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.
Maybe not 'jaw dropping' but pretty impressive nevertheless
No doubt beautiful pictures! I love the apostle islands, the north shore, the black hills, Cayuhoga Nat'l park, etc. But by the way some of my friends back home referred to it, one would have thought the North Shore of MN was like a combination of the Rockies meets Cape Cod! Spoiler alert.......it's not. Beautiful nonetheless though.
I think the issue is one of semantics. The Midwest is more than prairies, but the prairies are indescribably Midwestern because it is mostly found there. We tend to associate regions with things you can’t find elsewhere. The beauty of the rivers, hills, and forests of the Midwest probably looks very appealing from 150 miles away, but from 1500 miles away it feels different when we have our own forests, hills, and rivers close at hand. That doesn’t mean the Upper Midwest isn’t beautiful, it just means it lacks a signature draw that would distract from the cornfields in popular perception.
Is Wisconsin and Michigan really considered the midwest? I consider it to be the Great Lakes Region. Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma are midwest to me. Any state the Mississippi passes through is loaded with natural beauty.
If anything, I hear more people question if the plains are the Midwest. From a historical standpoint, the Great Lakes region is probably the best representation of "Midwest". However, it is a subregion, just like every other region has subregions.
Is Wisconsin and Michigan really considered the midwest? I consider it to be the Great Lakes Region. Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma are midwest to me. Any state the Mississippi passes through is loaded with natural beauty.
Absolutely. The Plains states also have some Western and other influences.
I think the issue is one of semantics. The Midwest is more than prairies, but the prairies are indescribably Midwestern because it is mostly found there. We tend to associate regions with things you can’t find elsewhere. The beauty of the rivers, hills, and forests of the Midwest probably looks very appealing from 150 miles away, but from 1500 miles away it feels different when we have our own forests, hills, and rivers close at hand. That doesn’t mean the Upper Midwest isn’t beautiful, it just means it lacks a signature draw that would distract from the cornfields in popular perception.
Yeah, yeah we know. The South is beautiful and the Midwest is crappy compared to the great South lol jk .
The Badlands are amazing. Honestly, it's too bad for those who refuse to lower themselves to go somewhere in the Midwest. I laugh at them....honestly, people like that are pathetic. Your photos are beautiful.
The Badlands are in the western US IMO. There is absolutely nothing "Midwest" about western South Dakota at all.
If anything, I hear more people question if the plains are the Midwest. From a historical standpoint, the Great Lakes region is probably the best representation of "Midwest". However, it is a subregion, just like every other region has subregions.
That generally is the way I define it...and, let's face it, we all define it in different ways. Awhile back, Wikipedia in its article had a map that showed the midwest colored in by state with the colors with three (I believe) categories:
• always considered midwest
• usually considered midwest
• sometimes considered midwest (category they once used but stopped when this map was made)
The map covered the tier of states from ND down to KS, then west through MO, KY, and very strangely WV, before going north to OH then west to every state on the Great Lakes and into Iowa. Basically the "North Central states" of virtually every elementary level social studies textbook.
Only seven states were in the "always" category: Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio. I also liked this designation. For the record, this is the original footprint of the Big Ten conference, a footprint it had in place for nearly a century.
Like CC says, the Midwest conceptually has a strong tie to the Great Lakes. The only two states on the Great Lakes are either on a much bigger body of water, the Atlantic (New York) or on a river close enough to the Atlantic that it can have an ocean port on it (Pennsylvania). New York and Pennsylvania were part of the 13 colonies and our 13 original states. I see a type of symmetry here insofar as the MidAtlantic states are dominated by the very body of water in their name while the North Central states are dominated by the Great Lakes. In a sense, urban America was pretty well created in three regions....New England, the Middle Atlantic, and the Midwest (Great Lakes) by the changes after the Civil War...rural to urban, industrialization, immigration and the like.
Thus the Great Lakes takes in six states that border the Great Lakes. The seventh state, Iowa, may be seen as being more related and connected to the Great Lakes region than any other state. Missouri though further from the Great Lakes is a place I would eliminate because I tend to see the Midwest as pure northern and no slave state seems to comfortably to belong. Obviously that would go for Kentucky as well. And as for West Virginia: to Wikipedia I would say: you gotta be kidding.
As noted, that is my outline (and apparently at least once that of Wikipedia and in days of yore it would appear, the Big Ten).
I always hated how Chicago got clumped with places like Omaha.
Once you get west of the Mississippi it starts feeling less familiar.
on the other hand, Omaha is surprisingly urban in a way that would surprise a lot of people. It did me. I do see your point though, but consider this: The city most like Omaha arguably is Des Moines.....and it is Iowa and midwestern and Iowa is very much tied to Chicago and Illinois. There are enough college students from Chicagoland who think their state university is in Iowa City.
The Badlands are in the western US IMO. There is absolutely nothing "Midwest" about western South Dakota at all.
Well in that case don't clump the plains with the great lakes
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.
.
