Are you suggesting there's a strong correlation between the number of low-salary workers living in the city and the presence of the Louvre or the Centre Pompidou?
Are you suggesting that nothing of cultural significance has happened in Paris since the Louvre opened as a museum in 1793? Or that Paris's culture can be reduced to a set of buildings?
>Are you suggesting that nothing of cultural significance has happened in Paris since the Louvre opened as a museum in 1793?
No; I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. In fact, that seems like a fairly strange statement given that I mentioned the Centre Pompidou (opened in the 1970s) in practically the same breath.
>Or that Paris's culture can be reduced to a set of buildings?
No; again, not sure where that's coming from.
My point, which you didn't address at all, was that you seemed to be implying that there was some kind of correlation between lower-income housing in cities and their cultural significance. Was that your goal? If so, can you explain further?
In a sentence: artists are poor. Hence the correlation. You can see this on a smaller scale with neighbourhoods in a given city. The culturally cutting edge neighbourhoods of NYC aren't the ones where all the rich people live.
