Well, this was too ace to leave languishing in RYMHM's comment section, so I hope 'ruby' and Ms Fits don't mind:
ruby said...sydney's the hottie who blows your mind a few nights, making shiny memories, but you have nothing to talk about with her at 3am. fit, fun, energetic and ultimately forgettable. low cal, light, fluffy and bright.
melbourne's the love of your life. melbourne writes sweet dedications on the flyleaf of your books, and graffiti about you out the front of your house after she crawls out the bedroom window, hair tousled. rough around the edges, but full of strong flavour and calories. the one.
3 comments:
Very apt.
However, I'm scared that Melbourne is no longer the love of my life. I'm pretty sure London is. The one that got away...
Ah, Gervy...
I wonder if that is partly due to London being the first place you lived away from home and the first place you lived with Mr. A?
Ok. This requires a proper response. Ruby's got her head up her arse. The notion that Sydney's appeal lies only at the surface is utter nonsense.
I'll get back to that in a moment but let's touch on the heart of her comment. I'm not interested in the Sydney versus Melbourne thing for two reasons. First, I'm from Sydney so I automatically don't care. ;-) Second, and far more importantly, it's stupid to try and make the comparison.
Why compare the two cities? Why compare any two cities? I'd argue that if you're interested only in the ephemeral and the surface layer, then these kinds of comparisons are what you go for. I contend that such comparisons fail to recognise the unique character that defines any city/place.
People and places form deep, complex relationships. When people compare two places, they tend to play a reductionist game, breaking down each place into a list of attributes that can be tallied up and cross checked to give a conclusive "score". It's such a poor way to articulate one's relationship.
Another point worth making here is that relationships take time to develop. Three guesses where Ruby has spent most of her life? I enjoy how she articulates her love for Melbourne (and its love for her) but I'd never assume I would be capable of articulating my relationship with Melbourne in the same way. I simply haven't spent enough time there for the relationship to mature.
By comparison, Sydney and I have a long, steady, stable relationship. It's been through highs and lows. We've had fights, disagreed with each other but at its heart, our relationship is deep and profound.
What's "ultimately forgettable" about Sydney's harbour? Or the energy of the Flemington and Fish markets early in the morning? Or spending a day walking from the Museum of Contemporary Art, past the Opera House, through the Botanical Gardens and the Domain to the Art Gallery of NSW, to finish the day with a wonderful, cheap meal in Chinatown?
Want something to talk about at 3am? Consider the ever changing dynamic of Sydney's suburbs, perhaps best exemplified in Howard's defeat in his own electorate at last year's election. There's an ever changing dialogue between this city and its inhabitants. And more often than not that conversation hits its most interesting points in the suburbs.
I could write as passionately about Apia. I could have a stab at Melbourne too. I have meaningful relationships with both those places. Neither of them are Sydney and that's just the way I want it.
There's only one Sydney, just as there's one Apia and one Melbourne. They're different places, with different lives, different characteristics and different behaviours. And not one of them is "ultimately forgettable". They're each amazing places, densely layered with delights, surprises, challenges and rewards. And it's their discovery that makes it all worth while.
Post a Comment