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.
Does it make sense to clump these as "Midwest"? Probably to New Yorkers, and Angelenos it does.
However, I spent my childhood in Detroit, Michigan. I never felt that the Dakotas were part of the midwest then. Even places like Minnesota and Iowa bordered on being a different region. To me the Midwest was basically Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan.
Now I realize that even the Dakotas stretch into traditional definitions of the midwest. From living in Minneapolis, I met many people from the Dakotas and they always referred to themselves as midwesterners. But at the same time there was a somewhat noticeable cultural gap between us, more profound than the one between us and Pittsburgh or Buffalo.
To me personally, once you get to the Dakotas you're in a very different landscape with a different culture than mine. Then again, I feel the same way about the Upper Midwest (MN/WI/MI) vs the rest (IA/IL/IN/OH). Lots of blending in there, true, but the Badlands are like the UP how? And how are the Badlands or UP like Cincinnati?
Great Lakes are lot more urban than the Great Plains. Chicago is the 3rd biggest city in the USA and a major hub. Then you have Detroit, Michigan (metro connects to lake Eerie), Cleveland, Ohio, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Buffalo NY, and so on. If you count area as well, maybe you could include Minneapolis, MN as part of the Great Lakes.
Tbh, I'm not sure if there is a city in the Great Plains that is rather large, maybe Kansas City, MO. Does that count as part of the great plains?
Nature wise, I think the Great Lakes has it again despite it being more urban by a wide margin.
This topic comes up periodically, and to be honest, I don't see the problem.
West Virginia has little in common with the Louisiana, but they're both in the South.
Seattle, Washington has little in common with Yuma, Arizona, but they're both in the West.
In some circumstances we use larger, general regions to divide our country. In other circumstances we use smaller, more specific regions. It depends on what kind of research you're doing and what information you need to know.
But, the Midwest as a whole, including both Ohio and North Dakota, was largely developed after the Northeast and before the West. Unlike the South and East, it's predominately German-American. Despite the industry in the bigger cities, the economy is largely agrarian.
This topic comes up periodically, and to be honest I don't see the problem.
West Virginia has little in common with the Louisiana, but they're both in the South.
Seattle, Washington has little in common with Yuma, Arizona, but they're both in the West.
In some circumstances we use larger, general regions to divde our country. In other circumstances we use smaller, more specific regions. It depends on what kind of research you're doing and what information you need to know.
I guess to someone from the East Coast (95 interstate area), the areas are the same. With the Great Lakes as the more urban part and the Great Plains as the more rural part of the midwest. However, the midwest spreading from Montana to New York and then from Canada border to Oklahoma would be quite an expansive region which one section more culturally similar to the east, the side more culturally similar to the west.
I guess to someone from the East Coast (95 interstate area), the areas are the same. With the Great Lakes as the more urban part and the Great Plains as the more rural part of the midwest. However, the midwest spreading from Montana to New York and then from Canada border to Oklahoma would be quite an expansive region which one section more culturally similar to the east, the side more culturally similar to the west.
Dude. Read what I wrote. I never said it's all the same. I lived in Minneapolis for three years and Chicago for eight. I know the Midwest. I'm actually writing this right now in Rochester, New York, which is an odd Rust Belt-East Coast hybrid of a city.
Of course the Eastern edge of the Midwest feels kinda East Coast, and the Western edge feels kinda Western. Duh. Just like how there are Midwestern influences in parts of Kentucky, Southern influences in parts of Illinois, and Northeastern influences in parts of Virginia.
And I agree that Ohio and North Dakota have more similarities that differences, but sometimes, in some circumstances, it's necessary and appropirate to group states in to large regions, and other times it's not. That's why we also have subregions like Rustbelt, Great Lakes, Upper Midwest, Interior Northeast, Upper South, Ohio River Valley, etc.
It all depends on the context, man.
Last edited by Dawn.Davenport; 02-06-2015 at 02:17 PM..
And I agree that Ohio and North Dakota have more similarities that differences,
I disagree with that in the context of the USA, Ohio and North Dakota have more differences than similarities. If you expend this to the context of the world, then sure.
I disagree with that in the context of the USA, Ohio and North Dakota have more differences than similarities. If you expend this to the context of the world, then sure.
Suppose there's a drought that is affecting most of Midwest and you're writing about how that drought is affecting corn prduction across the region. Since Ohio and Nebraska all grow a crapload of corn, it makes sense to group the entire region together. Thus, it would be silly to not use the term Midwest.
Suppose you're researching urban decay and revitalization. Since urban decay does not really affect the western half of the Midwest (there are exceptions--St. Louis), it would not make sense to use the term Midwest, and one would likely choose the more precise term Rustbelt.
Suppose there's a drought that affecting most of Midwest and you're writing about how that drought affected corn prduction across the region. In this case, it makes sense to group the entire region region togeather. Thus, it makes sense to use the term Midwest to describe the region as a whole.
Suppose you're researching urban decay and revitalization. Since urban decay does not really affect the Western of the Midwest (there are exceptions--St. Louis), it would not make sense to use the term Midwest, and likely choose the more precise term Rustbelt in terms.
Ohio is not really a big farming state, I'm sure they have some corn here and there but the majority of their economy is independent of this. A big drought in corn production won't effect Ohio noticeably but it may be devastating for Iowa.
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.
