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.
I've read here on this site as well as social media that from a certain group of people have said that some people are not cultured or exposed beacuse they don't live in a major city, or if they like cities that aren't popular with the crowd then they haven't been exposed to the world or haven't travelled as much. Do you think if you or someone lives in a major city that you're more cultured or exposed to the world? Just want your thoughts.
Generally speaking, the answer is yes. Major cities will tend to have more population overall, more diversity, more educated population, and more people who have lived or traveled in many parts of the world. Just more diverse backgrounds across the board. Smaller cities will tend to have more people with a small-town mindset.
That said, it's certainly far more nuanced than that and there are pros and cons to major cities and smaller cities. But with respect to cultured/exposed, certainly major cities will bring more.
Generally yes, but can vary at the individual level.
For example if I told you I lived in Lynchburg, VA you would probably think I am not very well cultured and that I am uneducated and not well travelled/have a lack of interest in travel. In fact I have a BA in Geography and an MA in Urban/Transportation planning from UNC Charlotte and a BA in German from my Uni days in Trier. I have also taken Japanese for two semesters along with European film, Japanese film, and several courses in Japanese culture. I have seen around 500+ international films. I probably own a good 200 books on European and Asian history and culture.
I have travelled the world extensively and have close family in Germany and several friends in Europe and Asia. My best friend is an immigrant from Tehran and he is well educated/well travelled (yes he lives in Lynchburg as well and is a PE traffic engineer. All his relatives live in Sweden, DC, Tehran, Chicago, and Vancouver so he gets around as well). I am an artist on the side who draws detailed illustrative maps and cities. I also take the train up to DC, Philly, and NYC often.
I live in Lynchburg because my job here pays extremely well, has top notch benefits, and the cost of living is very low to live in and own a condo downtown. Because my job allows for a month of paid vacation a year and because the cost of living is so low, I do multiple international trips a year and visit one or two new US states a year as well (doing Grand Rapids and Mackinac Island in August). Next year I am planning on going to Japan for a month... When I travel abroad I do things like go to the ballet in Helsinki, the Art Institute in Chicago, and the symphony orchestra in Hamburg... though I also live hitting breweries and dives in Milwaukee and hiking in Colorado and Utah so my interests are pretty varied.
But yeah generally speaking this is not the case for most folks in small towns unless you are educated, have disposable income, and a passion for travel and learning, though in Lynchburg we do have a great First Fridays gallery crawl and a fantastic performing arts theater downtown. I feel very fortunate to be in the position I am in and have had the experiences I have had for sure.
IMO, a lot depends on socio-economic status as much as anything else. In general, poor people will be less “worldly” than the affluent whether they’re urban or rural. The poor just don’t have the money to travel widely, go to college, pay for many cultural attractions, and sometimes meet few people outside their immediate areas. Always exceptions of course—there are rigid insular rich folks and very sophisticated poor ones. But generally the divide isn’t urban/rural, but money/ no money.
Generally speaking, the answer is yes. Major cities will tend to have more population overall, more diversity, more educated population, and more people who have lived or traveled in many parts of the world. Just more diverse backgrounds across the board. Smaller cities will tend to have more people with a small-town mindset.
That said, it's certainly far more nuanced than that and there are pros and cons to major cities and smaller cities. But with respect to cultured/exposed, certainly major cities will bring more.
That is NOT true.
Culture, travel, and a educated population are related to professional status rather than urban/rural divide.
There are plenty of professionals in rural areas.
I was an "urban bigot" having grown up in the San Francisco Bay Area. Even dated an opera singer while going to graduate school!! Now that is really "high" culture.
But when I moved to the sticks, I discovered I was doing more cultural activities and traveling much more than my friends that I left behind in the city.
I simply had MORE MONEY to spend than they did. Not that I made more, but my living expenses were real low compared to my friends. So we traveled more, I did got to some larger cities on business trips so took advantage of those opportunities.
BUT since we had to travel three hours to a decent size city for shopping once a month. We made a three day weekend of staying in a nice hotel, going out to concerts and shows in the evening and visiting museum's during the day. Yeah, then shopping before heading home.
I moved to a small town with international businesses. There I felt like the poor hick from San Francisco.
These folks flew to Russia, China, Chile, Argentina, New Zealand and a host of other countries on a regular basis.
Want to know the best places to eat in Mendota, Gisborne, or Vladivostok?? These folks had it down.
Small town, but with a symphony, various theater companies, and lots of cultural activities all year round. Yes, it was NOT the San Francisco opera company, but for most folks they wouldn't notice the difference, even if they lived in San Francisco.
I once ran into a forester in Montana, that married a New York city gal that was in love with New York city.
I asked him how that worked out.
He promised that they would spend a month in New York city every year. In those days, Montana was a real cheap place to live and so they spent their vacations in New York city. His wife quickly realized she was doing more cultural activities than her friends that still lived in New York. She could afford the broadway plays, and other cultural activities while her friends were barely able to afford housing.
Urban/rural split is a mythical divide with urban residents having little experience outside their bubble.
There is a greater economic and cultural diversity in rural areas. They tend to be very different from each other. Yes, some places are not culturally highbrow.
Urban areas, are all very similar. Plunk folks down in the middle of any large urban area, without telling them where there are and most would be hard pressed to identify the city. They are all basically the same.
Location: Miami (prev. NY, Atlanta, SF, OC and San Diego)
7,409 posts, read 6,553,115 times
Reputation: 6685
Growing up in NY exposed me to a number of things, particularly street smarts and openness to people of all shades and backgrounds, I otherwise would not have experienced to the same degree or at all in many other places.
IMO, a lot depends on socio-economic status as much as anything else. In general, poor people will be less “worldly” than the affluent whether they’re urban or rural. The poor just don’t have the money to travel widely, go to college, pay for many cultural attractions, and sometimes meet few people outside their immediate areas. Always exceptions of course—there are rigid insular rich folks and very sophisticated poor ones. But generally the divide isn’t urban/rural, but money/ no money.
Nothing more needs to be said, LOL, this is pretty much it.
Although large metro areas provide advantages of opportunity by having cultural attractions nearby.
Money + opportunity/proximity
But as others have said, there are plenty of "townies" who grow up in large, culture-rich cities who take advantage of nothing and may as well be living on Mars.
Culture, travel, and a educated population are related to professional status rather than urban/rural divide.
There are plenty of professionals in rural areas.
I was an "urban bigot" having grown up in the San Francisco Bay Area. Even dated an opera singer while going to graduate school!! Now that is really "high" culture.
But when I moved to the sticks, I discovered I was doing more cultural activities and traveling much more than my friends that I left behind in the city.
I simply had MORE MONEY to spend than they did. Not that I made more, but my living expenses were real low compared to my friends. So we traveled more, I did got to some larger cities on business trips so took advantage of those opportunities.
BUT since we had to travel three hours to a decent size city for shopping once a month. We made a three day weekend of staying in a nice hotel, going out to concerts and shows in the evening and visiting museum's during the day. Yeah, then shopping before heading home.
I moved to a small town with international businesses. There I felt like the poor hick from San Francisco.
These folks flew to Russia, China, Chile, Argentina, New Zealand and a host of other countries on a regular basis.
Want to know the best places to eat in Mendota, Gisborne, or Vladivostok?? These folks had it down.
Small town, but with a symphony, various theater companies, and lots of cultural activities all year round. Yes, it was NOT the San Francisco opera company, but for most folks they wouldn't notice the difference, even if they lived in San Francisco.
I once ran into a forester in Montana, that married a New York city gal that was in love with New York city.
I asked him how that worked out.
He promised that they would spend a month in New York city every year. In those days, Montana was a real cheap place to live and so they spent their vacations in New York city. His wife quickly realized she was doing more cultural activities than her friends that still lived in New York. She could afford the broadway plays, and other cultural activities while her friends were barely able to afford housing.
Urban/rural split is a mythical divide with urban residents having little experience outside their bubble.
There is a greater economic and cultural diversity in rural areas. They tend to be very different from each other. Yes, some places are not culturally highbrow.
Urban areas, are all very similar. Plunk folks down in the middle of any large urban area, without telling them where there are and most would be hard pressed to identify the city. They are all basically the same.
The bolded gets quote of the year in these forums thus far. I have never heard of that term, but oh how it fits.
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.
