Atlanta ( New York of the South? ) (Savannah, Perry: houses, shop, agriculture)

[WestbankNOLA]

Originally Posted by annie_himself

Confused about the underlined a little..



Very true, although N LA fits that vibe

I was just pointing out how subjective these titles and threads are. People will say that NOLA is super southern and that ATL isn't then turn around and say the opposite in a thread like this. You and I know that Southeast LA is anything but stereotypical, but it is never tossed out like TX and FL. Likewise MS and Appalachia are included in the mix when they're just a little bit different.

Originally Posted by Georgiafrog

But any real comparison between Georgia and Texas, or Alabama and Florida, or even Mississippi and Louisiana is missing the mark.

I'll say that North LA has the East TX to West MS vibe. People in S La actually write off N La as being part of TX or AR

[annie_himself]

Originally Posted by WestbankNOLA

I'd say that southeastern vibe ends slightly west of the MS/AL line. As most of MS markets itself as South Central vs Southeast and the western end of TN along with AR consider themselves Mid-South. On that note MS is more like LA than AL & GA IMO. It's sort of caught in the middle. Either way there is a big difference between Southeast, which is slightly subjective, and he south as a whole.

I agree that MS is split between the two. I've always considered myself part of the SE in Baton Rouge. Technically we are east of the MS river, by a hair.

Gotcha ^^

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

again what does Miami's cultural ties have to do with it being in the southeast United states????

The term "NY of the South," however crass it may be, pretty much refers to the city that exerts the most cultural and economic influence within its region. Miami exerts much more influence over the Caribbean and Latin America than the rest of the Southeast. It might technically be "in" the South, but it's not really "of" the South in that regard.

Originally Posted by WestbankNOLA

Regardless of what they are identified with, they all respresent the region as a whole.

I completely disagree. Miami has very little cultural and economic ties with the rest of the South; as a matter of fact, its influence within the U.S. really doesn't even go beyond Florida. There's a reason why it's referred to as "the capital of Latin America." Miami may be IN the South, but it's really not OF the South. Houston and Dallas are much more representative of the subregion of Texas than the South as a whole, IMO. Also, because Houston, Dallas, and Miami are geographically located on the edges of the South, they aren't really accessible to a large swath of the South like Atlanta is. It's pretty hard to represent the South as a whole under those circumstances.

Now that you've taken it there, go ahead and elaborate on what exactly "southerness" is.

I'm not going to trudge through that exactly, but what I'm saying is that because Houston, Dallas, and Miami--especially Miami--are geographically located on the edges of the South, they have something of a diluted or hybrid version of "southerness" due to influence from bordering regions. That's not true of Atlanta.

In your eyes what is "the region"?

Essentially the old Confederate states minus Missouri, plus Kentucky, and only the eastern part of Texas as opposed to the entire state.

From a cultural standpoint if you take out the Texas cities, let's just remove Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and maybe western Tennessee from the discussion.

They aren't in the discussion because we're not talking about cities in LA, AK, MS, and TN. Plus it's different with TX because it's considered its own subregion, it straddles two regions (south/southwest), and is a border state.

I'm not trying to be anal about this, but this topic always irks me. Regardless of how it is intended, when titles like this are established people don't realize that they just casted 40,000,000 people (excluding AR, TX, & VA) under one broad net. Houston and Dallas are going to be much more important to people west of Alabama and likewise with Miami and Floridians. North Carolina I honestly don't know.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

The craziest thing I've noticed is that whenever these topics progess or whenever the discussion of southerness is debated, it's usually someone from AL, GA, SC, NC, etc. trying to set the definition. No one else really seems to care and I think that it's unfair to the majority of southerners even if it is a silly title with no merit.

I'm not sure where the person who started this thread is from. But in this thread, the people who understand the principle behind the moniker even if they disagree with the exact wording are from all over: the Midwest, Northeast, West Coast, and South.

Originally Posted by HtownLove

just like Houston and Dallas is more identified to its subregion (the West SOuth central US), ATL is more identified with the SE. In the end, they are all in the South

I stated that Houston, Dallas, and Miami are more identified with their subregion, which in this case is really their respective states, than with the South as a whole. I believe that people think of Houston and Dallas (and the other major cities in TX) as Texan first and foremost, and then depending on who you are talking to, they might consider them Southern. Miami is very rarely identified with the larger South. On the other hand, I think Atlanta is highly identified with the South, much more so than Houston, Dallas, and Miami.

I think you are the one being technical by carving up the south so that ATL can be New York.

I didn't start the thread and I don't want "ATL to be New York." I'm merely pointing out the fact that not everyone includes (south) Florida and Texas in with the traditional South, either for cultural/geographical reasons or because they equate the southeast with the South. I'm not doing it, but that's obviously what goes on in the mind of a lot of people. That's not my fault at all; I'm merely describing the practical thought process going on behind it.

[annie_himself]

Can't rep you anymore. That was the point I was trying to get across. I personally feel like Houston, Dallas, and Miami, are undoubtedly southern, however, many people disagree.

Then you have these smaller cities which cast their reign over their respective regions (Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, Charlotte, etc).

[blkgiraffe]

I don't really care to argue this; it's simply a nickname. People who say this exclude Miami, Houston and Dallas. Atlanta is centrally located with the south; whereas the other 3 sit on the edges of it. I'm well aware that all of them are southern, but Atlanta tends to be the face and focus point of the south.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by annie_himself

It's a general statement. If its free, I just might come.

It's not a literal meaning. I don't know how else to explain it. I'm not questioning any cities southernness. And I'm not judging based on a cities credibility of being southern.

If you cannot explain ATL's position in the south then more than likely its position was exaggerated to you.

I never said Atlanta rules the south,

You are actually implying it by not exaplaining what you mean

it was merely the default big city

No it is not. There are 13 cities in the South Bigger than ATL and 3 metros that are bigger and more economically strong

of the general south

what is that?? There is no General South Mr Annie. You really do need my help The ATLans have you completely bamboozled.

and the poster child as it hosted the Olympics (among other reasons) and grew into a larger city.

the who now and the what what?? I guess LA is the poster child for the US because it has held the olympics twice. Or Maybe it is ST Louis cause it held the olympics first. Does ST Louis represent the Midwest because it has held the Olympics and Chicago has not??

And what city did ATL grow larger than??

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by Georgiafrog

I'm in no way an Atlanta booster, but there is a big difference between Georgia and Texas. There is a "southeastern" vibe, or attitude that exists in states like Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, and even North Carolina and Tennessee that is not evident in Texas, or Louisiana, or Florida. If you want to group all of the southern states together, then I understand the entry of cities like Miami, Dallas, New Orleans and Houston. But any real comparison between Georgia and Texas, or Alabama and Florida, or even Mississippi and Louisiana is missing the mark.

I agree with you one million percent. There are differences. But there are also differences between GA and VA, GA and FL, GA and LA, GA and TN. But who cares whatr the diffferences are all these states are in the SOuth.

Maine and Delaware are very different, so is vermont and NJ. Who cares. Why all the nitpicking?

[WestbankNOLA]

Originally Posted by Mutiny77

The term "NY of the South," however crass it may be, pretty much refers to the city that exerts the most cultural and economic influence within its region. Miami exerts much more influence over the Caribbean and Latin America than the rest of the Southeast. It might technically be "in" the South, but it's not really "of" the South in that regard.

I understand what you're trying to say, but be real. Trying to make the distinction between "in the South" and "of the South" is really blaah. The South is the South regardless of what people want it to be or how they imagine it or whatever else they want to do with the definition. Outside of Miami's Black American community (which is undoubtedly southern) and some Whites here and there I can understand it being culturally distinct from Georgia, but that doesn't remove it from the South. Also, I can't think of anything "stereotypically" southern that I can find in Atlanta that I can't find in Houston or Dallas from food, to accents, to ignorance, or whatever else there is out there. Just because they're so many miles away they're some sort of hybrid. Please, in that case every city is a hybrid because no city outside of Georgia is going to be a carbon copy of a city in Georgia. Every state in the region is going to have the same fundamental culture with a twist. As far as this central by and far wielding influence, maybe if it were only talking about Alabama, South Carolina, eastern Tennessee, and possibly North Carolina the yes we can say Atlanta is the big dog here. When you are talking about the south as a whole then not so much.

I completely disagree. Miami has very little cultural and economic ties with the rest of the South; as a matter of fact, its influence within the U.S. really doesn't even go beyond Florida. There's a reason why it's referred to as "the capital of Latin America." Miami may be IN the South, but it's really not OF the South. Houston and Dallas are much more representative of the subregion of Texas than the South as a whole, IMO. Also, because Houston, Dallas, and Miami are geographically located on the edges of the South, they aren't really accessible to a large swath of the South like Atlanta is. It's pretty hard to represent the South as a whole under those circumstances.

As far as Miami, read what I said above. I will add that Miami is to the south in terms of being a gateway to the U.S. and ethnic hub as New York is to its region and the nation. Oh, I'm sorry. Miami doesn't meet the stereotype so it's not in the south. No wait, I meant of the south. I get the two confused.

What is this large swath represented by Atlanta? How? Do people honestly think that everying west of the Mississippi River and south of the VA/NC line belongs to Atlanta, or did they give VA to Atlanta as well? Even if they do think this, which I know some do, that doesn't make it reality so why accept it like it does?

I'm not going to trudge through that exactly, but what I'm saying is that because Houston, Dallas, and Miami--especially Miami--are geographically located on the edges of the South, they have something of a diluted or hybrid version of "southerness" due to influence from bordering regions. That's not true of Atlanta.

What is this diluted "southerness"? Please trudge. We can't even define "southern", but we (not just you, in general) can sit here and argue about what is and isn't "southern" all day long. Ridiculous. One minute it's geographical, which makes sense even though it's still subjective. The next day it's this cultural thing that everyone wants to make into some giant behemoth that covers more or less 10 states. In reality no state is culturally identical to the next unless it is extremely small. No two states are even developed exactly alike. There is no large belt of "southerness" as every southern state has its on variant and Texas and most of Florida is in no way as foreign or different as most hardcore southerners would like you to think.

Essentially the old Confederate states minus Missouri, plus Kentucky, and only the eastern part of Texas as opposed to the entire state.

By that definition Texas, Florida, Arkansas, Louisiana, Virginia, and Tennessee are very much in.

They aren't in the discussion because we're not talking about cities in LA, AK, MS, and TN. Plus it's different with TX because it's considered its own subregion, it straddles two regions (south/southwest), and is a border state.

But aren't LA, AR, MS, and TN southern? Aren't they in south. Texas is considered a subregion because it lies on the borders of multiple regions. Houston definitely lies in the south, no question about that if you've ever spent time there. It's obvious unless you were out in a transplant filled suburb somewhere, but that goes for Atlanta as well.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

I mean that millions of people who probably don't even look to Atlanta for much of anything are automatically being told that they are represented by Atlanta and so on. It's not fair to say "hey, since you live in the south and Atlanta best represents the stereotype of southerness we're just going to group you with them. Who cares if you look toward another city for whatever you need."

I'm not sure where the person who started this thread is from. But in this thread, the people who understand the principle behind the moniker even if they disagree with the exact wording are from all over: the Midwest, Northeast, West Coast, and South.

The only people that I ever hear trying to dictate what is and isn't southern are usually from Alabama, Georgia, or North Carolina whether it's coming out of their mouths or being posted on this forum. There's a thread on the Mississippi forum right now if I'm not mistaken explaining how MS and NC are two completely different places culturally.

I stated that Houston, Dallas, and Miami are more identified with their subregion, which in this case is really their respective states, than with the South as a whole. I believe that people think of Houston and Dallas (and the other major cities in TX) as Texan first and foremost, and then depending on who you are talking to, they might consider them Southern. Miami is very rarely identified with the larger South. On the other hand, I think Atlanta is highly identified with the South, much more so than Houston, Dallas, and Miami.

This entire thing is built off of a general perception/misconception. Just because that's what people think or want to believe does not make it real.

I didn't start the thread and I don't want "ATL to be New York." I'm merely pointing out the fact that not everyone includes (south) Florida and Texas in with the traditional South, either for cultural/geographical reasons or because they equate the southeast with the South. I'm not doing it, but that's obviously what goes on in the mind of a lot of people. That's not my fault at all; I'm merely describing the practical thought process going on behind it.

People can't can't even define something, yet they'll go out of the way to categorize it. Yes indeed.

[Mutiny77]

I think you're misunderstanding a lot of what has been said (like some informal moniker meaning that Atlanta is somehow representative of everyone in the South...nowhere is that implied), but ok.

[WestbankNOLA]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

I agree with you one million percent. There are differences. But there are also differences between GA and VA, GA and FL, GA and LA, GA and TN. But who cares whatr the diffferences are all these states are in the SOuth.

I don't understand why this is so hard to grasp.

Maine and Delaware are very different, so is vermont and NJ. Who cares. Why all the nitpicking?

hmm