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.
A short visit as a tourist, when doing a surface comparison with other cities both on the coasts as well as the rest of the Midwest would cause someone to laugh at this characterization. A short visit to Chicago can easily blow away the casual visitor and leave them with the impression that no other city other than NYC is as large, urban, cosmopolitan, and sophisticated.
What Chicago has to offer as a city as far as amenities, opportunities, etc. etc. is in a class of its own, and is only matched or exceeded by those on the coast. The only other city within a days drive of Chicago that can be argued to match or even possibly exceed what Chicago has to offer is Toronto, but that's in another country entirely.
For some niche interests, such as 20th century popular musical heritage, Detroit absolutely matches or even exceeds Chicago (people underestimate the influence and legacy of Motown), and for aficionados of east coast style 19th century rowhouse architecture, Cincinnati matches or even exceeds Chicago, Some old school working class European ethnic enclaves of Cleveland can match or exceed those of Chicago (IE: Little Italy), and St. Louis, having been the largest city in the Midwest before the civil war has more 19th century architecture than Chicago with a touch of French colonial legacy, that give it just a touch of a New Orleans vibe (IE: Mardi Grad in Soulard).
but those are all niche interests (which I absolutely appreciate!) that most people aren't interested in those things enough to convince them to visit let alone live in these cities over Chicago.
HOWEVER, the more you spend time in Chicago getting to know the culture and exploring the city, and can compare and contrast with its peers both on the coast as well as in the Midwest, the more you understand how midwestern it is.
The rough parts of Chicago, where the crime and poverty is located look and feel more like their midestern counterparts than the coastal counterparts.
Coastal cities (NYC, LA, SF) are prohibitively expensive, and in many areas so thoroughly gentrified that there is hardly a "frontier" for gentrification, and the social problems come much more in the form of homelessness, encampments, etc. because its so unaffordable everywhere.
Chicagos South and West sides on the other hand, while not being nearly as depopulated and abandoned as Detroit's worse areas are clearly closer to "rustbelt." The massive former site of the South Shore steel works (steel mills were never much of a thing in NYC, DC, SF, or LA, but are/were in all the Great Lakes/midwest cities is STILL mostly vacant and is big as the entire loop. Yes, abandoned factories are being torn down and replaces all over midwestern cities, but the mere presence of half the lots being vacant and sometimes being overgrown in the worst parts of town, and the presence of large abandoned factories (when I lived in Oak Park back in 2010-2011, I would take the Green line and see the Old abandoned Brach's candy factory). Part of the reason why Chicago is comparatively more affordable than coastal cities, there is much more vacant, former industrial and railyard land that is available for gentrification and new construction of high rises.
The gentrified, most popular, most professional areas of the cities are dominated enough by graduates of Big Ten midwestern universities that work for major banks and corporations, (as opposed to creative jobs in tech, entertainment, and politics like you would have present in coastal cities) absolutely colors the culture and vibe of Chicagos social scene. You really do have a lot of young people that connect based on alumni connections, affinity for sports teams, and often move to Chicago, already have social networks in place.
Does this mean that Chicago is not big enough, where one can find their niche/community? No, but it might take more work than it would in the nations major expensive coastal cities, depending on what it is.
So yes, overall Chicago does feel midwestern when you get to know it on a deeper level and have traveled the country.
A short visit as a tourist, when doing a surface comparison with other cities both on the coasts as well as the rest of the Midwest would cause someone to laugh at this characterization. A short visit to Chicago can easily blow away the casual visitor and leave them with the impression that no other city other than NYC is as large, urban, cosmopolitan, and sophisticated.
What Chicago has to offer as a city as far as amenities, opportunities, etc. etc. is in a class of its own, and is only matched or exceeded by those on the coast. The only other city within a days drive of Chicago that can be argued to match or even possibly exceed what Chicago has to offer is Toronto, but that's in another country entirely.
For some niche interests, such as 20th century popular musical heritage, Detroit absolutely matches or even exceeds Chicago (people underestimate the influence and legacy of Motown), and for aficionados of east coast style 19th century rowhouse architecture, Cincinnati matches or even exceeds Chicago, Some old school working class European ethnic enclaves of Cleveland can match or exceed those of Chicago (IE: Little Italy), and St. Louis, having been the largest city in the Midwest before the civil war has more 19th century architecture than Chicago with a touch of French colonial legacy, that give it just a touch of a New Orleans vibe (IE: Mardi Grad in Soulard).
but those are all niche interests (which I absolutely appreciate!) that most people aren't interested in those things enough to convince them to visit let alone live in these cities over Chicago.
HOWEVER, the more you spend time in Chicago getting to know the culture and exploring the city, and can compare and contrast with its peers both on the coast as well as in the Midwest, the more you understand how midwestern it is.
The rough parts of Chicago, where the crime and poverty is located look and feel more like their midestern counterparts than the coastal counterparts.
Coastal cities (NYC, LA, SF) are prohibitively expensive, and in many areas so thoroughly gentrified that there is hardly a "frontier" for gentrification, and the social problems come much more in the form of homelessness, encampments, etc. because its so unaffordable everywhere.
Chicagos South and West sides on the other hand, while not being nearly as depopulated and abandoned as Detroit's worse areas are clearly closer to "rustbelt." The massive former site of the South Shore steel works (steel mills were never much of a thing in NYC, DC, SF, or LA, but are/were in all the Great Lakes/midwest cities is STILL mostly vacant and is big as the entire loop. Yes, abandoned factories are being torn down and replaces all over midwestern cities, but the mere presence of half the lots being vacant and sometimes being overgrown in the worst parts of town, and the presence of large abandoned factories (when I lived in Oak Park back in 2010-2011, I would take the Green line and see the Old abandoned Brach's candy factory). Part of the reason why Chicago is comparatively more affordable than coastal cities, there is much more vacant, former industrial and railyard land that is available for gentrification and new construction of high rises.
The gentrified, most popular, most professional areas of the cities are dominated enough by graduates of Big Ten midwestern universities that work for major banks and corporations, (as opposed to creative jobs in tech, entertainment, and politics like you would have present in coastal cities) absolutely colors the culture and vibe of Chicagos social scene. You really do have a lot of young people that connect based on alumni connections, affinity for sports teams, and often move to Chicago, already have social networks in place.
Does this mean that Chicago is not big enough, where one can find their niche/community? No, but it might take more work than it would in the nations major expensive coastal cities, depending on what it is.
So yes, overall Chicago does feel midwestern when you get to know it on a deeper level and have traveled the country.
Kudos to you for a very fair assessment. Being urban does not distance us from being Midwestern, although obviously Chicago is an outlier in some respects.
Kudos to you for a very fair assessment. Being urban does not distance us from being Midwestern, although obviously Chicago is an outlier in some respects.
True. Last Saturday evening, I joined a few friends for drinks and dinner in the Gold Coast. We had to check out a few different lounges in order to find space for us to have a cocktail, but a number of the luxury retailers and lounges/restaurants in this area transcend "midwest".
The Midwest is a varied region in terms of landscape. There's the great plains flat lands, there's the rural farmland in IN/IL, appalachia in eastern OH, there's the Ozarks of Missouri.... the forests and lakes of northern WI/MN. The great lakes of WI/IL/IN/MI/OH.
There is no uniform "Midwest" to fit all of that. There are subsections of the Midwest. And Chicago falls under "great lakes" and on the outskirts, the "heartland".
In the last year, I have done road trips to many Midwest locations and there is something about all of them that I love. St. Louis, the Twin Cities, Cleveland, Milwaukee. I love em all and have the best time when I visit. I am midwestern to the core, apparently. Chicago is solidly midwestern in my opinion.
Chicago is in a different category of its own in many respects, but it feels a lot like Detroit, and to some extent Milwaukee as well. How can all three of these be called East Coast cities? No, they are Great Lakes cities, and Chicago is the biggest.
"Midwestern" may or may not be a different category depending on who you ask.
One example: On many levels, Cleveland is like a mini-Chicago on several levels. Why? For other Midwestern/Midwestern-ish cities, Cleveland is more like Chicago in terms of:
- diversity (ethnic, race, income, class, etc.) including (really) an old money establishment (and esp the number of nationally-recognized institutions these people sponsored/built)
- the number of walkable, in-city neighborhoods (esp 'trendy' neighborhoods)
- a Great Lakes lakefront location (with several in-city beaches)
- a Gold Coast apartment district (Cleveland's just happens to be in adjacent, suburban Lakewood)
- quality mass transit (including the only other - outside Chicago's L - 100+-year-old legacy rail rapid transit system, diversity of high-quality residential neighborhoods (counting the city and suburbs -- Detroit and St. Louis have this, too, btw),
- sports bar/micro-brew culture
- foodie reputation
- high quality and diversity of music and the fine arts
- some Eastern influences (Cleveland more so than Chicago given Cleveland's direct Connecticut/New England heritage).
------
One thing Cleveland and Chicago DON'T SHARE is topography:
Cleveland: is often hilly, esp east of downtown, with deep creek and river gorges
Chicago: pancake flat with more surface-level creeks and rivers.
One example: On many levels, Cleveland is like a mini-Chicago on several levels. Why? For other Midwestern/Midwestern-ish cities, Cleveland is more like Chicago in terms of:
- diversity (ethnic, race, income, class, etc.) including (really) an old money establishment (and esp the number of nationally-recognized institutions these people sponsored/built)
- the number of walkable, in-city neighborhoods (esp 'trendy' neighborhoods)
- a Great Lakes lakefront location (with several in-city beaches)
- a Gold Coast apartment district (Cleveland's just happens to be in adjacent, suburban Lakewood)
- quality mass transit (including the only other - outside Chicago's L - 100+-year-old legacy rail rapid transit system, diversity of high-quality residential neighborhoods (counting the city and suburbs -- Detroit and St. Louis have this, too, btw),
- sports bar/micro-brew culture
- foodie reputation
- high quality and diversity of music and the fine arts
- some Eastern influences (Cleveland more so than Chicago given Cleveland's direct Connecticut/New England heritage).
------
One thing Cleveland and Chicago DON'T SHARE is topography:
Cleveland: is often hilly, esp east of downtown, with deep creek and river gorges
Chicago: pancake flat with more surface-level creeks and rivers.
I agree with you, but to say that Cleveland is often hilly . . . is a REAL stretch. (yes I've been there) Besides, Chicagoland has ravines and bluffs too, just not in the city limits. (North Shore, Barrington area, some in Dupage County particularly around the Morton Arborteum, Palos region to the SW of the city, Fox River valley, etc.
Anyone from other regions of the country would consider both regions pretty flat.
Right, it has the Cuyahoga Valley and some areas near strongsville but it should never be described as "hilly". It's not. It is however a surprisingly pretty area in places, notably the metroparks.
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.
