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.
Boston anchors the northern end of the Northeast Corridor; Washington anchors the southern end of it; and New York anchors its center. Thus, those three places, far more than any other, define the Northeast Corridor. By contrast, Philadelphia is just an intermediate stop, as is Baltimore, Wilmington, New Haven, Providence, etc.
Mind you, I'm talking perception when I say this. I think Philadelphia is a great city, and if it were located anywhere other than the Northeast Corridor, it would be the center of its region. But it didn't work out that way.
Boston anchors the northern end of the Northeast Corridor; Washington anchors the southern end of it; and New York anchors its center. Thus, those three places, far more than any other, define the Northeast Corridor. By contrast, Philadelphia is just an intermediate stop, as is Baltimore, Wilmington, New Haven, Providence, etc.
Mind you, I'm talking perception when I say this. I think Philadelphia is a great city, and if it were located anywhere other than the Northeast Corridor, it would be the center of its region. But it didn't work out that way.
That's quite a bit of an exaggeration, though.
Let's be clear--the NY metro is several magnitudes ahead of Boston, Philly and DC in terms of anchoring the entire Northeast Corridor. It is one of the critical urban epicenters of the world, with no other city in America coming remotely close as a true peer. So in that sense, the rest of the NEC is "overshadowed" by NYC by default.
I'll grant you that DC and Boston still have larger profiles than Philly for different reasons, and all three indisputably serve as regional anchors for their respective metropolitan areas. But in terms of defining influence in the NEC, due to their very similar urban scope and scale, the gap between the latter two and Philly is much, much smaller than the gap between all three and New York.
I just think Boston's self image is a lot higher because you have 5.75 states (MA, NE CT, VT, RI, NH, ME and parts of Upstate) representing it which is only about 14 million people, but there's strong unification that makes a 5 million metropolitan area appear more strengthened and unified. Boston is basically 'the city' for half of the Northeast states and that helps it be more competitive to NYC. It's a huge part of it when you have people from Caribou ME to Plattsburgh NY to New Haven CT to Nantucket MA going all in for Boston. Its an expansive hinterland.
I just think Boston's self image is a lot higher because you have 5.75 states (MA, NE CT, VT, RI, NH, ME and parts of Upstate) representing it which is only about 14 million people, but there's strong unification that makes a 5 million metropolitan area appear more strengthened and unified. Boston is basically 'the city' for half of the Northeast states and that helps it be more competitive to NYC. It's a huge part of it when you have people from Caribou ME to Plattsburgh NY to New Haven CT to Nantucket MA going all in for Boston. Its an expansive hinterland.
There's no doubt that Boston serves as New England's big city, but it still doesn't have the same pull as NYC, even within the Northeast, especially when NYC has a very strong pull on New Jersey, the rest of New York, half of Connecticut and Pennsylvania, too. That's certainly much more in population than all of New England.
I know I've seen a lot of discussion as of late among some Boston posters regarding New Englanders' disassociation from New York, but I really just don't see it that way. I personally know a number of native New Englanders who live in the New York region, and I'm not even from this area originally. I also know that New York comes up in conversation quite a bit, too, and rarely in a disparaging way.
I just don't know how NYC being the clear alpha city could ever be questioned.
Agreed, but you don’t give New Englanders (and others) enough credit. It’s not that people think Boston is larger than it is because it’s far from NYC: it’s that Boston is the biggest city for miles. NYC may be a heck of a lot bigger, but it’s not often worth the drive.
“Tiny” definitely isn’t a good word to describe Boston.
New Englanders don't think Boston rivals NYC because it's far away from NYC. It's more because they think Boston has a bigger influence than it really does (and it's huge) and probably don't know exactly how many multitudes NYC and the NYC MSA is.
Tiny relative to NYC which is 12x its size. Its definitely an large urban agglomeration in its own right.
There's no doubt that Boston serves as New England's big city, but it still doesn't have the same pull as NYC, even within the Northeast, especially when NYC has a very strong pull on New Jersey, the rest of New York, half of Connecticut and Pennsylvania, too. That's certainly much more in population than all of New England.
I know I've seen a lot of discussion as of late among some Boston posters regarding New Englanders' disassociation from New York, but I really just don't see it that way. I personally know a number of native New Englanders who live in the New York region, and I'm not even from this area originally. I also know that New York comes up in conversation quite a bit, too, and rarely in a disparaging way.
I just don't know how NYC being the clear alpha city could ever be questioned.
Population Wise it does. But the question here is why does Boston go to up to an NYC rival over Philly. I put the answer as simply its vast expansive hinterland plays a role in why it does. Your more than tripling its metropolitan area with its hinterland and influence it plays over the area.
For a dissociation between NYC? I dont see it that way at all. New York is very important to Boston and vice versa. Most of the drama comes between sports teams or if someone says NYC is a better city, then it becomes an issue. But that rarely happens? I live in the Greater NYC area (Or Philly? Seems to be more Philly fans and memorabilia in CNJ) and have lived in NYC and Upstate NYC. Most NYC dialogue is positive unless you talk about Sports, how dirty NYC is, or how bad the MTA is. I think the times when Bostonians felt superior to NYC people are over or quickly dying out as the new generation comes up.
I don’t think most people internalize the fact that Boston is as far from NYC as DC.
Like. In the stretch from NYC to DC, you’ve got Newark, Trenton, Allentown, Philly, Atlantic City, Wilmington, Baltimore, and Annapolis. From NYC to Boston you’ve got Stamford, Bridgeport, New Haven, Hartford, Springfield, Worcester, New London, and Providence.
The southern stretch is SO much more populous than the northern stretch. Hence, Boston feels a lot more “stand-alone” than Philly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade
New Englanders don't think Boston rivals NYC because it's far away from NYC. It's more because they think Boston has a bigger influence than it really does (and it's huge) and probably don't know exactly how many multitudes NYC and the NYC MSA is.
This is absolutely incorrect. New Englanders travel to NYC very frequently.
Quote:
Tiny relative to NYC which is 12x its size. Its definitely an large urban agglomeration in its own right.
I mean, yeah. There are very few cities in the world that are on NYC’s level.
I don’t think most people internalize the fact that Boston is as far from NYC as DC.
Like. In the stretch from NYC to DC, you’ve got Newark, Trenton, Allentown, Philly, Atlantic City, Wilmington, Baltimore, and Annapolis. From NYC to Boston you’ve got Stamford, Bridgeport, New Haven, Hartford, Springfield, Worcester, New London, and Providence.
The southern stretch is SO much more populous than the northern stretch. Hence, Boston feels a lot more “stand-alone” than Philly.
This is absolutely incorrect. New Englanders travel to NYC very frequently.
I mean, yeah. There are very few cities in the world that are on NYC’s level.
Even in that northern stretch, there's a ton more large cities of nearly 100k or more Waterbury Danbury Brockton New Bedford Fall River. I think the shift in climate, architecture, and demographic along with lack of large industrial factories, and lack of risque billboards along I-95, is more of what makes Boston feel 'stand alone'. It's not like it's in a sparsely populated and unurbanized area. Less populated for sure but a lot of it is how the population is laid out.
It takes two to make a rivalry. NYC and Boston seem to be locked into a relationship that Philadelphia never was included in or developed. I actually see Philadelphia as a different animal. Not better or worse but different.
Not sure if it's been mentioned or not, but it would be reasonable to think that Philly might have been more attentive to the other big city in its state and thus had more of a natural rivalry with Pittsburgh than NYC.
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.
