We had been talking about what region Missouri fits into, so this interested us. It got us into a larger discussion of how the US is broken into regions by various authorities. You could search around and find a number of variations of this map. We decided to contribute to the discussion by making our own region maps. We were going to make just one, but we couldn't agree on some things. Here's mine:
This map is based on a mixture of natural geography (climate, plants, topography) and culture. The western part of the map is more geographical, since I'm more familiar with these areas. I put Nevada in with the Mountain West because it is deserty like Utah, and I put Arizona in the Southwest for cultural reasons (people, food, Spanish/Mexican influence). It seems to fit best with NM and TX that way.
Oklahoma doesn't fit real well anywhere, but I put it in the plains because its flat and agricultural. I created the Borderland region because the three states it includes seem to split the difference between the areas around them, as seen by their unique positions during the Civil War. Florida is another state that doesn't really fit with its surroundings, but where else can you put it.
Finally, I don't like how many people compose what they call the "Midwest." Often it extends all the way to the Dakotas, encompassing states that are too disparate. I prefer the idea of a Great Lakes region.
Here's MacKenzie's map:
MacKenzie's note: I think my map is less geographical and more cultural than Craig's. I tried to classify the regions the way people from that area define themselves, which in some cases is easy as I have firsthand experience living in a lot of these areas. The way people define themselves doesn't always match how other states would see them but I think it is very telling of the culture. It seems fairly common to put Texas in the Southwest and I can see why someone might want to for temperature and food reasons but I don't know anyone from Texas who considered themselves from the Southwest. (I actually think a lot of Texans would want their state to be a region to itself but that is Texas pride for ya). And when I lived in Washington State, people refered to themselves as Pacific Northwesterners. I do feel like my map is a bit South-heavy though I couldn't really think of a state to take out other than Florida but as Craig mentioned, there isn't anywhere else for Florida to go. I guess people just like saying they are Southerners! Another difficulty I had was California. I really wanted to put Northern California in the Pacific Northwest and Southern California with the Southwest but alas, I had to select just one. Overall, this activity was harder than I though it would be but I like my end result.
Do you have any comments on our maps?
Thanks for the interesting way to start my day! I've always been struck by Texans' inability to even split up their own state. This map of the ethnic groups in Texas (http://www.maps.com/ref_map.aspx?cid=680,692,790,1264&pid=12754) shows why it's hard to choose whether to group Texas with the SW or SE. There's the eastern region where the dominate minority is African American and the southwestern region with huge proportion of Hispanics. The really fun thing is that these minority cultures really set the tone for the culture in a way the majority probably doesn't realize.
ReplyDeleteI think Florida is hard to fit, because it's mostly yankee old people and miltary that live there, thus diluting the southerness of the state.
ReplyDeleteCalifornia is so out there in every way that I think it should have its own designation. "Land of fruits and nuts" would be quite fitting.
ReplyDeleteI love Texas. I've never been crazy about the SW classification, however, I do understand the logic. I would call Texas it's own region... that make the Texas pride part of me happy and resolve McKenzie's southern heaviness.
ReplyDeleteHaving grown up in Indiana, we considered ourselves a part of the Midwest. Hands down.
ReplyDeleteHaving lived in Kentucky these past 5 years, I'm still not sure what to consider it. It seems like sort of a gateway between the North and South. True, I am basing this on my experience in Louisville. I hear that the rest of Kentucky is quite different (and more of an old Southern state).
I take MacKenzie's side.
I think I agree more with Craig's map, although the only thing I actively disagree with on MacKenzie's is the name "North Central," since that doesn't pre-exist in the geographical lexicon.
ReplyDeleteCraig's also right that Oklahoma is really tricky--I think it's the hardest to classify of all the states in the union. With Texas and Florida, you could easily make the argument that they are regions unto themselves, but it's hard to convince myself of that in Oklahoma's case.
If I were to make one of these, I'd start with Craig's map and tweak it: I'd get rid of "borderland" because Kentucky just has to go in the South, even though it's nice to have a different designation for West Virginia. I'd also put Virginia in the South since it seems weird for it not to be, although since I haven't spent time there I could be wrong about which region it culturally fits into.
I'd color Missouri green and call green West Midwest and yellow East Midwest. (Basically, using the Mississippi as a dividing line.) I think everybody in those states (with the exception, probably, of Oklahoma) thinks of themselves as Midwesterners even though the country differs so much from Ohio to Nebraska.
MacKenzie has a point that the South is pretty large, at least as far as number of states goes, so I guess you could split off the Deep South (Lousiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and I guess Florida) and the . . . shallow? South, with Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, Virginia, and (grudgingly) West Virginia.
AR - I've only lived in the more Eastern part of Texas so maybe that is why I am anti-SW. I wonder what my friends from the Tech area would say?
ReplyDeleteRachel - I originally had North Central listed as Great Plains but Craig said I couldn't do that if I included Minnesota. It seemed wrong to go against the North Dakota boy but I agree, I don't like the term North Central. And I like your idea of splitting off the Deep South though.
Also, I was reading Southern Living and apparently they consider Missouri part of the south which seems ridiculous even by my large south standards. They are probably quite biased towards a large region since in theory it expands their potential customer pool.
Virginia was in the Confederacy, but I think that with the growth of the DC metroplex into the state it has tilted to the north. Virginians in the rest of the state probably identify more with the South, but they are outnumbered.
ReplyDelete