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.
There's a difference between culturally dominant and artsy.
Santa Fe is more artsy than Albuquerque, but in terms of cultural attractions and pull Albuquerque still dominates the state of New Mexico.
An example I can think of is Oklahoma. Oklahoma City is the biggest city but Tulsa is more well-known for its culture. The University of Tulsa is the best college in the state, the downtown has tons of Art Deco, and the music/arts scene is stronger, with the Brady Arts District and Blue Dome at its core, but also Brookside, the BOK District and the Pearl. The two best art museums in Oklahoma - Gilcrease and Philbrook - are also in Tulsa, because of the old money in the 1920s. Tulsa is also more important for the state's Native American history since the city is in Osage Nation, Creek Nation and Cherokee Nation, and Tulsa is the anchor of Green Country, which also encompasses Choctaw Country.
Oklahoma City is the economic hub of the state, but until the 80s was a cow town. Tulsa was the city of the Oklahoma elite, and you can see this if you go to the older neighborhoods in both cities.
St. Louis is clearly the dominant city in Missouri even though the city of Kansas City has a higher population than the city of St Louis (KC’s land area is lterally over 5 times that of St. Louis’s). The St. Louis metro area is bigger of course, and ranks higher in GDP, media market size, etc.
St. Louis is clearly the dominant city in Missouri even though the city of Kansas City has a higher population than the city of St Louis (KC’s land area is lterally over 5 times that of St. Louis’s). The St. Louis metro area is bigger of course, and ranks higher in GDP, media market size, etc.
Is it? The reputation of Saint Louis I've heard is a dying city that killed itself in the 60s by destroying all of its historic stock while electing corrupt politicians.
The reputation of Kansas City has always been an underrated city that is way funner than people expect.
Is it? The reputation of Saint Louis I've heard is a dying city that killed itself in the 60s by destroying all of its historic stock while electing corrupt politicians.
The reputation of Kansas City has always been an underrated city that is way funner than people expect.
It's a shame you apparently haven't taken time to visit St. Louis and see what the city is like for yourself. Despite its many challenges, most cities would kill to have a fraction of the historic urban fabric that St. Louis has to this day. In fact, St. Louis is a national model for historic preservation. There are too many historic districts and neighborhoods to mention, but google Lafayette Square, Soulard, Benton Park, Shaw, Tower Grove, Central West End among many others and it's not hard to see that St. Louis packs a punch in terms of historic architecture.
Cities are complex and can't be deduced to rankings and statistics alone. Dig beyond the surface and explore the neighborhoods. Anyone who loves cities will at least appreciate St. Louis if they actually take the time to get to know it.
Is it? The reputation of Saint Louis I've heard is a dying city that killed itself in the 60s by destroying all of its historic stock while electing corrupt politicians.
The reputation of Kansas City has always been an underrated city that is way funner than people expect.
Agreed with your assessment of my forever hometown, but to paraphrase "The Death of Mary, Queen of Scots" by Monty Python, St. Louis is Not Dead Yet, nor is it dying.
Yes, the core city has lost almost two-thirds of its peak population, and a large chunk of its north side has emptied out, but:
--if you were to look at the pre-World War II city of Kansas City, the same stats would apply, more or less, and a good chunk of its central section has also emptied out. The difference between the two cities here: St. Louis shot itself in the foot without knowing it when the city fathers effected the Great Divorce from St. Louis County in 1871, while Kansas City opted to annex most of its future Missouri-side suburbs over about a 35-year period starting in 1944 with its annexation of the city of Marlborough on its southern border.
--the city's central corridor and south side are still totally intact, and the central corridor - especially the Central West End and Delmar Loop - have significant entertainment and cultural districts. Westport and the Crossroads in KC strike me as livelier than their St. Louis counterparts, but they ain't beanbag.
As far as architecture is concerned, well, there is the Arch, and a significant Louis Sullivan building downtown, and Soulard and Tower Grove retain their character, among other historic neighborhoods in St. Louis. The chatter on this board, however, leads me to believe that many find KC's stock of historic architecture more interesting, and I'm sorry, but there's nothing like the Country Club District or the Plaza in the city of St. Louis itself.
As for St. Louis' dominance: The city became Missouri's second-largest only because so many people left it. It's the core city of the state's largest metro, and truth to tell, Kansas City, Mo., holds greater sway over Kansas, which contains nearly half the metropolitan area's 2.2 million residents, than it does over Missouri. (This is also not new: John Guinther, in his 1948 book "Inside U.S.A.," referred to Kansas City, Mo., in his chapter on Kansas as "the capital of a state it's not even in.")
Which brings up an interesting point: Mutiny77 left Kansas off the list of states whose most influential city is not its largest one. In fact, Kansas is probably the only state in the Union whose most influential city lies just outside its borders.* And the Kansas portion of metropolitan Kansas City is also Kansas' largest urban area and has been for quite some time: when I was growing up there, Kansas state highway maps pointed out that one in every four Kansans lived in greater Kansas City.
*Edited to add: No, scratch that. New Jersey's two most influential cities both lie in adjacent states, just over its border with them.
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.
