WHAT IF: a Midwest without Chicago (Metropolis, Sullivan: living, move to, yard)

[edsg25]

Imagine, if you will, a Middle West that grew up differently....with no Chicago. What I am suggesting is a region where no city would have arrived at regional dominance like Chicago did and that the rest....Detroit, St. Louis, M/SP, Cleveland, Indy, Milw, etc., had stayed in place the way they are now, none being able to differentiate itself from the pack to special position in this part of the country.

How would the region be different today without such a Chicago?

And if you want to take it one step further, what would the US be like differently than today with such an interior, that you could travel from NY to either LA or SF without hitting any such major forces as Chicago when going between those two coasts?

And consider: does the very existence of Chicago and its greatness so far removed from the coasts in some way give voice and impact to the entire interior, with reaches from the Windy City to places like Kentucky, Arkansas, Kansas, etc.?????

[Ghengis]

Twins would have won the AL Central last year!

[Irishtom29]

Then you need to imagine a Midwest with no Great Lakes and no Mississippi valley. The existence of those things determined that Chicago would, nay MUST, exist.

[Manigault]

Chicago without the lake would be St. Louis. The Midwest without Chicago would be Milwaukee-ish.

[Milwaukee City]

I would move to New York, plain and simple. I hate winter with a passion but I love Milwaukee and having Chicago a hour away keeps me sane. I'm trying to move to South Florida or San Diego but if I don't win this war with the wifey it will be the city of the big shoulders.

I'm more of a Portage Park person, I could see myself living near Belmont and Central.

[Tex?Il?]

One of the other midwestern cities would've become like Chicago, pure and simple.

Despite what many on this forum might say, Chicago rise to prominence is mostly a matter of luck in having the right people at the right time, and of course the accompanying feedback mechanisms associated with it.

Examples: People like Daniel Burnham, Louis Sullivan, people who ran the board of trade, encouraged all the railroads, and the efficiency of the stockyards. and of course we all know about the two mayor Daleys.

Make no mistake one of the other cities: (Milwaukee, St. Louis, Detroit, etc. although St. Louis would be the likely candidate). would've made it.

Read: Natures Metropolis by William Cronon. Its was partially civic boosterism that propelled Chicago over St. Louis, Cincinatti.

[Milwaukee City]

I think Chicago's prominence is luck, based upon location. Being at the bottom of LK Michigan was very accessible during the day of the railroad and shipping days. Then most people would say why not Gary then b/c Gary is actually on the bottom of LK.Michigan. I think the location difference in Gary and Chicago is like splitting hairs, Chicago became what it is today b/c of leadership and more importantly location.

[Tex?Il?]

I partially take that back. Like some posters said, geography would say Chicago would have to have had existed where it did. But I totally think that if you had different people in different places at different times, then Chicago would be more on par with Milwaukee, St. Louis, Detroit, etc.

I could really go into this, but remember, Chicago is what it is because of a minority of people with big plans (planners, artichects, etc.) NOT because of southern and eastern European immigrants, and southern African Americans, etc. ALL midwestern cities had them migrate for work.

[Milwaukee City]

I can prove Chicago is what it is today b/c of location, for the reason that Milwaukee was actually bigger than Chicago at one time, well that didn't last for long and then the Chicago fire happened and I believe if the Chicago fire wouldn't have happened Chicago might have been the largest city in the us today.

[Avengerfire]

God this thread is pretty pointless. All that will come out of it is verbal Masturbation.