Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
"UK undoubtedly has some beautiful parts but mainly in protected National Park areas. Whereas France is 75% beautiful and 25% rough/nondescript the UK (is probably 25% beautiful and 75% rough/nondescript. As we are so overcrowded the beautiful areas tend to be overrun with people whereas in France you can drive for miles in glorious unspoilt countryside."
++++
I wouldn't demur with any of that. This is why I put France at #1 and the UK at #9. Plus the French climate is superior (for now) and their urbanism less spoiled
But the UK is still beautiful in parts, and splendidly varied, with an often-glorious coastline and some divine cityscapes - Cambridge! - and on a world ranking is right up there. It's just not as impressive as France, but France is number 1
Which brings us to the bigger point. European countries crowd the top spots of "Most Beautiful Countries", which is why Europe, as a whole, gets more tourists than anywhere on earth. The tourists aren't dumb
There are some natural landscapes that, individually, are more breath-taking than anywhere in Europe - the Antarctic Peninsula for sure, perhaps the wilds of the American West, Greenland, Ethiopia, bits of Oz, central Asia, NZ (apparently, haven't been), and so on, but for overall beauty, Europe sweeps the prizes
The Telegraph list is bonkers, and is merely designed to stir up arguments. Which it has done. So well done that editor
Yosemite Big Sur San Francisco (on a sunny day) Lake Tahoe Park City
And that's just a tiny part of the South West corner of the US.
Disagree on SF. It's a dump. Trash everywhere, homeless people doing heroin or fentanyl all over the place, random violence, actual shit in the street and it's got literal elite of tech workers who have simply removed themselves from the community, they live there but don't contribute at all.
Sure, but so long as you don't get too close, then the sun glinting off the bay and the skyscrapers is incredibly beautiful.
I'd argue only Chicago and Hong Kong, in the world, are not beautiful cities.
Doesn't Chicago have a famous architectural river boat cruise?
And it's been done decades since I was in Hong Kong, but crossing the harbour on the ferry from the island to Kowloon was a visually delightful experience. Not beautiful? Pah!
I was doing the old swipe to type.
And "not" and "more" get confused.
Well that makes more sense.
I do actually really like sunlight glinting off shining skyscrapers. In my dreams, the Manchester of 2035 will look like this. Many Mancunians are grumpy about Manhattanchester, but I think the best of the new towers going up are as good as almost anything put up in Manchester's history. Manchester will be England's Chicago.
AOC isn't Bernie Sanders - she is a left Democrat. The chances that she starts challenging people in her own party are low to start with.
Plus she is astute enough to realise that even if she somehow got the nomination, she can't get enough of the centre (such as it is in American politics) to win.
I'm not sure. We were talking upthread about a possible stalking horse / test the waters candidate, should (a potentially unfit by then) Biden make the party unhappy by persisting in running.
You don't have to win for a run to be worthwhile, in the right circumstances. People reassess you if you take a good shot at it.
On topic, perhaps Truss's potential appeal to Labour voters has also been underestimated:
@thhamilton My big worry about Liz Truss, from a pro-Labour point of view, is that having listened to quite a lot of (older) interviews with her she comes across really well. On a personal level, in a way that hasn’t been true of any Tory leader in my lifetime, I *like* her.
Liz Truss has a northern accent and a sense of humour. Her problem has always been making speeches. She improved so dramatically between the last debate and the hustings that she must have had intense coaching and rehearsal (as we'd recommended); possibly, like the old-time snooker players, a pint of lager or some beta blockers too. I guess we shall have to wait for the memoirs to get the details.
I suspect Liz is making a mistake in ducking Andrew Neil (and most interviews) as she'd probably come over well and because, like everything, answering questions is a learned skill. But avoiding interviews is standard Lynton Crosby advice so there we go.
40°C heatwave may have killed 1000 people in England and Wales
First estimate of extreme heat's impact suggests that more than half of the deaths are expected to have been in people aged 85 and older
Antonio Gasparrini at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine estimates that 948 people died in England and Wales because of the sweltering conditions between 17 and 19 July. More than half, 495 people, are estimated to have been aged 85 or older, a group that compromises roughly 2 per cent of the nations’ population.
"The numbers are derived from modelling how many deaths would be expected in different parts of the country depending on how high temperatures go, rather than the observed number of excess deaths during a heatwave." In other words it is a prediction with the model having the status of a hypothesis. The it gets reported and forwarded in a simplistic manner and no doubt will soon be quoted by campaigners as fact.
I reckon a good fifth of science based stories are based on taking the words "may have", "could have" and "up to" and substituting the words "are" and "is".
And that's why I don't subscribe to the New Scientist. It isn't even pop sci, it's just an aggregation of badly written, breathless, Daily Mail level pieces. This guy just has a model which says if so many days of such temps, so many deaths.
The Daily Mail is much better. It has a really good science/tech editor and they publish fascinating articles. Probably the best paper for that. Weirdly
Btw The Great series 2 on Ch 4
Indeed. I’m trying to resist bingeing. Apparently season 2 is just as good as season 1 if not better! Yayyyy
Saw it last year on Amazon. Definite three Huzzahs from me.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not a bad list. But harsh on Essex and lincs which have some really pretty parts - just not very well known - which means few tourists which is 👍
I’d put Herefordshire in the top 3 simply for being the only entirely unspoiled English county
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Where do you live?
Cheshire. The bit which is covered by Mancunian sprawl. But most of Cheshire is very lovely: the Peak District, the Sandstone Ridge, the black and white timbered towns and villages, the golden triangle.
I've tried to make it 'what's lovely to look at and be in' rather than 'what makes your heart sing because this land is HOME!' - but its undeniable that taste in what's lovely will be influenced by the sorts of places I grew up loving - and also I know all the lovely spots of Cheshire in a way I simply don't with e.g. Essex.
"UK undoubtedly has some beautiful parts but mainly in protected National Park areas. Whereas France is 75% beautiful and 25% rough/nondescript the UK (is probably 25% beautiful and 75% rough/nondescript. As we are so overcrowded the beautiful areas tend to be overrun with people whereas in France you can drive for miles in glorious unspoilt countryside."
++++
I wouldn't demur with any of that. This is why I put France at #1 and the UK at #9. Plus the French climate is superior (for now) and their urbanism less spoiled
But the UK is still beautiful in parts, and splendidly varied, with an often-glorious coastline and some divine cityscapes - Cambridge! - and on a world ranking is right up there. It's just not as impressive as France, but France is number 1
Which brings us to the bigger point. European countries crowd the top spots of "Most Beautiful Countries", which is why Europe, as a whole, gets more tourists than anywhere on earth. The tourists aren't dumb
There are some natural landscapes that, individually, are more breath-taking than anywhere in Europe - the Antarctic Peninsula for sure, perhaps the wilds of the American West, Greenland, Ethiopia, bits of Oz, central Asia, NZ (apparently, haven't been), and so on, but for overall beauty, Europe sweeps the prizes
The Telegraph list is bonkers, and is merely designed to stir up arguments. Which it has done. So well done that editor
Yosemite Big Sur San Francisco (on a sunny day) Lake Tahoe Park City
And that's just a tiny part of the South West corner of the US.
Disagree on SF. It's a dump. Trash everywhere, homeless people doing heroin or fentanyl all over the place, random violence, actual shit in the street and it's got literal elite of tech workers who have simply removed themselves from the community, they live there but don't contribute at all.
Sure, but so long as you don't get too close, then the sun glinting off the bay and the skyscrapers is incredibly beautiful.
I'd argue only Chicago and Hong Kong, in the world, are not beautiful cities.
You've never been to Stoke, have you?
Yes, this is quite a claim by Robert - Chicago and Hong Kong are the only two non-beautiful cities in the world? Of all the cities in the world, the bottom two places for looks are taken up by Chicago and Hong Kong? Surely there must be more to this?
He meant “more”. It’s an autocorrect thing. Is my supposition
He’s saying the most beautiful cities are
Hong Kong Chicago SF
He’s totally wrong but it is at least arguable. Unlike what he actually wrote, which is daft
Which cities are more beautiful (from a distance) than those three?
Maybe Lyon. Perhaps Sydney. Vancouver can be quite pretty on a nice day. Rome has its moments.
But other than those, I'm really struggling to think of any. None of the Chinese cities are particularly attractive. And I love London, but it's not beautiful. Nor, frankly, is Paris.
I don’t understand this “from a distance” thing. What cities are experienced “from a distance”? They are lived in
But, as I say upthread, if that is your criterion Florence wins
And are you really arguing Paris is not beautiful? Have you ever been? It’s got some grotty bits and some major problems - but large parts of central Paris are magnificent
And I say that as a patriotic Brit who honestly believes London is the greater and more interesting city. But Paris is definitely beautiful
I’d say Venice is the most beautiful city of all. Paris is second. Prague is overrated. Fuck Krakow. Cambridge is in the top 10
Venice is degenerate; I didn't like it. I mean walking into the Scuolo Grande di San Rocco, having a wander around, and then walking upstairs unaware of the sight that will greet you, is one of life's most extraordinary and moving experiences.
But Venice as a whole not so much, even taking John Julius Norwich's advice.
40°C heatwave may have killed 1000 people in England and Wales
First estimate of extreme heat's impact suggests that more than half of the deaths are expected to have been in people aged 85 and older
Antonio Gasparrini at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine estimates that 948 people died in England and Wales because of the sweltering conditions between 17 and 19 July. More than half, 495 people, are estimated to have been aged 85 or older, a group that compromises roughly 2 per cent of the nations’ population.
"The numbers are derived from modelling how many deaths would be expected in different parts of the country depending on how high temperatures go, rather than the observed number of excess deaths during a heatwave." In other words it is a prediction with the model having the status of a hypothesis. The it gets reported and forwarded in a simplistic manner and no doubt will soon be quoted by campaigners as fact.
I reckon a good fifth of science based stories are based on taking the words "may have", "could have" and "up to" and substituting the words "are" and "is".
And that's why I don't subscribe to the New Scientist. It isn't even pop sci, it's just an aggregation of badly written, breathless, Daily Mail level pieces. This guy just has a model which says if so many days of such temps, so many deaths.
The Daily Mail is much better. It has a really good science/tech editor and they publish fascinating articles. Probably the best paper for that. Weirdly
Btw The Great series 2 on Ch 4
Indeed. I’m trying to resist bingeing. Apparently season 2 is just as good as season 1 if not better! Yayyyy
Saw it last year on Amazon. Definite three Huzzahs from me.
Oh, wait. Is this just the season that’s already on Amazon??
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not a bad list. But harsh on Essex and lincs which have some really pretty parts - just not very well known - which means few tourists which is 👍
I’d put Herefordshire in the top 3 simply for being the only entirely unspoiled English county
Yes, I reflected there is probably a lot in Essex I simply don't know. Lovejoy country. Lincolnshire however I know quite well. I actually quite like the astonishing flatness, and the fact that from the top of a four foot drainage ditch you can see for miles - but I assumed that to be a quite idiosyncratic taste!
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not a bad list. But harsh on Essex and lincs which have some really pretty parts - just not very well known - which means few tourists which is 👍
I’d put Herefordshire in the top 3 simply for being the only entirely unspoiled English county
It's striking that Kent, with Canterbury and the white cliffs of Dover, the garden of England, is so low down at 29. It's not that I'd necessarily be able to put it above counties higher up, but it's pretty nice for the 75th percentile.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
On topic, perhaps Truss's potential appeal to Labour voters has also been underestimated:
@thhamilton My big worry about Liz Truss, from a pro-Labour point of view, is that having listened to quite a lot of (older) interviews with her she comes across really well. On a personal level, in a way that hasn’t been true of any Tory leader in my lifetime, I *like* her.
Liz Truss has a northern accent and a sense of humour. Her problem has always been making speeches. She improved so dramatically between the last debate and the hustings that she must have had intense coaching and rehearsal (as we'd recommended); possibly, like the old-time snooker players, a pint of lager or some beta blockers too. I guess we shall have to wait for the memoirs to get the details.
I suspect Liz is making a mistake in ducking Andrew Neil (and most interviews) as she'd probably come over well and because, like everything, answering questions is a learned skill. But avoiding interviews is standard Lynton Crosby advice so there we go.
Does she have a northern accent? I can't detect a trace.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not a bad list. But harsh on Essex and lincs which have some really pretty parts - just not very well known - which means few tourists which is 👍
I’d put Herefordshire in the top 3 simply for being the only entirely unspoiled English county
Yes, I reflected there is probably a lot in Essex I simply don't know. Lovejoy country. Lincolnshire however I know quite well. I actually quite like the astonishing flatness, and the fact that from the top of a four foot drainage ditch you can see for miles - but I assumed that to be a quite idiosyncratic taste!
People think of Colchester and its environs when they think of Essex.
Around Bishop's Stortford (not Stansted Airport, obvs, but to the south) it is beautiful. If flat.
Nice photos. Which also provide two good answers to the question 'where might we stop on the way home from Cornwall'? Always tricky: you have to either leave the county by about 8am, or wait until at least 4pm. But if you leave at 8, where do you stop? You have to get to at least the Somerset levels, or the traffic jams just catch you up. And it's difficult to find anywhere to stop which is as pleasant as the place you just left, which is a slightly downbeat ending to your holiday. But Avebury and Cheddar Gorge might be two good candidates to break the journey home.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
39 Middlesex
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Somewhat ironically, the vast majority of the foreign tourists’ first experience of the UK, is in Middlesex.
On topic, perhaps Truss's potential appeal to Labour voters has also been underestimated:
@thhamilton My big worry about Liz Truss, from a pro-Labour point of view, is that having listened to quite a lot of (older) interviews with her she comes across really well. On a personal level, in a way that hasn’t been true of any Tory leader in my lifetime, I *like* her.
Liz Truss has a northern accent and a sense of humour. Her problem has always been making speeches. She improved so dramatically between the last debate and the hustings that she must have had intense coaching and rehearsal (as we'd recommended); possibly, like the old-time snooker players, a pint of lager or some beta blockers too. I guess we shall have to wait for the memoirs to get the details.
I suspect Liz is making a mistake in ducking Andrew Neil (and most interviews) as she'd probably come over well and because, like everything, answering questions is a learned skill. But avoiding interviews is standard Lynton Crosby advice so there we go.
Does she have a northern accent? I can't detect a trace.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not a bad list. But harsh on Essex and lincs which have some really pretty parts - just not very well known - which means few tourists which is 👍
I’d put Herefordshire in the top 3 simply for being the only entirely unspoiled English county
It's striking that Kent, with Canterbury and the white cliffs of Dover, the garden of England, is so low down at 29. It's not that I'd necessarily be able to put it above counties higher up, but it's pretty nice for the 75th percentile.
Exactly! That goes back to my earlier point. Most of England, and almost all of the UK, is pretty lovely.
On topic, perhaps Truss's potential appeal to Labour voters has also been underestimated:
@thhamilton My big worry about Liz Truss, from a pro-Labour point of view, is that having listened to quite a lot of (older) interviews with her she comes across really well. On a personal level, in a way that hasn’t been true of any Tory leader in my lifetime, I *like* her.
Liz Truss has a northern accent and a sense of humour. Her problem has always been making speeches. She improved so dramatically between the last debate and the hustings that she must have had intense coaching and rehearsal (as we'd recommended); possibly, like the old-time snooker players, a pint of lager or some beta blockers too. I guess we shall have to wait for the memoirs to get the details.
I suspect Liz is making a mistake in ducking Andrew Neil (and most interviews) as she'd probably come over well and because, like everything, answering questions is a learned skill. But avoiding interviews is standard Lynton Crosby advice so there we go.
She should perhaps do such an interview in the autumn if she wins, perhaps around party conference season. But there's no benefit to her doing one now.
"UK undoubtedly has some beautiful parts but mainly in protected National Park areas. Whereas France is 75% beautiful and 25% rough/nondescript the UK (is probably 25% beautiful and 75% rough/nondescript. As we are so overcrowded the beautiful areas tend to be overrun with people whereas in France you can drive for miles in glorious unspoilt countryside."
++++
I wouldn't demur with any of that. This is why I put France at #1 and the UK at #9. Plus the French climate is superior (for now) and their urbanism less spoiled
But the UK is still beautiful in parts, and splendidly varied, with an often-glorious coastline and some divine cityscapes - Cambridge! - and on a world ranking is right up there. It's just not as impressive as France, but France is number 1
Which brings us to the bigger point. European countries crowd the top spots of "Most Beautiful Countries", which is why Europe, as a whole, gets more tourists than anywhere on earth. The tourists aren't dumb
There are some natural landscapes that, individually, are more breath-taking than anywhere in Europe - the Antarctic Peninsula for sure, perhaps the wilds of the American West, Greenland, Ethiopia, bits of Oz, central Asia, NZ (apparently, haven't been), and so on, but for overall beauty, Europe sweeps the prizes
The Telegraph list is bonkers, and is merely designed to stir up arguments. Which it has done. So well done that editor
Yosemite Big Sur San Francisco (on a sunny day) Lake Tahoe Park City
And that's just a tiny part of the South West corner of the US.
Disagree on SF. It's a dump. Trash everywhere, homeless people doing heroin or fentanyl all over the place, random violence, actual shit in the street and it's got literal elite of tech workers who have simply removed themselves from the community, they live there but don't contribute at all.
Sure, but so long as you don't get too close, then the sun glinting off the bay and the skyscrapers is incredibly beautiful.
I'd argue only Chicago and Hong Kong, in the world, are not beautiful cities.
You've never been to Stoke, have you?
Yes, this is quite a claim by Robert - Chicago and Hong Kong are the only two non-beautiful cities in the world? Of all the cities in the world, the bottom two places for looks are taken up by Chicago and Hong Kong? Surely there must be more to this?
He meant “more”. It’s an autocorrect thing. Is my supposition
He’s saying the most beautiful cities are
Hong Kong Chicago SF
He’s totally wrong but it is at least arguable. Unlike what he actually wrote, which is daft
Which cities are more beautiful (from a distance) than those three?
Maybe Lyon. Perhaps Sydney. Vancouver can be quite pretty on a nice day. Rome has its moments.
But other than those, I'm really struggling to think of any. None of the Chinese cities are particularly attractive. And I love London, but it's not beautiful. Nor, frankly, is Paris.
I don’t understand this “from a distance” thing. What cities are experienced “from a distance”? They are lived in
But, as I say upthread, if that is your criterion Florence wins
And are you really arguing Paris is not beautiful? Have you ever been? It’s got some grotty bits and some major problems - but large parts of central Paris are magnificent
And I say that as a patriotic Brit who honestly believes London is the greater and more interesting city. But Paris is definitely beautiful
I’d say Venice is the most beautiful city of all. Paris is second. Prague is overrated. Fuck Krakow. Cambridge is in the top 10
Venice is degenerate; I didn't like it. I mean walking into the Scuolo Grande di San Rocco, having a wander around, and then walking upstairs unaware of the sight that will greet you, is one of life's most extraordinary and moving experiences.
But Venice as a whole not so much, even taking John Julius Norwich's advice.
Last time I was there I was hosted in the Gritti Palace. In the “Hemingway suite”. Good job I wasn’t paying as it is £5k a night
40°C heatwave may have killed 1000 people in England and Wales
First estimate of extreme heat's impact suggests that more than half of the deaths are expected to have been in people aged 85 and older
Antonio Gasparrini at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine estimates that 948 people died in England and Wales because of the sweltering conditions between 17 and 19 July. More than half, 495 people, are estimated to have been aged 85 or older, a group that compromises roughly 2 per cent of the nations’ population.
"The numbers are derived from modelling how many deaths would be expected in different parts of the country depending on how high temperatures go, rather than the observed number of excess deaths during a heatwave." In other words it is a prediction with the model having the status of a hypothesis. The it gets reported and forwarded in a simplistic manner and no doubt will soon be quoted by campaigners as fact.
I reckon a good fifth of science based stories are based on taking the words "may have", "could have" and "up to" and substituting the words "are" and "is".
And that's why I don't subscribe to the New Scientist. It isn't even pop sci, it's just an aggregation of badly written, breathless, Daily Mail level pieces. This guy just has a model which says if so many days of such temps, so many deaths.
The Daily Mail is much better. It has a really good science/tech editor and they publish fascinating articles. Probably the best paper for that. Weirdly
Btw The Great series 2 on Ch 4
Indeed. I’m trying to resist bingeing. Apparently season 2 is just as good as season 1 if not better! Yayyyy
Saw it last year on Amazon. Definite three Huzzahs from me.
Oh, wait. Is this just the season that’s already on Amazon??
Then I’ve seen it already then. BAHHHHH
Yes, I made the same mistake a couple of days back. There is a third due, though.
On topic, perhaps Truss's potential appeal to Labour voters has also been underestimated:
@thhamilton My big worry about Liz Truss, from a pro-Labour point of view, is that having listened to quite a lot of (older) interviews with her she comes across really well. On a personal level, in a way that hasn’t been true of any Tory leader in my lifetime, I *like* her.
Liz Truss has a northern accent and a sense of humour. Her problem has always been making speeches. She improved so dramatically between the last debate and the hustings that she must have had intense coaching and rehearsal (as we'd recommended); possibly, like the old-time snooker players, a pint of lager or some beta blockers too. I guess we shall have to wait for the memoirs to get the details.
I suspect Liz is making a mistake in ducking Andrew Neil (and most interviews) as she'd probably come over well and because, like everything, answering questions is a learned skill. But avoiding interviews is standard Lynton Crosby advice so there we go.
Does she have a northern accent? I can't detect a trace.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
39 Middlesex
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Somewhat ironically, the vast majority of the foreign tourists’ first experience of the UK, is in Middlesex.
Middlesex hasn't existed since 1965...
Middlesex hasn't been an administrative area since 1965, you mean. And Cookie wasn't talking about administrative areas...
"UK undoubtedly has some beautiful parts but mainly in protected National Park areas. Whereas France is 75% beautiful and 25% rough/nondescript the UK (is probably 25% beautiful and 75% rough/nondescript. As we are so overcrowded the beautiful areas tend to be overrun with people whereas in France you can drive for miles in glorious unspoilt countryside."
++++
I wouldn't demur with any of that. This is why I put France at #1 and the UK at #9. Plus the French climate is superior (for now) and their urbanism less spoiled
But the UK is still beautiful in parts, and splendidly varied, with an often-glorious coastline and some divine cityscapes - Cambridge! - and on a world ranking is right up there. It's just not as impressive as France, but France is number 1
Which brings us to the bigger point. European countries crowd the top spots of "Most Beautiful Countries", which is why Europe, as a whole, gets more tourists than anywhere on earth. The tourists aren't dumb
There are some natural landscapes that, individually, are more breath-taking than anywhere in Europe - the Antarctic Peninsula for sure, perhaps the wilds of the American West, Greenland, Ethiopia, bits of Oz, central Asia, NZ (apparently, haven't been), and so on, but for overall beauty, Europe sweeps the prizes
The Telegraph list is bonkers, and is merely designed to stir up arguments. Which it has done. So well done that editor
Yosemite Big Sur San Francisco (on a sunny day) Lake Tahoe Park City
And that's just a tiny part of the South West corner of the US.
Disagree on SF. It's a dump. Trash everywhere, homeless people doing heroin or fentanyl all over the place, random violence, actual shit in the street and it's got literal elite of tech workers who have simply removed themselves from the community, they live there but don't contribute at all.
Sure, but so long as you don't get too close, then the sun glinting off the bay and the skyscrapers is incredibly beautiful.
I'd argue only Chicago and Hong Kong, in the world, are not beautiful cities.
You've never been to Stoke, have you?
Yes, this is quite a claim by Robert - Chicago and Hong Kong are the only two non-beautiful cities in the world? Of all the cities in the world, the bottom two places for looks are taken up by Chicago and Hong Kong? Surely there must be more to this?
He meant “more”. It’s an autocorrect thing. Is my supposition
He’s saying the most beautiful cities are
Hong Kong Chicago SF
He’s totally wrong but it is at least arguable. Unlike what he actually wrote, which is daft
Which cities are more beautiful (from a distance) than those three?
Maybe Lyon. Perhaps Sydney. Vancouver can be quite pretty on a nice day. Rome has its moments.
But other than those, I'm really struggling to think of any. None of the Chinese cities are particularly attractive. And I love London, but it's not beautiful. Nor, frankly, is Paris.
I don’t understand this “from a distance” thing. What cities are experienced “from a distance”? They are lived in
But, as I say upthread, if that is your criterion Florence wins
And are you really arguing Paris is not beautiful? Have you ever been? It’s got some grotty bits and some major problems - but large parts of central Paris are magnificent
And I say that as a patriotic Brit who honestly believes London is the greater and more interesting city. But Paris is definitely beautiful
I’d say Venice is the most beautiful city of all. Paris is second. Prague is overrated. Fuck Krakow. Cambridge is in the top 10
Venice is degenerate; I didn't like it. I mean walking into the Scuolo Grande di San Rocco, having a wander around, and then walking upstairs unaware of the sight that will greet you, is one of life's most extraordinary and moving experiences.
But Venice as a whole not so much, even taking John Julius Norwich's advice.
Last time I was there I was hosted in the Gritti Palace. In the “Hemingway suite”. Good job I wasn’t paying as it is £5k a night
My room
The view from my room
One time I went I bumped into a friend who lectures there. It was early in the morning and the institute he was working for sent a barge just for him. He gave me a lift and in the quiet before the tourists we glided through the City, under the bridges, in the still morning air. Was magical.
It is still degenerate, that said. Difficult to avoid the gold stuffed into mouth feeling of the place.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
You could argue that in a list like this there ought to be two Essex's North and South. North Essex, away from the coast in the Tendring area, has some extremely attractive villages and well preserved, historic small towns. Poor South Essex has been attacked by overspill and small-scale industrialisation.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
The A180 apparently has a higher proportion of drivers falling asleep than any other major road.
Though to me the A180 always has the appeal of novelty. The M6 through the West Midlands does not have this appeal; it also requires far more concentration than ought to be the case due to the volumes of traffic and the temporary speed limits.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
The A180 apparently has a higher proportion of drivers falling asleep than any other major road.
Though to me the A180 always has the appeal of novelty. The M6 through the West Midlands does not have this appeal; it also requires far more concentration than ought to be the case due to the volumes of traffic and the temporary speed limits.
Falling asleep is good; making you want to kill yourself or emigrate to Frankfurt is more what I had in mind with the A47.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
You could argue that in a list like this there ought to be two Essex's North and South. North Essex, away from the coast in the Tendring area, has some extremely attractive villages and well preserved, historic small towns. Poor South Essex has been attacked by overspill and small-scale industrialisation.
Yes; a few of the big counties have similar issues. Lancashire north of Bolton is glorious, but it is hard to make a case for industrial South Lancashire.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
You could argue that in a list like this there ought to be two Essex's North and South. North Essex, away from the coast in the Tendring area, has some extremely attractive villages and well preserved, historic small towns. Poor South Essex has been attacked by overspill and small-scale industrialisation.
40°C heatwave may have killed 1000 people in England and Wales
First estimate of extreme heat's impact suggests that more than half of the deaths are expected to have been in people aged 85 and older
Antonio Gasparrini at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine estimates that 948 people died in England and Wales because of the sweltering conditions between 17 and 19 July. More than half, 495 people, are estimated to have been aged 85 or older, a group that compromises roughly 2 per cent of the nations’ population.
"The numbers are derived from modelling how many deaths would be expected in different parts of the country depending on how high temperatures go, rather than the observed number of excess deaths during a heatwave." In other words it is a prediction with the model having the status of a hypothesis. The it gets reported and forwarded in a simplistic manner and no doubt will soon be quoted by campaigners as fact.
I reckon a good fifth of science based stories are based on taking the words "may have", "could have" and "up to" and substituting the words "are" and "is".
And that's why I don't subscribe to the New Scientist. It isn't even pop sci, it's just an aggregation of badly written, breathless, Daily Mail level pieces. This guy just has a model which says if so many days of such temps, so many deaths.
The Daily Mail is much better. It has a really good science/tech editor and they publish fascinating articles. Probably the best paper for that. Weirdly
Btw The Great series 2 on Ch 4
Indeed. I’m trying to resist bingeing. Apparently season 2 is just as good as season 1 if not better! Yayyyy
Saw it last year on Amazon. Definite three Huzzahs from me.
Oh, wait. Is this just the season that’s already on Amazon??
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
Good point I should have said the A47 east of Peterborough.
You can have £20 at Evens. You are betting that the Tory membership next Tory leader election will show that Liz Truss is not popular with the Tory membership, (compared to Rishi Sunak). Deal?
What's the English county outside London most visited by tourists?
I guess Wiltshire must be quite high due to Stonehenge (and proximity to London)
If you mean foreign tourists then Avon for Bath or Oxon for Oxford would be my guess - alongside Wilts
Oxon also for Bicester Village outlet shops, whatever those are, apparently.
A friend working for Ralph Lauren had a voucher that got 40% off any price (including sale prices) - at "Factory Outlets". Went there and cleared out a lot of shirts at £10 a shirt. Low rise shopping mall out in the country, really. Can't really get the love or the hate for the place.
It used to be an essential stop for all Chinese tour Parties for some reason.
Edit. Which reason is explained in the previous post. Wonder how many of said garments were made in China?
There is an old urban legend about the Polo shirts. When they were made in Hong Kong, a chap was sent there to see how they were doing. He reported back that the factory was incredible, and very hard working. Three shifts.... Corporate came back "Three shifts? We are paying for 2". So the story goes, they were running a third shift to make knock offs....
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
"UK undoubtedly has some beautiful parts but mainly in protected National Park areas. Whereas France is 75% beautiful and 25% rough/nondescript the UK (is probably 25% beautiful and 75% rough/nondescript. As we are so overcrowded the beautiful areas tend to be overrun with people whereas in France you can drive for miles in glorious unspoilt countryside."
++++
I wouldn't demur with any of that. This is why I put France at #1 and the UK at #9. Plus the French climate is superior (for now) and their urbanism less spoiled
But the UK is still beautiful in parts, and splendidly varied, with an often-glorious coastline and some divine cityscapes - Cambridge! - and on a world ranking is right up there. It's just not as impressive as France, but France is number 1
Which brings us to the bigger point. European countries crowd the top spots of "Most Beautiful Countries", which is why Europe, as a whole, gets more tourists than anywhere on earth. The tourists aren't dumb
There are some natural landscapes that, individually, are more breath-taking than anywhere in Europe - the Antarctic Peninsula for sure, perhaps the wilds of the American West, Greenland, Ethiopia, bits of Oz, central Asia, NZ (apparently, haven't been), and so on, but for overall beauty, Europe sweeps the prizes
The Telegraph list is bonkers, and is merely designed to stir up arguments. Which it has done. So well done that editor
Yosemite Big Sur San Francisco (on a sunny day) Lake Tahoe Park City
And that's just a tiny part of the South West corner of the US.
Disagree on SF. It's a dump. Trash everywhere, homeless people doing heroin or fentanyl all over the place, random violence, actual shit in the street and it's got literal elite of tech workers who have simply removed themselves from the community, they live there but don't contribute at all.
Sure, but so long as you don't get too close, then the sun glinting off the bay and the skyscrapers is incredibly beautiful.
I'd argue only Chicago and Hong Kong, in the world, are not beautiful cities.
You've never been to Stoke, have you?
Yes, this is quite a claim by Robert - Chicago and Hong Kong are the only two non-beautiful cities in the world? Of all the cities in the world, the bottom two places for looks are taken up by Chicago and Hong Kong? Surely there must be more to this?
He meant “more”. It’s an autocorrect thing. Is my supposition
He’s saying the most beautiful cities are
Hong Kong Chicago SF
He’s totally wrong but it is at least arguable. Unlike what he actually wrote, which is daft
Which cities are more beautiful (from a distance) than those three?
Maybe Lyon. Perhaps Sydney. Vancouver can be quite pretty on a nice day. Rome has its moments.
But other than those, I'm really struggling to think of any. None of the Chinese cities are particularly attractive. And I love London, but it's not beautiful. Nor, frankly, is Paris.
I don’t understand this “from a distance” thing. What cities are experienced “from a distance”? They are lived in
But, as I say upthread, if that is your criterion Florence wins
And are you really arguing Paris is not beautiful? Have you ever been? It’s got some grotty bits and some major problems - but large parts of central Paris are magnificent
And I say that as a patriotic Brit who honestly believes London is the greater and more interesting city. But Paris is definitely beautiful
I’d say Venice is the most beautiful city of all. Paris is second. Prague is overrated. Fuck Krakow. Cambridge is in the top 10
Venice is degenerate; I didn't like it. I mean walking into the Scuolo Grande di San Rocco, having a wander around, and then walking upstairs unaware of the sight that will greet you, is one of life's most extraordinary and moving experiences.
But Venice as a whole not so much, even taking John Julius Norwich's advice.
Last time I was there I was hosted in the Gritti Palace. In the “Hemingway suite”. Good job I wasn’t paying as it is £5k a night
My room
The view from my room
Across the River and Into the Trees, which is partly set at the Gritti, is considerd one of Hemingway’s worst, but I liked it. Worth a go.
fuck it here’s my list of the top ten most beautiful countries on earth based on criteria I’ve plucked from my colon
1. France 2. China 3. India 4. Italy 5. Montenegro 6. Japan 7. USA 8. Switzerland 9. UK 10. Chile
I hope that settles things
What kind of Socialist Remainer Traitor has France at one and England at nine?
France is 100 times more beautiful than England. The only thing saving the Yookay from total humiliation in such a list is Wales, Scotland and the stolen bit of Ireland.
The Lakes say hi. Likewise the Cotswolds the marches the dales the West Country the Thames valley Northumbria and Cornwall
England is paradoxical. It has some shockingly ugly bits and some painfully banal bits, but it has managed to preserve some of the most stunning places on the planet
And anyway this is about the UK
UK undoubtedly has some beautiful parts but mainly in protected National Park areas. Whereas France is 75% beautiful and 25% rough/nondescript the UK (is probably 25% beautiful and 75% rough/nondescript. As we are so overcrowded the beautiful areas tend to be overrun with people whereas in France you can drive for miles in glorious unspoilt countryside.
England is 5% beautiful and 95% rough/nondescript.
Can I just check - have you visited every single part of it, to check it out? Because if not your claim is worthless.
He dare not. It is full of these uniform folk called the English, and they all make him feel very inferior.
There are all sort of places that are beautiful, but completely off the tourist trail. Most of North Hertfordshire and rural Bedfordshire, for example.
This is the first time in the history of ever that I’ve heard someone rhapsodise about rural Bedfordshire.
I’m not saying you’re wrong (I don’t know), but it certainly belies its reputation.
I've always had a soft spot for Berkshire too. Nobody I've heard of goes there on holiday but it's got some gorgeous countryside. The North Wessex Downs are better known but I've had some fabulous walks near Bracknell.
A beautiful little village, just round the corner from the Shuttleworth Collection. Lots of lovely country walks in the surrounding area.
I have no desire to denigrate Bedfordshire. My experience consists entirely of avoiding the Delice de France kiosk at Luton Airport.
Luton airport is shit. Utterly so.
Old Warden is a lovely place to stay in summer. I went there for a wedding (held on the grounds of the Shuttleworth Collection). Lovely country walks all around, unspoilt tiny village. The B & B in the village is really nice and the local pub is good as well.
Seeing the huge old R100 and R101 airship hangars at Cardington between OW and Bedford is a treat for a tech history geek, of course.
They aren't pretty, but they are fascinating, like much industrial architecture.
They’re absolutely massive (150’ tall and 800’ long), and can be seen from miles away.
They look big at a distance. Then you walk towards them. Then they look bigger. This process continues to the point of WTAF???!!!
If anyone wants to go to Venice - go in winter. Mid December or mid January. You either get poetic mist or a low, limpid sunlight, and NOT MANY TOURISTS
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
In this context, bearing in mind my earlier comment about South Essex, can I nominate the A13 as one of the most soul destroying roads in the country?
It's saving grace, if such there be, is that in the eastern sector, there are so many used car dealers within about 5 miles that if you can't find what you want along there it probably doesn't exist!
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
In this context, bearing in mind my earlier comment about South Essex, can I nominate the A13 as one of the most soul destroying roads in the country?
It's saving grace, if such there be, is that in the eastern sector, there are so many used car dealers within about 5 miles that if you can't find what you want along there it probably doesn't exist!
If you ever have to go to Shoeburyness Take the A road, the okay road that's the best Go motorin' on the A13 Well, if you're looking for a thrill that's new Take in Fords, Dartford Tunnel and the river too Go motorin' on the A13 It starts down in Wapping There ain't no stopping By-pass Barking and straight through Dagenham Down to Grays Thurrock And rather near Basildon Pitsea, Thundersley, Hadleigh, Leigh-On-Sea Chalkwell, Prittlewell Southend's the end If you ever have to go to Shoeburyness Take the A road, the okay road that's the best Go motorin' on the A13 It starts down in Wapping There ain't no stopping By-pass Barking and straight through Dagenham Down to Grays Thurrock And rather near Basildon Pitsea, Thundersley, Hadleigh, Leigh-On-Sea Chalkwell, Prittlewell Southend's the end
"UK undoubtedly has some beautiful parts but mainly in protected National Park areas. Whereas France is 75% beautiful and 25% rough/nondescript the UK (is probably 25% beautiful and 75% rough/nondescript. As we are so overcrowded the beautiful areas tend to be overrun with people whereas in France you can drive for miles in glorious unspoilt countryside."
++++
I wouldn't demur with any of that. This is why I put France at #1 and the UK at #9. Plus the French climate is superior (for now) and their urbanism less spoiled
But the UK is still beautiful in parts, and splendidly varied, with an often-glorious coastline and some divine cityscapes - Cambridge! - and on a world ranking is right up there. It's just not as impressive as France, but France is number 1
Which brings us to the bigger point. European countries crowd the top spots of "Most Beautiful Countries", which is why Europe, as a whole, gets more tourists than anywhere on earth. The tourists aren't dumb
There are some natural landscapes that, individually, are more breath-taking than anywhere in Europe - the Antarctic Peninsula for sure, perhaps the wilds of the American West, Greenland, Ethiopia, bits of Oz, central Asia, NZ (apparently, haven't been), and so on, but for overall beauty, Europe sweeps the prizes
The Telegraph list is bonkers, and is merely designed to stir up arguments. Which it has done. So well done that editor
Yosemite Big Sur San Francisco (on a sunny day) Lake Tahoe Park City
And that's just a tiny part of the South West corner of the US.
Disagree on SF. It's a dump. Trash everywhere, homeless people doing heroin or fentanyl all over the place, random violence, actual shit in the street and it's got literal elite of tech workers who have simply removed themselves from the community, they live there but don't contribute at all.
Sure, but so long as you don't get too close, then the sun glinting off the bay and the skyscrapers is incredibly beautiful.
I'd argue only Chicago and Hong Kong, in the world, are not beautiful cities.
You've never been to Stoke, have you?
Yes, this is quite a claim by Robert - Chicago and Hong Kong are the only two non-beautiful cities in the world? Of all the cities in the world, the bottom two places for looks are taken up by Chicago and Hong Kong? Surely there must be more to this?
He meant “more”. It’s an autocorrect thing. Is my supposition
He’s saying the most beautiful cities are
Hong Kong Chicago SF
He’s totally wrong but it is at least arguable. Unlike what he actually wrote, which is daft
Which cities are more beautiful (from a distance) than those three?
Maybe Lyon. Perhaps Sydney. Vancouver can be quite pretty on a nice day. Rome has its moments.
But other than those, I'm really struggling to think of any. None of the Chinese cities are particularly attractive. And I love London, but it's not beautiful. Nor, frankly, is Paris.
I don’t understand this “from a distance” thing. What cities are experienced “from a distance”? They are lived in
But, as I say upthread, if that is your criterion Florence wins
And are you really arguing Paris is not beautiful? Have you ever been? It’s got some grotty bits and some major problems - but large parts of central Paris are magnificent
And I say that as a patriotic Brit who honestly believes London is the greater and more interesting city. But Paris is definitely beautiful
I’d say Venice is the most beautiful city of all. Paris is second. Prague is overrated. Fuck Krakow. Cambridge is in the top 10
Venice is degenerate; I didn't like it. I mean walking into the Scuolo Grande di San Rocco, having a wander around, and then walking upstairs unaware of the sight that will greet you, is one of life's most extraordinary and moving experiences.
But Venice as a whole not so much, even taking John Julius Norwich's advice.
Last time I was there I was hosted in the Gritti Palace. In the “Hemingway suite”. Good job I wasn’t paying as it is £5k a night
My room
The view from my room
Across the River and Into the Trees, which is partly set at the Gritti, is considerd one of Hemingway’s worst, but I liked it. Worth a go.
I rather liked wandering around Giudecca - weirdly silent and empty, but felt more real, in many ways, than the tourist trap across the canal.
Mind you, was staying at the Hilton there - the views from the rooftop pool/bar are nice.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Staffordshire's an odd one: the big perception of it is the M6, which doesn't show it at its best. West Staffs is like Shropshire; north east Staffs is the Peak District, both of which have much to recommend them. And I particularly like the area around Abbot's Bromley.
I'm sticking with my preferences as they are I like Shropshire a lot - but one of the beauties of a discussion like this is that most people will stick up for their local area - from which I infer that there is far more beauty worth discovering than even someone like me who is fairly well traveled in the UK has found.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Sadly Staffordshire also has Wolverhampton, Dudley, West Bromwich, Warley and Walsall, so big handicaps there.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
M4 west, junctions 16 (Swindon) to 18 (Bath) is unremittingly dull.
What's the English county outside London most visited by tourists?
I guess Wiltshire must be quite high due to Stonehenge (and proximity to London)
UK + Int? Devon or Cornwall would be my guess.
I was thinking of international tourists, should have specified
Oxford is a huge tourist draw. When I was at Christ Church there were more tourists than students walking around almost every afternoon, and that was before they sort of used the dining hall in Harry Potter
Wiltshire should be even more popular. I've been quite disappointed by the numbers at Avebury when I've had to change bus there. I've had to spend nearly two hours a week there and haven't seen more than twenty tourists there at any one time. It's not got the iconic image of its Amesbury relative, but it's a far more interactive monument - you can eat a picnic in its shade
I think my own town, Marlborough, should sell itself better too. It might be bollocks, but there's a theory that the name is from "Merlin's Barrow", and that Merlin was thought to buried underneath the "Mound" at Marlborough College, which is an ancient manmade hill built around the same time as Silbury Hill. It's obviously bollocks that "Merlin", the wizard, was buried there. But it might be true that the town was named so because people believed it
About twenty five years ago I was working in a pub here, and a couple were staying who had come on an Arthurian adventure. They'd randomly selected Marlborough as a place to stay on their way west to Welsh and Cornish places that claim to have connections to Arthur or the Knights of the Round Table. They had no idea about the Marlborough legend. I've never seen two people so excited to be in Marlborough
Happy memories of megalith and beer hunts in Wiltshire when a young chap and the pubs were closed during the afternoon so we had to go and hunt megaliths in between. I was back in Marlborough a few years back - funeral of a friend's father - a very pleasant town, as is the Kennet & Avon Canal and the chalk ridges to north and south.
PS one of my favourite spots is the dry chalkland valley still with the sarsens scattered over it, a little to the west of Marlborough.
I think we had one of the best Jubilee street parties
Oh yes - it has that enormous old wide high street for the old markets. We stayed in a hotel about halfway along on the north side for the funeral party (so to speak).
The Castle & Ball?
Either thatr or the Royal Oak - probably the former!
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Sadly Staffordshire also has Wolverhampton, Dudley, West Bromwich, Warley and Walsall, so big handicaps there.
fuck it here’s my list of the top ten most beautiful countries on earth based on criteria I’ve plucked from my colon
1. France 2. China 3. India 4. Italy 5. Montenegro 6. Japan 7. USA 8. Switzerland 9. UK 10. Chile
I hope that settles things
What kind of Socialist Remainer Traitor has France at one and England at nine?
France is 100 times more beautiful than England. The only thing saving the Yookay from total humiliation in such a list is Wales, Scotland and the stolen bit of Ireland.
The Lakes say hi. Likewise the Cotswolds the marches the dales the West Country the Thames valley Northumbria and Cornwall
England is paradoxical. It has some shockingly ugly bits and some painfully banal bits, but it has managed to preserve some of the most stunning places on the planet
And anyway this is about the UK
UK undoubtedly has some beautiful parts but mainly in protected National Park areas. Whereas France is 75% beautiful and 25% rough/nondescript the UK (is probably 25% beautiful and 75% rough/nondescript. As we are so overcrowded the beautiful areas tend to be overrun with people whereas in France you can drive for miles in glorious unspoilt countryside.
England is 5% beautiful and 95% rough/nondescript.
Can I just check - have you visited every single part of it, to check it out? Because if not your claim is worthless.
He dare not. It is full of these uniform folk called the English, and they all make him feel very inferior.
There are all sort of places that are beautiful, but completely off the tourist trail. Most of North Hertfordshire and rural Bedfordshire, for example.
This is the first time in the history of ever that I’ve heard someone rhapsodise about rural Bedfordshire.
I’m not saying you’re wrong (I don’t know), but it certainly belies its reputation.
I've always had a soft spot for Berkshire too. Nobody I've heard of goes there on holiday but it's got some gorgeous countryside. The North Wessex Downs are better known but I've had some fabulous walks near Bracknell.
A beautiful little village, just round the corner from the Shuttleworth Collection. Lots of lovely country walks in the surrounding area.
I have no desire to denigrate Bedfordshire. My experience consists entirely of avoiding the Delice de France kiosk at Luton Airport.
Luton airport is shit. Utterly so.
Old Warden is a lovely place to stay in summer. I went there for a wedding (held on the grounds of the Shuttleworth Collection). Lovely country walks all around, unspoilt tiny village. The B & B in the village is really nice and the local pub is good as well.
Seeing the huge old R100 and R101 airship hangars at Cardington between OW and Bedford is a treat for a tech history geek, of course.
They aren't pretty, but they are fascinating, like much industrial architecture.
They’re absolutely massive (150’ tall and 800’ long), and can be seen from miles away.
They look big at a distance. Then you walk towards them. Then they look bigger. This process continues to the point of WTAF???!!!
"UK undoubtedly has some beautiful parts but mainly in protected National Park areas. Whereas France is 75% beautiful and 25% rough/nondescript the UK (is probably 25% beautiful and 75% rough/nondescript. As we are so overcrowded the beautiful areas tend to be overrun with people whereas in France you can drive for miles in glorious unspoilt countryside."
++++
I wouldn't demur with any of that. This is why I put France at #1 and the UK at #9. Plus the French climate is superior (for now) and their urbanism less spoiled
But the UK is still beautiful in parts, and splendidly varied, with an often-glorious coastline and some divine cityscapes - Cambridge! - and on a world ranking is right up there. It's just not as impressive as France, but France is number 1
Which brings us to the bigger point. European countries crowd the top spots of "Most Beautiful Countries", which is why Europe, as a whole, gets more tourists than anywhere on earth. The tourists aren't dumb
There are some natural landscapes that, individually, are more breath-taking than anywhere in Europe - the Antarctic Peninsula for sure, perhaps the wilds of the American West, Greenland, Ethiopia, bits of Oz, central Asia, NZ (apparently, haven't been), and so on, but for overall beauty, Europe sweeps the prizes
The Telegraph list is bonkers, and is merely designed to stir up arguments. Which it has done. So well done that editor
Yosemite Big Sur San Francisco (on a sunny day) Lake Tahoe Park City
And that's just a tiny part of the South West corner of the US.
Disagree on SF. It's a dump. Trash everywhere, homeless people doing heroin or fentanyl all over the place, random violence, actual shit in the street and it's got literal elite of tech workers who have simply removed themselves from the community, they live there but don't contribute at all.
Sure, but so long as you don't get too close, then the sun glinting off the bay and the skyscrapers is incredibly beautiful.
I'd argue only Chicago and Hong Kong, in the world, are not beautiful cities.
You've never been to Stoke, have you?
Yes, this is quite a claim by Robert - Chicago and Hong Kong are the only two non-beautiful cities in the world? Of all the cities in the world, the bottom two places for looks are taken up by Chicago and Hong Kong? Surely there must be more to this?
He meant “more”. It’s an autocorrect thing. Is my supposition
He’s saying the most beautiful cities are
Hong Kong Chicago SF
He’s totally wrong but it is at least arguable. Unlike what he actually wrote, which is daft
Which cities are more beautiful (from a distance) than those three?
Maybe Lyon. Perhaps Sydney. Vancouver can be quite pretty on a nice day. Rome has its moments.
But other than those, I'm really struggling to think of any. None of the Chinese cities are particularly attractive. And I love London, but it's not beautiful. Nor, frankly, is Paris.
I don’t understand this “from a distance” thing. What cities are experienced “from a distance”? They are lived in
But, as I say upthread, if that is your criterion Florence wins
And are you really arguing Paris is not beautiful? Have you ever been? It’s got some grotty bits and some major problems - but large parts of central Paris are magnificent
And I say that as a patriotic Brit who honestly believes London is the greater and more interesting city. But Paris is definitely beautiful
I’d say Venice is the most beautiful city of all. Paris is second. Prague is overrated. Fuck Krakow. Cambridge is in the top 10
Venice is degenerate; I didn't like it. I mean walking into the Scuolo Grande di San Rocco, having a wander around, and then walking upstairs unaware of the sight that will greet you, is one of life's most extraordinary and moving experiences.
But Venice as a whole not so much, even taking John Julius Norwich's advice.
Last time I was there I was hosted in the Gritti Palace. In the “Hemingway suite”. Good job I wasn’t paying as it is £5k a night
My room
The view from my room
Across the River and Into the Trees, which is partly set at the Gritti, is considerd one of Hemingway’s worst, but I liked it. Worth a go.
I rather liked wandering around Giudecca - weirdly silent and empty, but felt more real, in many ways, than the tourist trap across the canal.
Mind you, was staying at the Hilton there - the views from the rooftop pool/bar are nice.
The stories coming out of Ukraine today are rekindling my desire to see NATO engage directly in the war on Ukraine's side to bring it to a swift conclusion.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Sadly Staffordshire also has Wolverhampton, Dudley, West Bromwich, Warley and Walsall, so big handicaps there.
They’re in the West Midlands these days.
Yes, I know, but I thought the listing was for historical counties?
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Sadly Staffordshire also has Wolverhampton, Dudley, West Bromwich, Warley and Walsall, so big handicaps there.
We got rid of those! Although I suppose technically Telford is in a separate unitary authority these days.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
I actually rather like the M5 viaduct out of Birmingham. It makes me happy. On the way south, it's 'M6 over - now holiday is starting'; on the way north it's 'M5 over - nearly home'. And the raised element gives a good view over the black country, which is actually more interesting than you think it is going to be, and certainly more pleasant than the M6 through the urban West Midlands.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Sadly Staffordshire also has Wolverhampton, Dudley, West Bromwich, Warley and Walsall, so big handicaps there.
We got rid of those! Although I suppose technically Telford is in a separate unitary authority these days.
I was talking historical counties - we all have to take our urban bits back for this discussion!
There's one phrase used in those statements which is rather interesting: "sex recorded at birth". I've not heard this one before, and immediately I like it much more than "assigned".
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Staffordshire's an odd one: the big perception of it is the M6, which doesn't show it at its best. West Staffs is like Shropshire; north east Staffs is the Peak District, both of which have much to recommend them. And I particularly like the area around Abbot's Bromley.
I'm sticking with my preferences as they are I like Shropshire a lot - but one of the beauties of a discussion like this is that most people will stick up for their local area - from which I infer that there is far more beauty worth discovering than even someone like me who is fairly well traveled in the UK has found.
Interesting that you missed the most beautiful of the lot - Cannock Chase, which lies between the M6 and Abbots Bromley.
I assume by the Peak District you were including Dovedale?
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
M4 west, junctions 16 (Swindon) to 18 (Bath) is unremittingly dull.
I have a vague memory that that section has a concreted surface? Concreted rather than tarmacked roads are always less pleasant - feels like the road is shouting crossly at you.
Right then. As I’m on a boringly air conditioned train to Richmond, my top ten beautiful cities
1. Venice 2. Paris 3. St Petersburg 4. Florence 5. New Orleans 6. Cambridge 7. Hong Kong 8. New York City 9. Edinburgh 10. Newent 11. Bordeaux
On your Montenegro rule, my favourite is Laon
Siena.
I remember a medieval (mostly) art gallery in Sienna - after seeing the 147th version of Madonna and Child by various artists, the physical shock of a Dürer was interesting....
There's one phrase used in those statements which is rather interesting: "sex recorded at birth". I've not heard this one before, and immediately I like it much more than "assigned".
If we can get away from this “assigned” nonsense, so much the better! They think a midwife goes eeny meeny miny mo?
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
I actually rather like the M5 viaduct out of Birmingham. It makes me happy. On the way south, it's 'M6 over - now holiday is starting'; on the way north it's 'M5 over - nearly home'. And the raised element gives a good view over the black country, which is actually more interesting than you think it is going to be, and certainly more pleasant than the M6 through the urban West Midlands.
Oh, *out* of Birmingham, the M5 viaduct is a lovely view of the countryside. But most of my experience was of doing a weekly commute from down South to up North on a Monday morning, and the M5/M6 junction was the inevitable pinch point no matter from which way it was approached. I ended up switching to the M42 and M6 Toll.
I’ll vote for the M6 toll as the best road in the country, the only thing that would make it better is raising the speed limit!
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
You could argue that in a list like this there ought to be two Essex's North and South. North Essex, away from the coast in the Tendring area, has some extremely attractive villages and well preserved, historic small towns. Poor South Essex has been attacked by overspill and small-scale industrialisation.
Maldon has grown on me over the years. Family live there so I visit quite often.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Staffordshire's an odd one: the big perception of it is the M6, which doesn't show it at its best. West Staffs is like Shropshire; north east Staffs is the Peak District, both of which have much to recommend them. And I particularly like the area around Abbot's Bromley.
I'm sticking with my preferences as they are I like Shropshire a lot - but one of the beauties of a discussion like this is that most people will stick up for their local area - from which I infer that there is far more beauty worth discovering than even someone like me who is fairly well traveled in the UK has found.
Interesting that you missed the most beautiful of the lot - Cannock Chase, which lies between the M6 and Abbots Bromley.
I assume by the Peak District you were including Dovedale?
Yes, which I'd say is probably Staffordshire's highlight. Though I actually - due to a walk of almost unsurpassable, heart-rending, tears-to-the-eye, Good-God-this country-is-beautiful-and-I-am-lucky-to-be-alive joy, one Spring 20 years ago - prefer the dales to its west.
I know Cannock Chase only as a vague blur in the distance from the M6, I'm afraid.
Which proves one of my points. When you know a place by passing through it on soul-destroying major roads - especially in that small central section of the country which we must all pass through to get to the other side of England - you don't think much of it. The more you know a place, the lovelier it becomes. From which we must conclude that Britain is much, much lovelier than we think.
Right then. As I’m on a boringly air conditioned train to Richmond, my top ten beautiful cities
1. Venice 2. Paris 3. St Petersburg 4. Florence 5. New Orleans 6. Cambridge 7. Hong Kong 8. New York City 9. Edinburgh 10. Newent 11. Bordeaux
Paris? Are you on crack? Doesn't even make the top 25 worldwide.
Cambridge is a small town, not a city.
New Orleans. Not a chance.
And New York may be impressive, but it's nowhere near as beautiful as Chicago.
Venice I will grant you. And I've never been to St Petersburg, so I'll you have that one.
St Petersburg city didn't do much for me, just really a big version of many of the cities in that part of the world that have old towns built around the same time.
You can have £20 at Evens. You are betting that the Tory membership next Tory leader election will show that Liz Truss is not popular with the Tory membership, (compared to Rishi Sunak). Deal?
You can have £20 at Evens. You are betting that the Tory membership next Tory leader election will show that Liz Truss is not popular with the Tory membership, (compared to Rishi Sunak). Deal?
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
M4 west, junctions 16 (Swindon) to 18 (Bath) is unremittingly dull.
The A47 is an incredibly dull road, especially either side of Kings Lynn, it used to have a fantastic greasy spoon cafe at Necton, now gone. However the A17 beats it for sheer depression. When i used to be allowed to drive by the health nazis and holidayed in Scotland there was simply nothing worse than homeward bound driving all day to reach Newark and having 2 hours of A17, A47 to go.........
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Staffordshire's an odd one: the big perception of it is the M6, which doesn't show it at its best. West Staffs is like Shropshire; north east Staffs is the Peak District, both of which have much to recommend them. And I particularly like the area around Abbot's Bromley.
I'm sticking with my preferences as they are I like Shropshire a lot - but one of the beauties of a discussion like this is that most people will stick up for their local area - from which I infer that there is far more beauty worth discovering than even someone like me who is fairly well traveled in the UK has found.
Interesting that you missed the most beautiful of the lot - Cannock Chase, which lies between the M6 and Abbots Bromley.
I assume by the Peak District you were including Dovedale?
Yes, which I'd say is probably Staffordshire's highlight. Though I actually - due to a walk of almost unsurpassable, heart-rending, tears-to-the-eye, Good-God-this country-is-beautiful-and-I-am-lucky-to-be-alive joy, one Spring 20 years ago - prefer the dales to its west.
I know Cannock Chase only as a vague blur in the distance from the M6, I'm afraid.
Which proves one of my points. When you know a place by passing through it on soul-destroying major roads - especially in that small central section of the country which we must all pass through to get to the other side of England - you don't think much of it. The more you know a place, the lovelier it becomes. From which we must conclude that Britain is much, much lovelier than we think.
Cannock Chase is certainly well worth a visit. Even allowing for the convenience of having it literally 200 yards from my doorstep, I'd put it ahead of Dovedale.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
I actually rather like the M5 viaduct out of Birmingham. It makes me happy. On the way south, it's 'M6 over - now holiday is starting'; on the way north it's 'M5 over - nearly home'. And the raised element gives a good view over the black country, which is actually more interesting than you think it is going to be, and certainly more pleasant than the M6 through the urban West Midlands.
Oh, *out* of Birmingham, the M5 viaduct is a lovely view of the countryside. But most of my experience was of doing a weekly commute from down South to up North on a Monday morning, and the M5/M6 junction was the inevitable pinch point no matter from which way it was approached. I ended up switching to the M42 and M6 Toll.
I’ll vote for the M6 toll as the best road in the country, the only thing that would make it better is raising the speed limit!
My wife and I see eye to eye on most things, but one of the few things guaranteed to cause a row (aside from any visit to Bent's Garden Centre near Leigh, and wrapping Christmas presents for the kids) is the M6 toll road. She loves it; I'm sure she's almost go out of her way to use it; I resent paying £5.50 for a saving which I generally reckon to be rather less than ten minutes. It's pleasant to drive down, but £5.50's worth of pleasant? One of those things I irrationally resent paying for. I'd happily spend £5.50 on wholly unneccessary cake.
The stories coming out of Ukraine today are rekindling my desire to see NATO engage directly in the war on Ukraine's side to bring it to a swift conclusion.
If it wasn't for the big stockpile of nuclear weapons that Russia has I think the rest of NATO would be halfway to liberating Crimea by this point.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
You could argue that in a list like this there ought to be two Essex's North and South. North Essex, away from the coast in the Tendring area, has some extremely attractive villages and well preserved, historic small towns. Poor South Essex has been attacked by overspill and small-scale industrialisation.
Maldon has grown on me over the years. Family live there so I visit quite often.
Some nice pubs and a very nice walk along the river to the statue of Earl Britnoth. Who was an adviser to King Ethelred the Badly Advised (aka Unready) and one can see how he got the job!
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
M4 west, junctions 16 (Swindon) to 18 (Bath) is unremittingly dull.
The A47 is an incredibly dull road, especially either side of Kings Lynn, it used to have a fantastic greasy spoon cafe at Necton, now gone. However the A17 beats it for sheer depression. When i used to be allowed to drive by the health nazis and holidayed in Scotland there was simply nothing worse than homeward bound driving all day to reach Newark and having 2 hours of A17, A47 to go.........
The A130 is also a pointless shit of a road that serves only to take you from Chelmsford where you don't want to be to Rayleigh, Wickford or sodding Benfleet where nobody except Mark Francois wants to be
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
39 Middlesex
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Somewhat ironically, the vast majority of the foreign tourists’ first experience of the UK, is in Middlesex.
Middlesex hasn't existed since 1965...
Middlesex hasn't been an administrative area since 1965, you mean. And Cookie wasn't talking about administrative areas...
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
Good point I should have said the A47 east of Peterborough.
I raise the A17 between Newark and the A47. Have spent a fair proportion of time on that road on the way to and from Norfolk and it's flat and featureless all the way.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
I actually rather like the M5 viaduct out of Birmingham. It makes me happy. On the way south, it's 'M6 over - now holiday is starting'; on the way north it's 'M5 over - nearly home'. And the raised element gives a good view over the black country, which is actually more interesting than you think it is going to be, and certainly more pleasant than the M6 through the urban West Midlands.
Oh, *out* of Birmingham, the M5 viaduct is a lovely view of the countryside. But most of my experience was of doing a weekly commute from down South to up North on a Monday morning, and the M5/M6 junction was the inevitable pinch point no matter from which way it was approached. I ended up switching to the M42 and M6 Toll.
I’ll vote for the M6 toll as the best road in the country, the only thing that would make it better is raising the speed limit!
My wife and I see eye to eye on most things, but one of the few things guaranteed to cause a row (aside from any visit to Bent's Garden Centre near Leigh, and wrapping Christmas presents for the kids) is the M6 toll road. She loves it; I'm sure she's almost go out of her way to use it; I resent paying £5.50 for a saving which I generally reckon to be rather less than ten minutes. It's pleasant to drive down, but £5.50's worth of pleasant? One of those things I irrationally resent paying for. I'd happily spend £5.50 on wholly unneccessary cake.
£5.50? Do you get off at an intermediate junction or have you just not used it for a long time?
I think my answer is, it's worth it at rush hour, probably not otherwise. I would routinely save 15 minutes a day by using it to drive to work, which for the reduced rate of £2.90 I negotiated with them, plus the massively reduced stress, was definitely worth it.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
39 Middlesex
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Somewhat ironically, the vast majority of the foreign tourists’ first experience of the UK, is in Middlesex.
Middlesex hasn't existed since 1965...
It needs a big sign on the Lea Bridge Road: "Middlesex welcomes careful drivers". That sort of thing.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
I actually rather like the M5 viaduct out of Birmingham. It makes me happy. On the way south, it's 'M6 over - now holiday is starting'; on the way north it's 'M5 over - nearly home'. And the raised element gives a good view over the black country, which is actually more interesting than you think it is going to be, and certainly more pleasant than the M6 through the urban West Midlands.
Oh, *out* of Birmingham, the M5 viaduct is a lovely view of the countryside. But most of my experience was of doing a weekly commute from down South to up North on a Monday morning, and the M5/M6 junction was the inevitable pinch point no matter from which way it was approached. I ended up switching to the M42 and M6 Toll.
I’ll vote for the M6 toll as the best road in the country, the only thing that would make it better is raising the speed limit!
My wife and I see eye to eye on most things, but one of the few things guaranteed to cause a row (aside from any visit to Bent's Garden Centre near Leigh, and wrapping Christmas presents for the kids) is the M6 toll road. She loves it; I'm sure she's almost go out of her way to use it; I resent paying £5.50 for a saving which I generally reckon to be rather less than ten minutes. It's pleasant to drive down, but £5.50's worth of pleasant? One of those things I irrationally resent paying for. I'd happily spend £5.50 on wholly unneccessary cake.
Ha! 90% of the time I’ve used it, the toll has ended up on either an expenses claim form, or a personal company expense offsetting income tax and NI.
I’d make the toll £3 for cars and £30 for lorries, and the speed limit 90, to reinforce the time savings over the old road.
LONDON, July 29 (Reuters) - The UK's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) said on Friday it has been directed by the government to temporarily relax permitting conditions for coal-fired power stations in England during the winter period.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I'd put Staffs above Shropshire. It's got everything Shropshire has, but more variety and interest in it.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
Staffordshire's an odd one: the big perception of it is the M6, which doesn't show it at its best. West Staffs is like Shropshire; north east Staffs is the Peak District, both of which have much to recommend them. And I particularly like the area around Abbot's Bromley.
I'm sticking with my preferences as they are I like Shropshire a lot - but one of the beauties of a discussion like this is that most people will stick up for their local area - from which I infer that there is far more beauty worth discovering than even someone like me who is fairly well traveled in the UK has found.
Interesting that you missed the most beautiful of the lot - Cannock Chase, which lies between the M6 and Abbots Bromley.
I assume by the Peak District you were including Dovedale?
Yes, which I'd say is probably Staffordshire's highlight. Though I actually - due to a walk of almost unsurpassable, heart-rending, tears-to-the-eye, Good-God-this country-is-beautiful-and-I-am-lucky-to-be-alive joy, one Spring 20 years ago - prefer the dales to its west.
I know Cannock Chase only as a vague blur in the distance from the M6, I'm afraid.
Which proves one of my points. When you know a place by passing through it on soul-destroying major roads - especially in that small central section of the country which we must all pass through to get to the other side of England - you don't think much of it. The more you know a place, the lovelier it becomes. From which we must conclude that Britain is much, much lovelier than we think.
Cannock Chase is certainly well worth a visit. Even allowing for the convenience of having it literally 200 yards from my doorstep, I'd put it ahead of Dovedale.
Hm. Just done a Google image search on Cannock Chase.
It does look grand, I grant you. Doesn't look like much on the map - but England is full of these patches which look an insignifcant blob on the map but conspire to be huge and satisfying when you are in them. Delamere Forest and the West Pennine Moors both fall into this category.
It would have to go some to be above Dovedale though, which I would feature on any list of natural highlights of England.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
Not sure that the grassy, rolling sea of the Sussex Downs should come below Norfolk and Suffolk, which are mind-numbingly boring and flat.
What about the most soul-destroying road in the UK. I will make a strong case for the A47.
A47 goes through Rutland, one of the nicest parts of the country.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
M4 west, junctions 16 (Swindon) to 18 (Bath) is unremittingly dull.
The A47 is an incredibly dull road, especially either side of Kings Lynn, it used to have a fantastic greasy spoon cafe at Necton, now gone. However the A17 beats it for sheer depression. When i used to be allowed to drive by the health nazis and holidayed in Scotland there was simply nothing worse than homeward bound driving all day to reach Newark and having 2 hours of A17, A47 to go.........
The A130 is also a pointless shit of a road that serves only to take you from Chelmsford where you don't want to be to Rayleigh, Wickford or sodding Benfleet where nobody except Mark Francois wants to be
The A130 is a superb piece of road, actually, built far above spec, admittedly, but there you go.
The stories coming out of Ukraine today are rekindling my desire to see NATO engage directly in the war on Ukraine's side to bring it to a swift conclusion.
If it wasn't for the big stockpile of nuclear weapons that Russia has I think the rest of NATO would be halfway to liberating Crimea by this point.
Comments
I do actually really like sunlight glinting off shining skyscrapers. In my dreams, the Manchester of 2035 will look like this. Many Mancunians are grumpy about Manhattanchester, but I think the best of the new towers going up are as good as almost anything put up in Manchester's history. Manchester will be England's Chicago.
We were talking upthread about a possible stalking horse / test the waters candidate, should (a potentially unfit by then) Biden make the party unhappy by persisting in running.
You don't have to win for a run to be worthwhile, in the right circumstances.
People reassess you if you take a good shot at it.
I suspect Liz is making a mistake in ducking Andrew Neil (and most interviews) as she'd probably come over well and because, like everything, answering questions is a learned skill. But avoiding interviews is standard Lynton Crosby advice so there we go.
Definite three Huzzahs from me.
I’d put Herefordshire in the top 3 simply for being the only entirely unspoiled English county
I've tried to make it 'what's lovely to look at and be in' rather than 'what makes your heart sing because this land is HOME!' - but its undeniable that taste in what's lovely will be influenced by the sorts of places I grew up loving - and also I know all the lovely spots of Cheshire in a way I simply don't with e.g. Essex.
But Venice as a whole not so much, even taking John Julius Norwich's advice.
Then I’ve seen it already then. BAHHHHH
How about Cheddar Gorge:
I've seen Avebury mentioned:
And Bath:
Oxford is nice. From a distance:
And closer in:
There is precisely zero potential gain for the favourite in any election in submitting to a gotcha "interview" with Brillo.
Lincolnshire however I know quite well. I actually quite like the astonishing flatness, and the fact that from the top of a four foot drainage ditch you can see for miles - but I assumed that to be a quite idiosyncratic taste!
I can't detect a trace.
Around Bishop's Stortford (not Stansted Airport, obvs, but to the south) it is beautiful. If flat.
Which also provide two good answers to the question 'where might we stop on the way home from Cornwall'? Always tricky: you have to either leave the county by about 8am, or wait until at least 4pm.
But if you leave at 8, where do you stop? You have to get to at least the Somerset levels, or the traffic jams just catch you up.
And it's difficult to find anywhere to stop which is as pleasant as the place you just left, which is a slightly downbeat ending to your holiday.
But Avebury and Cheddar Gorge might be two good candidates to break the journey home.
My room
The view from my room
There is a third due, though.
But not much of one.
It is still degenerate, that said. Difficult to avoid the gold stuffed into mouth feeling of the place.
Though to me the A180 always has the appeal of novelty. The M6 through the West Midlands does not have this appeal; it also requires far more concentration than ought to be the case due to the volumes of traffic and the temporary speed limits.
The foreign city I most enjoy is Naples.
I’ll go with the M5 viaduct into Birmingham, or maybe the M6 viaduct into Birmingham.
You can have £20 at Evens. You are betting that the Tory membership next Tory leader election will show that Liz Truss is not popular with the Tory membership, (compared to Rishi Sunak). Deal?
(No Mods editing please!)
Rutland Rocks ...
Uppingham and Oakham and countless wonderful villages.
It's also got Stoke, but Shropshire has Telford.
In summer it is beautiful but insufferable
It's saving grace, if such there be, is that in the eastern sector, there are so many used car dealers within about 5 miles that if you can't find what you want along there it probably doesn't exist!
Take the A road, the okay road that's the best
Go motorin' on the A13
Well, if you're looking for a thrill that's new
Take in Fords, Dartford Tunnel and the river too
Go motorin' on the A13
It starts down in Wapping
There ain't no stopping
By-pass Barking and straight through Dagenham
Down to Grays Thurrock
And rather near Basildon
Pitsea, Thundersley, Hadleigh, Leigh-On-Sea
Chalkwell, Prittlewell
Southend's the end
If you ever have to go to Shoeburyness
Take the A road, the okay road that's the best
Go motorin' on the A13
It starts down in Wapping
There ain't no stopping
By-pass Barking and straight through Dagenham
Down to Grays Thurrock
And rather near Basildon
Pitsea, Thundersley, Hadleigh, Leigh-On-Sea
Chalkwell, Prittlewell
Southend's the end
Mind you, was staying at the Hilton there - the views from the rooftop pool/bar are nice.
https://rugby-league.com/article/60634/rfl-board-approves-new-gender-participation-policy-for-rugby-league
https://www.englandrugby.com/news/article/rfu-council-votes-in-favour-of-change-to-gender-participation-policy
I'm sticking with my preferences as they are I like Shropshire a lot - but one of the beauties of a discussion like this is that most people will stick up for their local area - from which I infer that there is far more beauty worth discovering than even someone like me who is fairly well traveled in the UK has found.
And we have Salisbury. And Malmesbury
The history here is hard to rival
And the raised element gives a good view over the black country, which is actually more interesting than you think it is going to be, and certainly more pleasant than the M6 through the urban West Midlands.
I assume by the Peak District you were including Dovedale?
33 vs 26 with 2 abstentions.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11058021/Nadine-Dorries-gives-Grade-II-listed-status-controversial-Cecil-Rhodes-plaque-Oxford-Uni.html
I’ll vote for the M6 toll as the best road in the country, the only thing that would make it better is raising the speed limit!
I know Cannock Chase only as a vague blur in the distance from the M6, I'm afraid.
Which proves one of my points. When you know a place by passing through it on soul-destroying major roads - especially in that small central section of the country which we must all pass through to get to the other side of England - you don't think much of it. The more you know a place, the lovelier it becomes. From which we must conclude that Britain is much, much lovelier than we think.
Cambridge is a small town, not a city.
New Orleans. Not a chance.
And New York may be impressive, but it's nowhere near as beautiful as Chicago.
Venice I will grant you. And I've never been to St Petersburg, so I'll you have that one.
But Peterhof is exquisite.
Why would I want to enter into this bet?
However the A17 beats it for sheer depression.
When i used to be allowed to drive by the health nazis and holidayed in Scotland there was simply nothing worse than homeward bound driving all day to reach Newark and having 2 hours of A17, A47 to go.........
I certainly wouldn't call either Cambridge or NYC beautiful. Fascinating perhaps but not beautiful.
It's pleasant to drive down, but £5.50's worth of pleasant? One of those things I irrationally resent paying for. I'd happily spend £5.50 on wholly unneccessary cake.
NYC is impressive, but not beautiful.
I think my answer is, it's worth it at rush hour, probably not otherwise. I would routinely save 15 minutes a day by using it to drive to work, which for the reduced rate of £2.90 I negotiated with them, plus the massively reduced stress, was definitely worth it.
I’d make the toll £3 for cars and £30 for lorries, and the speed limit 90, to reinforce the time savings over the old road.
LONDON, July 29 (Reuters) - The UK's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) said on Friday it has been directed by the government to temporarily relax permitting conditions for coal-fired power stations in England during the winter period.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/britain-keep-coal-fired-power-plants-open-this-winter-2022-07-29/
It does look grand, I grant you. Doesn't look like much on the map - but England is full of these patches which look an insignifcant blob on the map but conspire to be huge and satisfying when you are in them. Delamere Forest and the West Pennine Moors both fall into this category.
It would have to go some to be above Dovedale though, which I would feature on any list of natural highlights of England.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge