Sometimes you can. Depends what you want out of it. I've only spent a very short time in London, but I live in New York, and some evenings all I need to do to be happy is walk to the middle of the Brooklyn Bridge and look at the lights and the people. Same reason I don't really need an itinerary if I head upstate - it's enough to find a random mountain, climb it, and look at the trees and lakes. Just getting to know the feeling of a place can be very special.

I am not sure what you mean by that. Do cities not want people to visit them? You can't travel through a city unless you commit to live there for a while?

I’m saying that if you want to enjoy a city you should find things that you enjoy to do there. If you just show up it’s not surprising that you’ll be unimpressed.

I guess? Seems like a concert for example would be just as fun in a smaller rural venue than a gigantic urban one.

I would enjoy the activity itself without regard of the location. If the city is to be impressive should it not stand on its own?

No, that’s what I’m saying. That’s not the point of it. All the buildings aren’t just for show. They’re all functional.

Not sure I agree. Strolling through Paris, New York stopping here and there for a coffee and cake is quite fun I’d say.