Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As somebody coming up from Texas or back from Indiana, it does seem like that once you leave Memphis heading south, there is no question you are in the Deep South. I'd say outside of the Memphis metro area, most of the entire state of Tennessee feels a lot like Kentucky. In the looks of the landscape and the people's accents, the demographics, their culture and lifestyle, those 2 states are about as similar as any two states in the nation. They are an entirely different region from the Deep South. If a Gateway city is a city that sort of divides 2 regions, then I would say Memphis is a Gateway City to the Deep South. As is Chattanooga, and as Evansville and Louisville are Gateway Cities to the South.
Historically Dallas may well have had more ties with the Southeast than the great plains. However, in 2014 I don't think it does.
I might -- and probably should have -- conceded this one to you (in fact, I thought about it later). I could agree that -- on many levels -- that the Greater Dallas area, with the increasing number of suburbs and Midwestern transplants/migrants, probably has -- as a whole -- brought an increasing Midwestern, even international influence. BUT...where it gets different is when one isolates the city of Dallas itself from its suburbs. This is where the overwhelming Southern character comes into play...in a way not in the least connected to the character of, say, Wichita, Kansas.
With that said...
Quote:
I work in the aviation industry and its easy to measure ties to a particular city or region based on origin and destination traffic of the small cities in the region. This is the traffic that starts and ends in a city that does not connect. Based on that data, DFW truly is where the Mid-South meets the Midwestern Great Plains. DFW is the single largest O&D market to cities Little Rock, Garden City KS, Northwest Arkansas, Grand Island NE, Tulsa, Joplin MO, etc. It is in the top three O&D destinations for Kansas City, Fargo, Sioux Falls, Cedar Rapids, Des Moines, Wichita, Omaha, St. Louis, Jackson, Huntsville, and Birmingham.
This all said, Dallas is not the international center of the South and Southeast. Atlanta is. Dallas is the international center of the Great Plains. Atlanta represents more to the South than any other city and Dallas represents more to the Great Plains than any other city.
As I said above, there is more, today, because of migration, something that makes the DWF area have a strong dis-connect from its original historical and cultural roots. I will give you that one. At the same time though, you seem to be basing -- at least by what I glean from your above statement -- that the ties are predicated upon your own -- with all due respect -- narrow rubric, as illustrated by your aviation association and seemingly limiting it to that. Plus, by extension of sorts, you are defining "the South" by your own definition (which we all do, far as that goes, I suppose)...but not by many other criterion, not the least of which is self-identification with the region itself.
And that is where it comes to that (among many others) the whole true cohesiveness of cultural region falls apart, as with Texas being anything similar to Nebraska. Or even Dallas, Texas, with Wichita, Kansas.
In any event, my original larger point, was that the residents of the "Great Plains" (actually, a better application would be the "Frontier Strip") are not a true cultural region, even if residents of the same may engage in trades which make them have more in common with one another in terms of sharing "shop talk". For example, that a South Carolina shrimper might do the same with a Massachusetts cod-figherman...but yet share not much else at all in terms of politics, attitudes, customs, speech, church membership, etc. Which is the true measure of it all. Which is really the essence of it all.
Anyway, to wind it up, we just have to agree to disagree on this one, and are possibly even talking past each other in some ways. Even if we disagree, I always appreciate and enjoy a good debate/discussion with a worthy opponent!
Historically Dallas may well have had more ties with the Southeast than the great plains. However, in 2014 I don't think it does.
I work in the aviation industry and its easy to measure ties to a particular city or region based on origin and destination traffic of the small cities in the region. This is the traffic that starts and ends in a city that does not connect. Based on that data, DFW truly is where the Mid-South meets the Midwestern Great Plains. DFW is the single largest O&D market to cities Little Rock, Garden City KS, Northwest Arkansas, Grand Island NE, Tulsa, Joplin MO, etc. It is in the top three O&D destinations for Kansas City, Fargo, Sioux Falls, Cedar Rapids, Des Moines, Wichita, Omaha, St. Louis, Jackson, Huntsville, and Birmingham.
This all said, Dallas is not the international center of the South and Southeast. Atlanta is. Dallas is the international center of the Great Plains. Atlanta represents more to the South than any other city and Dallas represents more to the Great Plains than any other city.
EDIT: Going through the data further, I can find one state in the South that seems to have closer transport ties to DFW than any of the other majors in the South and thats Arkansas. Other than that, all the other cities seem to have closer ties to Atlanta or Houston (the ones along the Gulf).
The below map isn't perfect (the Great Plains region is too big), but I think its a good representation of economical ties (not historical or cultural ones):
Well that's the issue. You seem to be talking about economic ties but most of everyone else is discussing culture.
The same points you make for Dallas can be made for Houston and Atlanta. The former has overwhelming influence from and economic ties with Latin America, while the same is true with Boswash and Midwestern transplants in the latter. None of these outside influences have wiped away the strong southern culture in either of these cities.
Well that's the issue. You seem to be talking about economic ties but most of everyone else is discussing culture.
The same points you make for Dallas can be made for Houston and Atlanta. The former has overwhelming influence from and economic ties with Latin America, while the same is true with Boswash and Midwestern transplants in the latter. None of these outside influences have wiped away the strong southern culture in either of these cities.
No, you really cant.
Neither has the ties to the Great Plains states and cities that Dallas does. The only other cities that do would be Chicago, Minneapolis, and Denver.
Also, looking at the cities culturally and historically Houston and Atlanta are more Southern than Dallas. DFW was always where east meets west. Houston and Atlanta were firmly South and East.
If a Gateway city is a city that sort of divides 2 regions, then I would say Memphis is a Gateway City to the Deep South. As is Chattanooga, and as Evansville and Louisville are Gateway Cities to the South.
Chattanooga is too far north to be a gateway city to the Deep South; you'd have to go farther South to Atlanta, Huntsville, or Birmingham.
Neither has the ties to the Great Plains states and cities that Dallas does. The only other cities that do would be Chicago, Minneapolis, and Denver.
I'm not talking about the Great Plains specifically. My point is that all three of the cities have strong ties to non-southern regions.
Quote:
Also, looking at the cities culturally and historically Houston and Atlanta are more Southern than Dallas. DFW was always where east meets west. Houston and Atlanta were firmly South and East.
I agree that Houston and Atlanta are more southern in a tactile way, but Dallas is also much more southern than you are suggesting. It may look a bit more like a typical plains city, but its cultural ties definitely come from the east.
What are your thoughts on the differences between Northern Georgia, Northern Alabama, and Northern Mississippi?
Northern GA and northern AL are fairly similar in terms of terrain and such (as GA and AL are practically mirror images of each other topographically, with GA having slightly higher elevations); northern MS seems to be a bit of an outlier however.
How many definitions of "Deep South" are there? Growing up, my idea of the Deep South conformed very closely to the description below:
Quote:
When "Deep South" first began to gain mainstream currency in print—in the middle of the 20th century—it applied to the states and areas of Mississippi, north Louisiana, southern Alabama and Georgia, and northern Florida. This was the part of the South many considered the "most Southern.
I never thought of it is as a real, cultural region, but rather a place during a particular time when Jim Crow and extra-judicial killings were at their extremes. I guess I've always thought of it within the context of the Civil Rights Movement, which was when the term "Deep South" began to be widely used.
But that's only what the Deep South was. To me, it's always been comparable to saying "Nazi Germany." It describes a dark place in history that no longer exists.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
