In his recent Huffington Post piece, 10 Terribly Overrated Destinations (And Where To Travel Instead), David Landsel singles out places that everyone is told to travel to but, in his opinion, are not worth the airfare.
Vancouver was among his victims.
It's really super to see Canadians being assertive and exhibiting national pride. But in the case of Vancouver, all that rah, rah, rah is regrettably misplaced.
Sure, the one they call Lotusland may photograph well, but maybe just stay home and look at pictures, because there really isn't much below the surface -- nothing unique anyway. You want a city core that alternates rather unpredictably between completely boring and absolutely terrifying, with close proximity to some of the continent's best Chinese food? And also tons and tons of traffic? Go to Los Angeles, where the weather's better and there are also tacos.
That public market Vancouver's tourist board loves so much? No better than what you'll find in many an American city, starting right next door in Seattle. The city's only truly unique asset, really, is a giant park that reminds you that you're in one of the most beautiful parts of the world, and that you should get out of town immediately and go see some nature.
Instead, try In the Northwest, your top choice right now is definitely Portland. It is friendly, manageable, affordable; the food is really good, there's enough culture and nature and all that good stuff, without the traffic and grit and expense and hassle of Seattle. But mostly, it has a distinct character, a sense of place. Portland is downright agreeable. (It should also be mentioned that there are some very good strip clubs.)
Other destinations named in the piece included San Francisco, Colorado and Chicago. What do you think?