I grew up in a town. As a little-un, I even thought that it was a decent-sized town. When Australia's Bicentennial year finally arrived, the bustling metropolis of Burnie - located in the stunning north-west coast of Tasmania - boasted an impressive TWENTY-FOUR THOUSAND people, and a figure no less impressive than [deep breath] By the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories: Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, and Saint Kitts and Nevis; Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith [exhale] Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the second officially pronounced Burnie a genuine, bona fide, one hundred percent dinky di CITY.
It doesn't matter that the harsh realities of the post-industrial economy has driven a retraction the hugely impressive numbers seen in the heady days of 1988, because once it is granted by the Queen herself, no-one can take the label CITY away from the city of Burnie.
Of course, as one of the casualties of the harsh realities of the post-industrial economy, I no longer live in Burnie. Forced by cruel fate to pitch my tent elsewhere, I landed in the state capital, Hobart (population 206,000). So, as you can see, I know all about big cities.
This week, as I may have mentioned, I was marooned in Sydney for three days. Sydney has a population somewhere in the vicinity of four and a half million. Like Burnie, it is also a city. Reflecting upon these numbers, it appears to me that 4.5 million people in one place seems like a stupid idea.
If you've ever been to a party where more people show up than are invited, you should get my drift. Trapped in a room that is too small with too many other people, some pleasant, some rude; some quiet, others loud; people having a laugh and people having a bit of biff. It all gets too much and eventually you are face with the truth that everybody is standing just too close by for comfort. Thrashing about like Cathy on the moors, eventually you find yourself huddled and sweating in the backyard looking for some respite.
Or maybe you don't. Anyway, it seems to me that there has to be some kind of threshold that any sensible person is able to detect. I would suggest that 4.5 million people in one eensy weensy/itsy bitsy city is some way over that threshold. What do you reckon? How many people is too many?
Comments
Sunshine Coast Daily - Australia
Living in Launceston (half Hobart's size, as you would know) offers a good quality of life without missing out on some of the things "real" cities have, but it's always going to be a compromise...
In answer to your question? I think 250,000-350,000 a good figure to ride that line between big-city convenience and small-city lifestyle.
I dunno. Too hard. Next question.
Can you even imagine?? I can't.
Jackie, it is all relative, isn’t it. London is HUGE, Glasgow less so. I think that I would struggle in Dehli, Sao Paulo or Beijing...
Me, I am a bit the same, but although I like the shops I hate the crowds. Teh Internets is great in that regard. Launceston does have a Myer, at least...
I could handle living in a small town if there was a city close by (and accessible). I don’t drive a car, so that would limit me somewhat.
To show where Hobartians’s heads are at, some locals consider where I live “out in the sticks”, and I get a bus every morning into Hobart’s CBD that takes me 15 minutes, max. In a car it would take about 8 minutes.
Yes, the people of southern Tasmania can be idiots (and I say that as someone from North West Tasmania).
Dina, it must make shopping fun!