U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-11-2017, 07:33 AM
 
Location: On the Great South Bay
7,131 posts, read 9,901,913 times
Reputation: 6423

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by goat314 View Post
Well if you want to get that technical. About 800,000 St. Louisans live in the Metro East, making them citizens of Illinois and technically Great Lake Staters. So St. Louis could be seen as a quasi-Great Lake, river city but in all honesty I don't think it's that cut in dry. Chicago for example has way more historical, cultural and economic connections to St. Louis than it does to Cleveland or Buffalo, but the later are technically "Great Lake" cities and by definition should have more in common right?
Well technically then I am a "Great Lake Stater" too because my state has Buffalo and Rochester. The same could be said of Philadelphians because of Erie. But no one seriously considers NYC and Philadelphia, let alone Long Island, to be Great Lakes cities.

Here is the thing, St Louis is on the Mississippi River. If St Louis is somehow a Great Lakes City, then are not Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit and Buffalo, also Mississippi Valley Cities!?!

Obviously that makes no sense. If St Louis was closer to Chicago then I can see a case being made that St Louis might be a Great Lakes City. But as it stands now, IMHO St Louis is too far and separated by almost entirely rural land from the nearest Great Lakes City.
'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-11-2017, 07:56 AM
 
Location: Tampa - St. Louis
1,090 posts, read 1,626,549 times
Reputation: 1508
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative View Post
Well technically then I am a "Great Lake Stater" too because my state has Buffalo and Rochester. The same could be said of Philadelphians because of Erie. But no one seriously considers NYC and Philadelphia, let alone Long Island, to be Great Lakes cities.

Here is the thing, St Louis is on the Mississippi River. If St Louis is somehow a Great Lakes City, then are not Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit and Buffalo, also Mississippi Valley Cities!?!

Obviously that makes no sense. If St Louis was closer to Chicago then I can see a case being made that St Louis might be a Great Lakes City. But as it stands now, IMHO St Louis is too far and separated by almost entirely rural land from the nearest Great Lakes City.
'
I was being hyperbolic, but just pointing out the absurdity of the Great Lake Megapolis concept. The example I used was that Chicago actually shares more connections to St. Louis and Indianapolis than it does to Buffalo and Cleveland, but the later are also Great Lake cities. Now there are certain nuances that only Great Lake cities have, just like there are things St. Louis shares with New Orleans and Memphis simply based on their river city legacies, but most cities are a hodgepodge of different regional influences. I think proximity and historical trade routes have the most influence in shaping the cultural identities of cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 08:06 AM
 
2,200 posts, read 2,318,579 times
Reputation: 1941
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative View Post
Historically the Great Plains states were all considered to be part of the West.
That's what "Midwest" originally meant, the middle of the West, i.e., Kansas and Nebraska.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 08:09 AM
 
2,200 posts, read 2,318,579 times
Reputation: 1941
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadgerFilms View Post
The name Midwest may be a bit of a misnomer, "Midnorth" would be more accurate"
See above. It's less a misnomer and more an anachronism. But it is certainly a valid and real regional identity and culture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 08:14 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX
10,779 posts, read 9,415,565 times
Reputation: 6137
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative View Post
Well technically then I am a "Great Lake Stater" too because my state has Buffalo and Rochester. The same could be said of Philadelphians because of Erie. But no one seriously considers NYC and Philadelphia, let alone Long Island, to be Great Lakes cities.

Here is the thing, St Louis is on the Mississippi River. If St Louis is somehow a Great Lakes City, then are not Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit and Buffalo, also Mississippi Valley Cities!?!

Obviously that makes no sense. If St Louis was closer to Chicago then I can see a case being made that St Louis might be a Great Lakes City. But as it stands now, IMHO St Louis is too far and separated by almost entirely rural land from the nearest Great Lakes City.
'
Just as someone earlier brought up the Erie Canal which was responsible for the boom in the early Midwest with NYC being the primary beneficiary as it was the port on the Atlantic, the Chicago Portage was almost entirely responsible for the boom that made Chicago #2 after NYC (this is before LA entered the picture).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Portage

The Chicago Portage basically linked Chicago and St. Louis. Midwestern food stuffs could be loaded on barges that could navigate the Portage and then they would float down to St. Louis at which time they could be loaded onto larger ships. This is why St. Louis and Chicago are linked.

The decline of St. Louis was more marked than Chicago because as the St. Lawrence Seaway was improved, Chicago could continue as a major shipping port directly out to sea, bypassing St. Louis. Those improvements also marked the decline of Buffalo, Rochester, and Albany as the Erie Canal commerce basically dried up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 08:28 AM
 
Location: Tampa - St. Louis
1,090 posts, read 1,626,549 times
Reputation: 1508
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative View Post
Well technically then I am a "Great Lake Stater" too because my state has Buffalo and Rochester. The same could be said of Philadelphians because of Erie. But no one seriously considers NYC and Philadelphia, let alone Long Island, to be Great Lakes cities.

Here is the thing, St Louis is on the Mississippi River. If St Louis is somehow a Great Lakes City, then are not Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit and Buffalo, also Mississippi Valley Cities!?!

Obviously that makes no sense. If St Louis was closer to Chicago then I can see a case being made that St Louis might be a Great Lakes City. But as it stands now, IMHO St Louis is too far and separated by almost entirely rural land from the nearest Great Lakes City.
'


Well Chicago is definitely a Mississippi Valley city, as is Pittsburgh, Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Kansas City etc. considering the Mississippi Valley is fed by several rivers including the Ohio, Missouri, Illinois, etc.. That's precisely how Chicago became Chicago, because of its connections to the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Valley via a very prosperous city at the time called St. Louis. How do you think frontier furs, leathers, and other treasures got to the Eastern Great Lake cities before an extensive railroad was built? With that said, the St. Louis-Chicago Amtrak route is the 2nd busiest Amtrak route in the Midwest outside of Milwaukee-Chicago, both routes are top 10 busiest in the country by the way, remnants of that old railroad legacy that the cities share.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 08:30 AM
 
Location: Tampa - St. Louis
1,090 posts, read 1,626,549 times
Reputation: 1508
Quote:
Originally Posted by cBach View Post
Just as someone earlier brought up the Erie Canal which was responsible for the boom in the early Midwest with NYC being the primary beneficiary as it was the port on the Atlantic, the Chicago Portage was almost entirely responsible for the boom that made Chicago #2 after NYC (this is before LA entered the picture).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Portage

The Chicago Portage basically linked Chicago and St. Louis. Midwestern food stuffs could be loaded on barges that could navigate the Portage and then they would float down to St. Louis at which time they could be loaded onto larger ships. This is why St. Louis and Chicago are linked.

The decline of St. Louis was more marked than Chicago because as the St. Lawrence Seaway was improved, Chicago could continue as a major shipping port directly out to sea, bypassing St. Louis. Those improvements also marked the decline of Buffalo, Rochester, and Albany as the Erie Canal commerce basically dried up.
Exactly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX
10,779 posts, read 9,415,565 times
Reputation: 6137
Quote:
Originally Posted by goat314 View Post

Well Chicago is definitely a Mississippi Valley city, as is Pittsburgh, Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Kansas City etc. considering the Mississippi Valley is fed by several rivers including the Ohio, Missouri, Illinois, etc.. That's precisely how Chicago became Chicago, because of its connections to the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Valley via a very prosperous city at the time called St. Louis. How do you think frontier furs, leathers, and other treasures got to the Eastern Great Lake cities before an extensive railroad was built? With that said, the St. Louis-Chicago Amtrak route is the 2nd busiest Amtrak route in the Midwest outside of Milwaukee-Chicago, both routes are top 10 busiest in the country by the way, remnants of that old railroad legacy that the cities share.
The Illinois and Michigan Canal connected that last segment to Lake Michigan with a project that reversed the flow of the Chicago River. It was replaced by an improved Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illino...Michigan_Canal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicag...and_Ship_Canal

The only thing that separates the Mississippi River and Lake Michigan is a small lock.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 01:37 PM
 
4,802 posts, read 3,841,934 times
Reputation: 2585
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay F View Post
I always wondered why the St. Louis accent sounds like the Great Lakes cities and not like the rest of Missouri which sounds much more Southern to me.
Ethnic groups. St. Louis had a much stronger Irish component that influenced their accent similar to the Great Lakes. I am also sure the influx of Germans diluted any Southern sound if it was there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2017, 02:09 PM
 
Location: On the Great South Bay
7,131 posts, read 9,901,913 times
Reputation: 6423
Quote:
Originally Posted by goat314 View Post

Well Chicago is definitely a Mississippi Valley city, as is Pittsburgh, Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Kansas City etc. considering the Mississippi Valley is fed by several rivers including the Ohio, Missouri, Illinois, etc.. That's precisely how Chicago became Chicago, because of its connections to the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Valley via a very prosperous city at the time called St. Louis. How do you think frontier furs, leathers, and other treasures got to the Eastern Great Lake cities before an extensive railroad was built? With that said, the St. Louis-Chicago Amtrak route is the 2nd busiest Amtrak route in the Midwest outside of Milwaukee-Chicago, both routes are top 10 busiest in the country by the way, remnants of that old railroad legacy that the cities share.
Well then Chicago is also a Hudson Valley city because it is connected to NYC by way of the Great Lakes and the Erie Canal. So are Cleveland, Detroit and Toronto. And they are also St Lawrence Valley cities because they can be connected to Montreal by water, as NYC can also.

In fact, Pittsburgh is a Hudson Valley city (who knew!) by going down the Ohio River, up the Mississippi River, up the canal to Lake Michigan then to Lake Huron, out to Lake Erie, down the Erie Canal to the Hudson River to land at the Chelsea Piers in Manhattan! And vice versa for New York and might as well add Miami because Miami can be connected to NYC by water and thus up to Buffalo, out to Chicago, down to Cairo and back east to Pittsburgh. All Ohio Valley cities!

St Louis and Memphis are also Gulf cities because they are connected by the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico, Springfield, Massachusetts is on the Long Island Sound and Philadelphia is a West Coast City because it is connected to Los Angeles by railroad!

Do you see how silly that sounds? Don't get me wrong, I understand the point of connectivity you are trying to make but that does not mean that Chicago is actually in the Mississippi Valley or that St Louis is on the Great Lakes. Otherwise the definition of region is so broad, that the whole country is basically one mega-region.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top