check out the Sports Illustrated but I would also check the NY Times as well just to see what it's like to see the world like a New Yorker . Times no pun intended have really changed.
Hank, I'll be honest, I don't read a lot for someone with a library background. I've always liked the research aspect and have probably not read more than 30 fiction books in my life. I watch television a fair bit as well. This information on Saskatoon I saw while watching CTV news and then just looked it up on Google to provide a link here.
Well as somebody who works in travel and is exposed to hundreds of promotional pieces of tourist boards from countries, states, provinces, cities around the world I would say sports teams/venues are usually just sort of a throw in if there is any mention at all.
Whereas museums and galleries tend to get played up much more - so I assume the tourist boards are figuring those types of venues are a more consistent driver of tourism on an ongoing basis.
Typically in a promotional piece for a city - there will be some pictures and features about the geographical aspects of the city - such as waterfront, beaches. But the bulk will be things to do there with museums and galleries, information about specific exhibits usually being a significant chunk - moreso than anything about arenas or stadiums.
Even in mention of the teams that play at those venues there is often details about other things that happen at those venues - like concerts etc.
Agree with what you are saying Pat. I suppose maybe iconic stadiums like Fenway and Wrigley might be an exception.
From this article above, I noticed the following which makes me believe, more and more, Hamilton was lucky it didn't put a sports stadium near the waterfront and can now think of a smaller structure along the lines of this museum/art gallery in Saskatoon and maybe along with it a small ampitheatre that would fit in with the ambience of the waterfront with a museum, artsy place sort of thing. I think most people in just about any city would prefer to see this museum near a precious waterfront area rather than a monstrosity type of stadium that looks like, well, just a stadium. (will admit though some modern stadiums like Lucas Oil Stadium I do like from an aesthetic point of view although it is quite large of course with seating around 65,000):
“Pablo Picasso, Georges Braque and other heavyweight 20th-century artists now have a home in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan, thanks to the new Remai Modern museum,? the Times article says. “A centerpiece of Saskatoon’s redeveloping waterfront, the museum sports world-class modernist architecture and an 8,000-work collection.?
Everywhere I go, I look for the museums before I leave. Some of the better surprises have been ones I found that I did not know about. I've been in large metropolitan museums and one-roomers. All are a draw for me. The number of people I see in museums shows that they are a draw for many. The only 'venue' that has ever drawn me was the Colosseum in Rome, but it's really a museum.
Cool, wish I would have went there way back when when I interviewed for a job at the U of Sask, a job I didn't get. But I realized then Saskatoon was a beautiful place, went for walk on the riverfront trails and met some very nice people.
Are you kidding me, as someone who hates traffic and impersonality and have been in much larger cities than Saskatoon - guess what?
Give me Saskatoon over Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver - ok Quebec City that's an actual tough one, I love the place, but big cities like the big 3 in Canada are so not what my wife and myself want now in our early retirement years, that's for sure. Wiarton is looking real good though I will admit.
I hear ya about the traffic issues. To deal with that daily as a commute or just general getting around daily - it gets old fast. But for visiting, sightseeing, dining, major events, tourist stuff and overwhelming natural beauty - Saskatoon doesn’t compare at all to Vancouver. You can eat outside and enjoy the views on a patio in January. Take in 3 seasons of activity in one day, etc etc.
We try to get to the west coast each January or February to see family and tour around. Feels like a vacation. Doing the same in Saskatoon in January or February - does not and is generally another week of being indoors avoiding the harsh cold. I can do that at home.
Well everyone has their likes and dislikes. I could use the warmer climes of Vancouver no question on frigid cold days, agree with that, and the gorgeous mountain views when available. Pricey place to buy a house though to live there. But visiting, sure. I actually preferred Victoria the couple times out there though.