Cities that are most like St. Louis (Republic, Memphis: high school, restaurant)

[stlouisan]

Originally Posted by PacificWest

You must haven't travel that much, just in the Midwest alone, you said "Cincy may have among the most impressive downtowns in the Midwest."

Have you ever heard of a city in the Midwest call Chicago? Maybe you should visit Chi-Town, then later come back here & post the most impressive downtowns in the the Midwest.

You might find it not only the most impressive in the Midwest, but the Country for that matter.

You either are attempting to start a fight or completely misunderstood what I said. Behind Chicago and Minneapolis, I think Cincy may have the best skyline in the Midwest.

[CoffeeAndBeer]

Skyline is about number 79 on a list of concerns in St. Louis. I'd rather have 10 new 5 story mixed use buildings downtown than a new 50 story building. I'd rather have interstate removed between the arch and downtown, too...

[Chicago76]

Originally Posted by DinsdalePirahna

You do not need tall buildings to create a nice skyline. You need unity. The StL skyline is disjointed, with many gaps and "sore thumb" buildings.
The arch should stand out and be the tallest building.

I agree completely. Part of it is that, but another part of it is the orientation of the skyline and the vantage points available for viewing. Cincinnati's buildings are generally oriented toward the river. Rather than fronting the river, STL's start there and run west away from it. So even excluding Midtown and the CWE, you can't really get a nice view of the DT skyline in its entirety from the river.

Cincy also has some great vantage points to view downtown like Mt. Adams and the KY side. Coming into the city from Erlanger on the KY side when you get to the top of that hill might be the best vantage point for a skyline anywhere in the Midwest in terms of making things look more impressive than they already are.

[kshe95girl]

Originally Posted by CoffeeAndBeer

Skyline is about number 79 on a list of concerns in St. Louis. I'd rather have 10 new 5 story mixed use buildings downtown than a new 50 story building. I'd rather have interstate removed between the arch and downtown, too...

Yep, me too!
Havent heard anything about that lately....

[Chicago76]

Originally Posted by stlouisan

Yep...this is true. Having known many people from cincinnati, they swear St. Louis is a carbon copy, although I would say Cincinnati is a bit more influenced by the south than St. Louis. Many from Cleveland actually feel St. Louis is a carbon copy of their city apart from the winters and summers.

Both are northern cities with some southern influence (not treading into that one again..we can agree to disagree...let's just say how muted those influences are is subject to interpretation). The big difference to me isn't which is more southern, but the source of the influence in both:

STL->more from migration northward from the bootheel/Arkansas and Deep South (AL and MS in particular). A lot of northward migration from the cotton belt along the Mississippi.

Cincy->not traditionally southern, but more migration from Appalachia: West Virginia, Eastern KY, and Western VA. Mainly the coalfield areas + the Bluegrass region immediately south. It's a little more Hatfield/McCoy, Coal Miners' Daughter, and Scots/Irish roots southern in terms of migration.

The Appalachian influence has been more continual, with mines with great frequency from the 60s to 80s, so it wouldn't surprise me if someone picks up on it more in Cincy.

A little off subject, but a lot of people don't know that Chicago's Uptown neighborhood was a huge place for Appalachians through the late 70s or so. It was kind of like a Hillbilly version of an Irish slum. Carol's Pub is about the only thing that remains, but that's been overun by hipsters for the most part.

[stlouisan]

Originally Posted by Chicago76

Both are northern cities with some southern influence (not treading into that one again..we can agree to disagree...let's just say how muted those influences are is subject to interpretation). The big difference to me isn't which is more southern, but the source of the influence in both:

STL->more from migration northward from the bootheel/Arkansas and Deep South (AL and MS in particular). A lot of northward migration from the cotton belt along the Mississippi.

Cincy->not traditionally southern, but more migration from Appalachia: West Virginia, Eastern KY, and Western VA. Mainly the coalfield areas + the Bluegrass region immediately south. It's a little more Hatfield/McCoy, Coal Miners' Daughter, and Scots/Irish roots southern in terms of migration.

The Appalachian influence has been more continual, with mines with great frequency from the 60s to 80s, so it wouldn't surprise me if someone picks up on it more in Cincy.

A little off subject, but a lot of people don't know that Chicago's Uptown neighborhood was a huge place for Appalachians through the late 70s or so. It was kind of like a Hillbilly version of an Irish slum. Carol's Pub is about the only thing that remains, but that's been overun by hipsters for the most part.

If you knew anything about Chicago, you would know that tons of white southerners settled there in the Great Migration, as they did in Detroit. Chicago is just as influenced by barbeque as St. Louis....it has its own signature barbeque sauces, and also its own style. And that Schnucks you made reference to, as I previously noted, is very near to my residence, and is in the vicinity of an African American neighborhood....also very close to the city limits, where a large black population resides. If there is any doubt to how large the southern influences are...take a trip to Louisville, a mirror opposite of St. Louis...a southern city with northern influences. You will experience major culture shock when you go there. The people of St. Louis and Cincinnati don't have Southern mannerisms, speech patterns, diets, etc...if there is a large white population living here that lives off chitlins, collard greens, and plays banjos, they must all go indoors whenever I'm around. To settle how muted those southern influences are...try visiting the northernmost major southern cities which have some northern influences...Louisville, Lexington, and Richmond. You should experience a major culture shock. Also...I just recently visited the south...drove through Paducah, Nashville, and Atlanta...if there is any doubt in your mind about just how large the southern influences are...drive I-24. The people and culture change when you reach about the latitudes of Cape Girardeau and Cairo.

[aragx6]

Originally Posted by Chicago76

Both are northern cities with some southern influence (not treading into that one again..we can agree to disagree...let's just say how muted those influences are is subject to interpretation). The big difference to me isn't which is more southern, but the source of the influence in both:

STL->more from migration northward from the bootheel/Arkansas and Deep South (AL and MS in particular). A lot of northward migration from the cotton belt along the Mississippi.

Cincy->not traditionally southern, but more migration from Appalachia: West Virginia, Eastern KY, and Western VA. Mainly the coalfield areas + the Bluegrass region immediately south. It's a little more Hatfield/McCoy, Coal Miners' Daughter, and Scots/Irish roots southern in terms of migration.

The Appalachian influence has been more continual, with mines with great frequency from the 60s to 80s, so it wouldn't surprise me if someone picks up on it more in Cincy.

A little off subject, but a lot of people don't know that Chicago's Uptown neighborhood was a huge place for Appalachians through the late 70s or so. It was kind of like a Hillbilly version of an Irish slum. Carol's Pub is about the only thing that remains, but that's been overun by hipsters for the most part.

There were still a few hanging around Bucktown too -- a few worker's cottages left that looked like something out of Deliverance, for serious.

[CoffeeAndBeer]

Originally Posted by Chicago76

A little off subject, but a lot of people don't know that Chicago's Uptown neighborhood was a huge place for Appalachians through the late 70s or so. It was kind of like a Hillbilly version of an Irish slum. Carol's Pub is about the only thing that remains, but that's been overun by hipsters for the most part.

I was aware of that, there's an old photo in Time magazine of the hillbilly slum. St. Louis definitely used to have hillbilly bars (and of course hillbilly slums) in certain areas, they are long gone. There were some on Manchester Ave were the Grove is, I think, according to my dad. The tap of southerners/country folk moving into St. Louis turned off a generation ago (at the previous rate, anyway) when the last car plant was built, I believe. Kansas City now seems to takes up almost all of the rural flight population, often from the plains.

[Smtchll]

Originally Posted by stlouisan

If you knew anything about Chicago, you would know that tons of white southerners settled there in the Great Migration, as they did in Detroit. Chicago is just as influenced by barbeque as St. Louis....it has its own signature barbeque sauces, and also its own style. And that Schnucks you made reference to, as I previously noted, is very near to my residence, and is in the vicinity of an African American neighborhood....also very close to the city limits, where a large black population resides. If there is any doubt to how large the southern influences are...take a trip to Louisville, a mirror opposite of St. Louis...a southern city with northern influences. You will experience major culture shock when you go there. The people of St. Louis and Cincinnati don't have Southern mannerisms, speech patterns, diets, etc...if there is a large white population living here that lives off chitlins, collard greens, and plays banjos, they must all go indoors whenever I'm around. To settle how muted those southern influences are...try visiting the northernmost major southern cities which have some northern influences...Louisville, Lexington, and Richmond. You should experience a major culture shock. Also...I just recently visited the south...drove through Paducah, Nashville, and Atlanta...if there is any doubt in your mind about just how large the southern influences are...drive I-24. The people and culture change when you reach about the latitudes of Cape Girardeau and Cairo.

I'd say culture shock is too strong of a word. I don't feel a culture shock when I go up to St. Louis, even my very Southern friends don't notice the differences. Yes, if I lived up there, I would definitely notice more cultural differences than I do when I visit, but if I wanted to experience a true culture shock, I'd have to go to New York or somewhere far from the South.

and there aren't any major Southerner cities where most of the white population eats chitlins, collard greens, and plays banjos. I think you're more likely to find African Americans that do those things, but even then, it's mostly older people. Those things are viewed as "country" We're talking about cities here...

[kshe95girl]

Originally Posted by Smtchll

I'd say culture shock is too strong of a word. I don't feel a culture shock when I go up to St. Louis, even my very Southern friends don't notice the differences. Yes, if I lived up there, I would definitely notice more cultural differences than I do when I visit, but if I wanted to experience a true culture shock, I'd have to go to New York or somewhere far from the South.

and there aren't any major Southerner cities where most of the white population eats chitlins, collard greens, and plays banjos. I think you're more likely to find African Americans that do those things, but even then, it's mostly older people. Those things are viewed as "country" We're talking about cities here...

That was a reference to a ridiculous claim made by another poster about south STL.
Which isnt true.