How can this be considered "Flyover Country"? (home, movies)
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.
Flyover is a pejorative that describes places that the vast majority of people only see while flying over them between major cities on the East and West Coast but will never see from the ground as there's nothing real much that distinguishes them from the hundreds of other flyover communities. Flyover country is places where people live who think most of those places you listed are HUGE cities
Good point, lol. It's not exact "flyover", but I saw a thread on CD this past week where they are discussing liberal vs. conservative correspondeing to urban vs. suburban. Someone countered with Well, what about Vermont?, known as a very liberal state but also very rural. So the other person asks, Is Vermont really liberal all over the state, or just in its big cities, like Burlington?
I almost fell off my chair laughing. Burlington, Vermont's largest city, has a population of fewer than 43,000 people! I don't think by any stretch of the imagination that would be considered a "big city", even in Vermont itself.
Flyover cities are cities that simply lack unique cultural significance to make them prominent tourist destinations. They may be great places to live but they just don't offer enough that is unique to make it worth it for somebody from a large coastal metro area to pay them a visit. Cities like Kansas City, St, Louis, Indianapolis, Omaha, Tulsa, and OKC are really your more prominent "flyover" cities as well as states without major cities such as the Dakotas, Kansas, Wyoming, Utah, Montana, and Idaho. Texas in recent years has become exempt because of the rise of Dallas and Houston as well as Austin, the fallback plan for every young college hipster grad who can't move to Portland or Seattle. The rise of hipster culture in the Twin Cities has also exempted it as its on more and more young people's radar. Colorado is exempt because of Denver and the outdoor recreation of the Rocky Mountains that attract people from all over the nation. The South has its own culture and associated tourism so there is a lot of people that vacation there. Gulf Shores, Alabama for instance is a great beach getaway and New Orleans speaks for itself. Nashville and Memphis get more tourists than you would think as well.
So yes, it is a stereotype that "flyover" cities are culturally devoid and it is true there may be less high culture in flyover cities than the major coastal cities, but it has more to do with the cities lacking uniqueness to attract tourists.
I think that's a pretty good description, bolded. A person from here (NJ in the NY metro area) would look at some of the cities you named like Kansas City, St. Louis, Indianapolis, etc., and think "Why would I want to go there? What is unique and different about it?"
Maybe there are good reasons to go there, but they aren't readily apparent to everyone else. Then again, I've also never had any desire to visit LA, and that's on the coast. San Francisco, yes, Portland, OR, yes, Seattle, yes, would like to visit all of them but LA, nah, not really.
When east coast people DO visit places out west, it's usually for the scenery, not the cities. We don't have Rockies here, or deserts. And this might sound weird, but personally, I would like to visit the Great Plains and see what endless flat fields of grain, WITHOUT cities, look like.
Who really believes a place like Philly is accomplished and relevant enough when it cant even pull over 1M foreign visitors, foreign born pop, or have any significant industry, maintain air route connections with more than 1 foreign continent, be the center to any global industry (entertainment, tourism, fashion, tech, energy, etc), or impact on the world while still not being on the coast should get a free swing because its near NYC?
.
Obviously being within the Top 10 metros by population, economy, etc. is a de facto reason not be considered flyover country. That means, I would not consider areas such as Chicago or Atlanta "flyover" areas, and neither, of course, is Philly -- and that by no means has anything to do with it "getting a pass" by being close to NYC.
Also -- not exactly sure how international tourism is relevant to a conversation that pertains exclusively to our national borders, especially considering that international tourism or foreign air connections are arbitrary measures of "relevance." (In the case of Philly, NY clearly serves as predominate foreign air/tourism hub with an expanded market incorporating Philly, for example. If you do not realize this, then you really are not familiar with the stong interrelation of air traffic patterns in the NY-Philly area).
Overall, the "flyover" term is overused, especially to slight the Interior US. While it obviously originated on the Coasts, I think it essentially refers to the highly sparsely populated areas of the US -- not the Chicagos, Denvers, or Dallases of the world.
Flyover country has nothing do with culture or lack thereof. It is simply a big chunk of land in the central part of America that most Americans have only seen from a plane. It's not an insult. It is a literal meaning. This concept isn't that hard to grasp.
I've never been to Kansas, i've never been to Nebraska, i've never been to Oklahoma but you know what, I've flown over all of them. So what's my experience with these states? A "flyover".
According to Wikipedia "Flyover country refers to the part of the country that most Americans have only viewed by air, thus "Fly-over country".
Maybe theres a negative stigma attached with the area but whether that stigma is correct or not does not lessen the fact that it is still flyover country.
Good point, lol. It's not exact "flyover", but I saw a thread on CD this past week where they are discussing liberal vs. conservative correspondeing to urban vs. suburban. Someone countered with Well, what about Vermont?, known as a very liberal state but also very rural. So the other person asks, Is Vermont really liberal all over the state, or just in its big cities, like Burlington?
I almost fell off my chair laughing. Burlington, Vermont's largest city, has a population of fewer than 43,000 people! I don't think by any stretch of the imagination that would be considered a "big city", even in Vermont itself.
Lol.
I remember stopping at a convenience store in a small town in Vermont and the women behind the counter referred as a "big city". I think they were trying to make themselves sound more rural to the out-of towners, but still, they obviously didn't travel much.
When east coast people DO visit places out west, it's usually for the scenery, not the cities. We don't have Rockies here, or deserts. And this might sound weird, but personally, I would like to visit the Great Plains and see what endless flat fields of grain, WITHOUT cities, look like.
I think it was an interesting sight myself, though I went through North Dakota, which is less farmed but lots of wide open spaces.
I was born and raised in Los Angeleez. Aside from the big family road trip when I was 17, the only times I've been to the East Coast were on layovers between L.A. and Europe, where I live now. (Northern Italy, to be precise.) One time I had a 12 hour layover at JFK so I made my way over to Midtown Manhattan with due haste. And I swear to God it feels like it takes longer to "fly over" everything in between L.A. and NYC or Philly (the hub for US Air, a common way to get to Venice) than it does to cross the Atlantic!
So there's a whole lot of "flying over" that you have to do, let me tell you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment
Is Atlanta considered flyover country since it's not on the coast?
No, I think they get a pass. Also, Georgia has a coastline.
Although I guess New Yorkers "fly over" Atlanta on their way to Miami?
Quote:
Is Houston considered flyover country?
Is Dallas considered flyover country?
Is Denver considered flyover country?
Yes, yes, and yes.
Quote:
Is Chicago considered flyover country?
Chicago is in the same category as Canada's Toronto: massive and cosmopolitan enough to be in the same league as L.A. and New York, despite the lack of saltwater.
Quote:
Is Detroit considered flyover country?
Yeah.
Quote:
Is Pittsburgh considered flyover country?
Ehhhhhhhh... that's a tough one. Philly isn't, they qualify as "East Coast." But Pittsburgh is like a whole different ballgame, geographically closer to West Virginia than it is to New York. I'm gonna have to lean towards "yeah."
Quote:
Is Cincinnati considered flyover country?
Yep.
Quote:
Is Las Vegas considered flyover country?
I used to live in Vegas. It's pretty much an orbiting satellite of Los Angeles. If Southern California were the Earth, Las Vegas would be the Moon. If SoCal were Australia, Las Vegas would be New Zealand. Some would go so far as to state that Las Vegas qualifies as being "West Coast" as a result of this relationship. Well, if Philly gets to be "East Coast", then it's only fair.
So, no. Not flyover country.
Quote:
All these major cities that exist between both coasts...most of them are HUGE cities with lots of culture and history, are they actually that insignificant?
Not necessarily.
But only Chicago is in the same league as L.A. and New York.
It is funny when people from the po-dunk parts of the northeast make fun of "flyover country". I grew up in upstate NY and have lived my adult life in Minneapolis. When I go back sometimes people make comments about rednecks and the Midwest when they find out I live in Minneapolis. They have no clue, in reality upstate NY is more like the stereotypical insular redneck flyover country while Minneapolis by comparison is a shining, cosmopolitan, urbane city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater
That is true. I've seen parts of upstate NY that look as economically depressed and rundown as anything I've seen in West Virginia.
Too true. Though I have never heard upstaters (rural) dismissing 'flyover' states. If anything they are too busy trying to out-redneck each other and prove how distant they are are culturally from New York City.
Yep, it's all "flyover" country... nothing to see here; keep moving along, no rubber-necking. Nothing but flat, boring, country filled with rude, uncultured hicks. Keep flying coast to coast, don't even bother to step (or even look) outside any airport if you happen to have a lay-over in fly-over country, it would probably burn your eyes with the boring views. If you happen to look out the window and see something interesting on the ground far below it is probably an optical illusion, because nothing of interest can possibility be in fly-over country. Keep to the coasts please. Keep the high taxes and COL where it is "desirable" and not where it is beautiful... I mean so boring.
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.
