Jump to content


Why haven't you registered yet?

Registration is quick, easy and completely FREE! Click the Create Account button located at the top-right to sign-up and receive additional benefits that existing members are already receiving!

Photo
- - - - -

Boundaries of the midwest


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 Newnan

Newnan

    Hamlet

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 655 posts
  • Location:Exurban Atlanta-formerly the boondocks

Posted 02 January 2006 - 10:16 PM

Where do you think the midwest begins and ends. This is from north to south, east to west, geographically, culturally, and you don't just have to use states as boundaries.

 

#2 Snowguy716

Snowguy716

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts
  • Location:Northern Minnesota

Posted 02 January 2006 - 10:34 PM

Well... it depends on what you mean midwest?

Midwest means: The Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, northern Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio

But within this you have the "Northern plains" which are the Dakotas and western Minnesota. You have the "upper Midwest" which is The Dakotas, Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin...

You can also classify Minnesota and Wisconsin as "western Great Lakes"

Politically, the line runs in a curve from the ND/MN boder south into Iowa and then turning east in central Iowa towards Chicago. The area north and east of this tends to be more liberal and has a more diversified economy (more mining, forestry, etc.)

Culturally.. North Dakota, northern Minnesota, and northern Wisconsin are very Scandinavian culturally.

Central and southern Minnesota, much of Iowa, and Wisconsin are very German.

#3 hudkina

hudkina

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

Posted 06 January 2006 - 03:01 AM

And where does Michigan fall in your classifications?

#4 Snowguy716

Snowguy716

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts
  • Location:Northern Minnesota

Posted 06 January 2006 - 04:28 PM

I would consider Michigan purely "Great Lakes" but still part of the midwest.

#5 hood

hood

    Burg

  • MemberZ
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,633 posts
  • Location:Lansing, Michigan

Posted 11 January 2006 - 06:44 PM

To me, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio and even Illinois, if only because of Chicago, never really fit with the rest of the Midwest.

#6 hudkina

hudkina

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

Posted 13 January 2006 - 12:23 AM

Illinois outside of Chicago is no different than Kansas or Nebraska.

#7 snoogit

snoogit

    Town

  • Members+
  • 3,141 posts
  • Location:Walker, MI

Posted 16 January 2006 - 10:53 AM

Michigan is part of the Midwest, even though its not 100% in line with its politics...

We may vote blue, but on the philosophies like on personal economy we fit right into the Midwestern mold. We just arent as vocal on the hotbed non economic issues of the day, which seem to drive most other states in voting.

Although if someone wanted to sump the Midwest moniker, and call MI, ILL, WI, MN, OH, IN, NY, and PA the "Great Lakes States", I don't think you'd find much objection to that. Because truth be told I feel much more closer to the opinions of a New Yorker, then I do the opinions of a Nebraskan, or a North/South Dakotan

#8 tamias6

tamias6

    Town

  • Members+
  • 3,679 posts
  • Location:Grand Rapids, MI

Posted 24 September 2006 - 07:03 PM

To me the Midwest comprised of the following states:

Michigan
Ohio
Indiana
Illinois
Wisconsin
Minnesota

UP includes states like Kansas and Iowa in the midwest catagory. But they should really be placed in a "Great Plains" catagory.

#9 jdkacz

jdkacz

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,545 posts
  • Location:Grand Rapids, MI

Posted 25 September 2006 - 10:14 PM

To me the Midwest comprised of the following states:

Michigan
Ohio
Indiana
Illinois
Wisconsin
Minnesota

UP includes states like Kansas and Iowa in the midwest catagory. But they should really be placed in a "Great Plains" catagory.



I agree, I feel that the midwest (a crazy moniker by the way since really, all the states of the Mississippi, I imagine this was coined early on when there was the east coast, the midwest and California back in the early years) and the plains state are two seperate regions within the country.

Midwest
-Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Indiana & Ohio

Plains States
-Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, the Dakotas, & Montana

#10 nowensone

nowensone

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts
  • Location:Nihility's Kitchen

Posted 25 September 2006 - 10:27 PM

Where does Louisville, and for that matter, the rest of Kentucky fit?

#11 GRDadof3

GRDadof3

    Gigalopolis

  • Global Moderators
  • 18,328 posts
  • Location:Metro Grand Rapids

Posted 25 September 2006 - 10:35 PM

Where does Louisville, and for that matter, the rest of Kentucky fit?


Kentucky is South, not Midwest (Southern Ohio and Indiana could be considered "South"). They certainly have Southern accents.

Jdkacz, you forgot Missouri (Midwest).

#12 nowensone

nowensone

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts
  • Location:Nihility's Kitchen

Posted 26 September 2006 - 04:49 AM

Kentucky is South, not Midwest (Southern Ohio and Indiana could be considered "South"). They certainly have Southern accents.

Jdkacz, you forgot Missouri (Midwest).

I wouldn't say Kentucky is really south either, and they don't have the same kinds of accents. And Louisville, what I was really asking about, to me feels somwhat like rust belt/midwest town, feel free to dispute that, but it can't really be south either. There are places in southern Ohio that share much in common with WV, but even they are differnent than most of the south. Perhaps Appalachian is a better term for some of these areas. And if southern Ohio is "South", does that apply to Cincinnati?

#13 ppassafi

ppassafi

    Whistle-Stop

  • Members+
  • PipPipPip
  • 120 posts

Posted 26 September 2006 - 02:51 PM

I wouldn't say Kentucky is really south either, and they don't have the same kinds of accents. And Louisville, what I was really asking about, to me feels somwhat like rust belt/midwest town, feel free to dispute that, but it can't really be south either. There are places in southern Ohio that share much in common with WV, but even they are differnent than most of the south. Perhaps Appalachian is a better term for some of these areas. And if southern Ohio is "South", does that apply to Cincinnati?



Kentucky absolutely cannot be categorized as one thing or the other, no matter what anyone tells you. Eastern KY east of Lexington is most definitely Appalachian, and it is one of the poorest regions in the country. This area is a large reason KY has not hit the "new south" boom in stride bc many of the urban area tax dollars go to bailing this poverty out. The people in Appalachia have distinct nasally southern accents that are different than anywhere else.

Lexington is the best example of a "new south" city in KY. It is growing fast, has a major research university, and is diversifying its economy. It also is famous for horses, and girls in southern dresses and greek life, etc. Lexington could easily be a twin of Columbia, SC, or Jackson, MS, etc.

Then you have Louisville, which was a mid nineteenth and early twentieth century metropolis. In fact New Albany, IN, a current suburb of Louisville, was the largest city in Indiana until 1850! At a time, Louisville was the nation's leading producer of rubber and tires, and was highly regarded for shipbuilding, distilling, textiles, etc. The only major city in KY, Louisville cannot be clasified as south nor midwest. It has certain southern elements but many people here do not have southern accents, do not like grits, and do NOT associate with the south or the rest of KY for that matter. And I am talking about lifelong Louisvillians who grew up in the actual city which is really bouded by the Olmstead Park System (Shawnee in the west end, Iroquois on the south end, and Cherokee on the east end). Many of the southern elements in the city are brought here by people from down state who move here. At the same time, many of the Midwestern elements are brought by transplants from places like Chicago and Cleveland who are beginning to flock here as the city slowly begins its "new south" boom. The most "southern aspect" of the city's history is the persistent availability of slaves that were used by the region's steamboat, railroad, and distilling aristocracy. In contrast to the true south, slaves were not as concentrated in Louisville nor would you find any plantations in the region. They merely served as household servants who would live in "cariage houses" in alleys behind the wealthy mansions. In fact, when you think about it, these early neighborhoods were ironically "integrated" withe the wealthy whites living on tree lined streets in mansions and their slaves living in servant quartes in densely packed carriage houses on back alleys.

The Louisville of today has recently hit a "new south" boom with a knowledge based economy and is becoming a major distribution and biomedical/informatics center. Condos are sprouting everywhere, downtown is growing fast, and you can feel the momentum in the city. However, if you take a stroll along the Ohio River to Shippingport, a major 1800's warehouseing district, you can almost hear the steamboats blowing as if you were in another time. Or you can travel east to Butchertown and hear the hogs squealing in the meat packing district and the stench of blood in Beargrass Creek. It is a colorful city full of a history of massive influxes of German and Irish immigrants with a distinct neighborhood known as Germantown that still has a tavern on almost every corner. Seidenfaden's is my favorite. You can feel the Midwest grit and industrial grime amidst the new south boom, the infill condos, and the coastal transplants. But you can also see the southern charm of the city with bourbon, Churchill Downs, and some friendly neighbors with a southern accent who will offer to cut your grass while you are on vacation. It is a melting pot of culture, and thats why I love the city.

#14 nowensone

nowensone

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts
  • Location:Nihility's Kitchen

Posted 26 September 2006 - 03:23 PM

^Informative, thank you, though the "New South" term I find weird as usual, since it really just means 'newer growth', 'renaissance' or is referring to a certain part of the south (usually the SE of the south...) as opposed to other "fringe" south areas. Anyway, no point in debating something that has a fluid meaning, but maybe one should say Louisville is experiencing "New Central" growth. :) Anyway, thanks again.

#15 jdkacz

jdkacz

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,545 posts
  • Location:Grand Rapids, MI

Posted 27 September 2006 - 10:19 PM

Being a football junkie, I've more assumed regions based on their conference. One reason GRdad, I left out Missouri -- they're in the Big 12. Also, why I personally feel that Kentucky is in the south as they're in the SEC. I know its simple thinking, but it keeps things straight for me.

#16 nowensone

nowensone

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts
  • Location:Nihility's Kitchen

Posted 27 September 2006 - 10:44 PM

^ That may work for college, but try that with the NFL divisions... :blink:

#17 tamias6

tamias6

    Town

  • Members+
  • 3,679 posts
  • Location:Grand Rapids, MI

Posted 28 September 2006 - 12:09 AM

Indiana is more like half and half. From Indianapolis on north looks and feels like the midwest to me while anything south of the capital city seems to have a southern feel that only gets stronger the closer to the Kentucky border one gets. My Grand Parents and my mother were born and rised in the southwest corner of the state and they have strong southern accents.

#18 walker

walker

    Hamlet

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 460 posts

Posted 28 September 2006 - 05:57 AM

Indiana is more like half and half. From Indianapolis on north looks and feels like the midwest to me while anything south of the capital city seems to have a southern feel that only gets stronger the closer to the Kentucky border one gets. My Grand Parents and my mother were born and rised in the southwest corner of the state and they have strong southern accents.

I was thinking about posting that same thought yesterday. I had a history professor once who claimed the real dividing point between the north and south was the old national highway. If you search in Wikipedea for "National Old Trails Highway" you can see a map of where this road went. It bisected Indiana through Indianapolis. After he had mentioned that I noticed that the people I knew that came from that area, even just a little south of Indianapolis, had accents and attitudes more typical of people from Kentucky or Tennessee

#19 nowensone

nowensone

    Burg

  • Members+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,692 posts
  • Location:Nihility's Kitchen

Posted 28 September 2006 - 09:36 AM

Is there a magical transformation that takes place as you cross anywhere along the roughly 120 miles of shared border between WV and Pennsylvania? Probably not, but neighbors on either side of it will enjoy a life time of radically different judgments based on it anyway.

Edited by nowensone, 28 September 2006 - 09:36 AM.


#20 GRDadof3

GRDadof3

    Gigalopolis

  • Global Moderators
  • 18,328 posts
  • Location:Metro Grand Rapids

Posted 29 September 2006 - 07:19 PM

Kentucky absolutely cannot be categorized as one thing or the other, no matter what anyone tells you.


No one tells me anything about Kentucky. In fact, I don't think I've heard anyone talk about Kentucky. It's one of those States that's stuck in the middle of a bunch of other States, like a five of diamonds laying in a pile of playing cards. I've only been to Kentucky on the way to Spring Break back in the 90's. I may have stopped at a Flap Jack Shack as I passed through.

With the mountains, the Flap Jack Shacks, and the waitresses with the Southern accents, it was all South to me.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users