Quote:
Originally Posted by Joakim3
I never said they aren't, but there is a distinct cultural shift between them and California (cities than Vegas & Phoenix aren't no were near as cultural independent) which is why people tend to subcategorize them.
It's no different than when people refer to the DC-Boston corridor as the East Coast but subcategorize Jacksonville, Orlando & Miami as the South despite all of them lying on the Atlantic seaboard
|
Again, I disagree. I think Seattle and Portland have quite a bit in common culturally with the Bay Area and the more rural parts of Washington and Oregon have a lot in common with the more rural parts of Northern California. Southern California is only one part of the West Coast, and California itself encompasses a variety of areas and cultures. Phoenix and Las Vegas do have some superficial similarities to LA and San Diego and there is definitely cultural overlap there (although I'd argue that LA especially is a much more nuanced and sophisticated place) but they don't have much in common with West Coast culture, say, north of Santa Barbara.
What ties LA, San Diego, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle together is that shared "coastal" identity. They are more expensive, elitist/snobby, culturally rich, and sophisticated. All of those cities are much stronger producers of cultural trends than places like Phoenix, and there is a "West Coast" thread that ties them all together.
In terms of the East Coast vs. the South, it's a completely different thing because those regions were developed during a different era. The North vs. South distinctions are much greater along the East Coast for historical reasons than they are along the West Coast.
Don't get me wrong, the Pacific Northwest is its own region that has a distinct feel, but the coastal part of the Pacific Northwest is very much part and parcel of the West Coast.