Lonely Planet Cities Book 1st Ed.: 1st Edition [Paperback]

For anyone with wanderlust in their blood, this is the coffee table book for you. Having thoroughly enjoyed the Lonely Planet's photo extravaganza predecessor, "The Travel Book: A Journey Through Every Country in the World", I was excited to see that editor Roz Hopkins has chosen to follow up with this subjective ranking of the two hundred cities deemed traveler favorites by Lonely Planet's readers and editors. Smaller, lighter and admittedly less definitive than "The Travel Book", "The Cities Book" is just as entertaining - slightly over five pounds of often glorious photographs and thumbnail sketches of the chosen cities.

The format is straightforward. Each city has a two-page spread with four defining photos and the following information consistently presented:

--Vital Statistics: Quick facts providing the date when the city was born, its elevation, its geographic size and location, its population and its nickname. It's amazing how Paris has set the standard for so many other cities, e.g., Budapest is known as the "Paris of Eastern Europe" and Beirut the "Paris of the Middle East".
--Anatomy: Description of the geographic layout of the city and how to navigate within.
--People: Ethnic breakdown of the denizens.
--Typical Native: Profile of what characterizes the city's typical native and what he/she thinks is important.
--Defining Experience: A sequential series of personal experiences unique to what the city offers, which can be done fairly easily by a traveler.
--Strengths: List of places, events and experiences that identify the best of what the city offers.
--Weaknesses: The flip side of what areas of development the city may have, e.g., Tokyo's high cost of living or St. Petersburg's collapsed buildings.
--Gold Star: One unique characteristic of the city that approaches the transcendent, e.g., carnival in Venice or the four Unesco World Heritage sights within Kathmandu.
--Cityspeak: Top conversation topics of natives.
--Starring Role in...: Selected books or films in which the city is prominently featured.
--Import: List of things (e.g., sports, foods, types of people, etc.) that have been historically absorbed in the city from other places.
--Export: List of personalities icons, famous items of interest or pervasive traditions that have their roots in the city.
--Sensory recommendations: See, Eat, Drink, Do, Watch, Buy, After Dark...sound bites about things to do to tantalize your senses in the city.
--Urban Myth: A colorful story, usually apocryphal in nature, about the city's history.

Obviously not as all-encompassing as "The Travel Book", which covers all the countries of the world, the list of top 200 cities will clearly elicit arguments as to which ones have been selected, where they rank and most critically, which ones did not make the cut. It hardly reflects the most scientific of methodologies as it is based on a poll taken for three months in early 2005 on the Lonely Planet Web site asking readers to vote for their favorite cities. Votes were also added for Lonely Planet's writers and employees.

From my perspective, the selections for the first one-third of the list are inarguable even though the rankings may surprise, e.g., Los Angeles seems low at #49, while Melbourne quite high at #11. The remainder of the list is a colorful hodgepodge with established cities mixed in with quite obscure choices in often remote locations. I think it would have made sense to include some parameters around what constitutes a city versus a town or a village, e.g., at #159, Christiansted in the US Virgin Islands has only 7,800 inhabitants, while Alexandria, Egypt, at #162, has 3.3 million people. Unsurprisingly, the US is the most represented country with 14 cities recognized and yet the omissions are glaring, e.g., Boston, San Diego, Santa Fe, Honolulu, among others. However, debating the choices is a major part of the fun, as well as the type of information that Lonely Planet offers for each city which has been culled mainly from their comprehensive guidebooks.

To give you a sampling, the top 25 cities are: (1) Paris; (2) New York; (3) Sydney (4) Barcelona; (5) London; (6) Rome; (7) San Francisco; (8) Bangkok; (9) Cape Town; (10) Istanbul; (11) Melbourne; (12) Hong Kong; (13) Kathmandu; (14) Prague; (15) Vancouver; (16) Buenos Aires; (17) Rio de Janeiro; (18) Berlin; (19) Jerusalem; (20) Montreal; (21) Edinburgh; (22) Venice; (23) Hanoi; (24) Amsterdam; (25) Singapore. Here's a list of the last five to illustrate their relative obscurity: (196) Saint-Denis, Reunion; (197) Granada, Spain (not obscure but the last of five Spanish cities listed); (198) Beira, Mozambique; (199) Madang, Papua New Guinea; (200) Ashgabat, Turkmenistan.

There is an interesting series of introductory essays on the past, present and future of urbanization. The photographic quality is generally superb, and you get a true flavor of the cities especially the inhabitants. I think for the more obscure locations, it would have helped to have a greater sense of the cityscapes. A great purchase for global trekkers and armchair travelers alike, this hefty book achieves its primary objective - to showcase the incredible diversity of the world through the urban oases in which most of us live.

I was looking for a book that had a few great pictures of each city and a bit of commentary. I'm more than willing to overlook the commentary -- how could any 1 page of bullet-point text ever really capture a city? But the commentary is weak -- a bizarre mix of pseudo-hipness and hackneyed stereotypes that may have been apt 20 years ago (if ever).

What I found unforgivable are the pictures. The only explanation I can come up with is they let loose an amateur photographer with instructions to be "artistic". Poor-quality pictures included of Paris: The canvas canopy of a pizzeria, pastries, the underside of the Eiffel tower, a couple kissing in a cafe. Of Rome: The face of a statue, a blurry shot of a street, a slice of a colonnade, 2 men with the city in the background. Lisbon: A tram in a narrow street next to hanging laundry, 3 undistinguished houses, a woman in a window and a crowded beach.

I've spent time in many of the cities covered and can't fathom why they chose the photographs included. They don't capture the cities and they are not good stand-alone photos.

I was looking forward to an interesting read with some evocative pictures. I don't recognize most of the cities as depicted in the book -- including New York where I live. I strained to identify all but 1 of the pictures (close shot of 2 women in the subway, a blurry shot of 2 cabs, a painting in a gallery at MOMA and the Apollo Theater sign). A little New York nit: how can one of New York's "strengths" be Dean & DeLuca and a "weakness" be "the coffee". One can find any style of really great coffee in NYC -- and Dean & DeLuca has some of it.

The book has the feel of an 8th grade social studies textbook. With the odd commentary and bad photos -- completely grim.

Lonely Planet has done it again. I loved the Travel Book and now they have something similar... but its Cities. I starting flipping through this in a bookstore, was totally mesmerized and had to buy it. There are the usual suspects (Paris, London, New York) and then cities that I've never even heard of. Each page is dedicated to a specific city with beautiful photography and the usual Lonely Planet sass and humor. One of my favorite parts is the first few pages where there is a history of the city and an exploration of its future. Highly recommended!

› Go to Amazon.com to see all 18 reviews  3.1 out of 5 stars