Why is Chicago "the most American of big cities"? (Washington: gangs, gardens)

[MassVt]

I believe that the claim about Chicago being "the most American" city refers to comparisons with NYC and LA, which come off as being more "worldly" and "international" when compared to Chicago..

[tonythetuna]

Originally Posted by MassVt

Good post; by the time Chicago was being settled, "Americans" no longer felt a need to recreate Europe in the Midwest, and instead built an environment that was less claustrophobic than the older, more European-based cities of Boston, NYC, Philly, etc..

The first city of Chicago that burned was way different than what came after. If you dig in enough and look at parts that survived the fire and that are on the old grid you will see that the city was built compact and tight like the east coast cities. Many of the large streets were widened in the next few decades after the fire.

Lincoln Park and Old Town are some great areas to see this. It can even be seen downtown if you know where to look.

[citylove101]

I always think of Chciago as the Great American City in the US, as opposed to New York, which I consider the Great World City in the US. (And I don't thnk of LA much at all!)

Now don't flame me 'cause in many ways Chitown is a world city for sure. Just not on the scale of NYC, with vastly greater levels of imimgration, the UN, corp hdqrs, and a world center in finance, fashion, art to name jsut a few

But I think of Chicago as the Great American City because 1) skyscrapers! 2) railroads! 3) gangsters! 4)wheat! and mainly 4) its managed to keep its big time status while virtually every other city in the Midwest has been withering on the vine. It can reinvent itself as industries come and go and still stay great. That's very American.

FYI -- my own theory is that no city that isnt a trading center is really intersting. port cities are obvious ones. but cities that are rail hubs and air hubs can do it also. the movement of people and goods in and out means the movement of ideas in and out, which makes a city interesting and attracts new blood. its why chicago will probably never end up like detroit or st louis or cleveland

[SillyGrin]

Interesting theory. I think there is something to that. Detriot and Saint Louis were major trading centers in their time - both being located on waterways that were essential for transportation. But as other forms of transportation emerged, this was less the case.

[paytonc]

Originally Posted by Dncr

It just is. I don't know how to explain it via this computer, but Chicago is just the most American of all major cities. It represents both our past, present, and future.

I'd largely agree. Chicago pioneered and epitomized the idea of an instant industrial city, rising from swamps and ashes to world-city status during 1850-1930 like no city before -- and solely on the strength of America's bountiful harvests, then-limitless frontier, and waves of immigration. It was, like America, an emerging and inventive power unbound by geography or the past; its rise coincided with (and contributed to) the USA's tremendous growth as an industrial power with huge aspirations.

It also helps that Chicago's the economic capital of the Midwest, which is usually seen as the most "American" of regions. It also helps that Chicago exported itself, its goods, and its form across the country via the railroad empire that it built.

That same instant-city narrative is now being repeated throughout the developing world, although typically in cities that have a bit more history than Chicago had.

[uptown_urbanist]

It sounds like a hollow name. I don't know the history of where the nickname comes from, so perhaps in its original context it made sense. Other than that, though, I don't think Chicago is any more or less American than any other big city, although my impression is that Chicago doesn't feel as international in flavor as NYC or LA. (since I think a large and diverse foreign population is representative of being "American," though, I think those cities are as American as anywhere else)

I agree that the name seems to make most sense in the context of Chicago's historical rise, as well as its location in the Midwest.

Maybe it also feels more like "home" to more people than many other big cities; it has its own distinctive identity and feel, certainly, but its architecture will feel relatively familiar and comfortable to those from both coasts, as well as to native Midwesterners. It's very diverse, but in a way that feels different than the diversity I was used to on the west coast.

[SoxCub Fan]

Originally Posted by MassVt

I believe that the claim about Chicago being "the most American" city refers to comparisons with NYC and LA, which come off as being more "worldly" and "international" when compared to Chicago..

Finally someone has it right....when they refer to "big" cities they are referring to NY, LA, Chicago....and out of the 3 Chicago has a more "American" feel. Its that simple. New Yorkers are extremely different than the rest of the country, it almost feels as if you are visiting a different country or an island somewhere far off from the main land. New York is not a good representation of what America is as a whole, if a foreigner were to come here and only visit NY, he would leave with the wrong impression of what this country is truly about. Same with LA; LA is its own monster and doesnt give an accurate depiction of what Americans as a whole represent in terms of values, ethnic make-up, and overall feel. But Chicago is spot on....Chicago is about as American as you can get. There isnt a heavy foreign influence in terms of the behavior, attitudes, and views of the people who live here. It is the American city built by Americans for Americans.

[SoxCub Fan]

Originally Posted by tonythetuna

The first city of Chicago that burned was way different than what came after. If you dig in enough and look at parts that survived the fire and that are on the old grid you will see that the city was built compact and tight like the east coast cities. Many of the large streets were widened in the next few decades after the fire.

Lincoln Park and Old Town are some great areas to see this. It can even be seen downtown if you know where to look.

True...just go to Printers Row in the South Loop some blocks looks exactly like parts of Manhattan.

[Chicago60614]

I've heard that name/phrase mentioned a lot about Chicago in multiple settings.

It's not about who lives here now, where they're from, or how "international" the city is compared to NYC or LA.


It goes back to the roots of Chicago. It wasn't settled directly by Europeans as on the east coast. It wasn't a colony of Britain, it didn't have the Mexican or Spanish influence of the south, it didn't have the French influence of Louisiana.

Chicago was a city built by Americans, and thrived not just because of international trade, but because it became the great gateway as our country exploded and expanded out west. Americans built Chicago, Americans put up the railroads, devised the grid system for the city, built the first skyscrapers, the city fourished because it was used as a western base for the ever-expanding country.

I think that's why Chicago is called the most American of American cities (USA). It was a great metropolis that was founded and grew after the United States had been formed, the war of 1812 was over, the country was established and coming into its own. It didn't have the influence of the French, Spanish, British, etc. It was pioneers and first/second generation Americans that decided how the city would be built. Other cities fit this picture of course, but I think it was Chicago extreme growth in the 1800's and first half of the 1900's and how extremely large it got that gave the city that title.

[Irishtom29]

Early fur trade Chicago did have a freewheeling, laid back kind of French, Indian and Metis "Middle Ground" kind of culture but when the New Englanders and upstate New Yorkers showed up those people and their culture were bowled right over.

Thank God for the Erie Canal and the subsequent flood of enterprising northeasterners on the make; they made this town big time. And this state.

A couple of good books on the subject are "Chicago and the Old Northwest 1673-1835" by Quaife and "Frontier Illinois" by Davis.