Are St. Louis and New Orleans the last "eastern" cities?
 

Splitting the US on binary east/west lines, the Mississippi River is often seen as the dividing line ("W" and "K" call numbers, for example).

The Eastern states are often said to include the Northeast, the South Atlantic and the East North Central and East South Central regions.

This would put Louisiana and Missouri outside the "east" but St. Louis and New Orleans are more similar to cities to the east and can perhaps be said to be the last eastern cities.

st. louis kinda seems like the ultimate junction city of north, east, south, and west.

it's a bit of shame about TWA getting bought out by American, STL is such a natural spot for a large hub airport.

I’ve chewed over this a lot and have varied my opinion on this over time as i’ve explored more of the eastern third of the US via automobile instead of flying to the coast.

There is so much real estate between the Mississippi and the Atlantic that it’s really hard for me to think of St. Louis as the last eastern city, anymore. In fact I’ve argued for the idea that Missouri is a weird proto-western state where various westbound currents merged flowing in from east, northeast and southeast.

In any case, both St. Louis and New Orleans were shaped by the time that they arose - as european imperial outposts that leapfrogged the last westernmost American redoubts.

…and then really physically expanded during peak Manifest Destiny as convenient far forward supply chain bases to the benefit of industrialists and u.s. government expansion (Western Arsenal/Armory of the West based at St. Louis, etc).

In your opinion, in what ways are STL and New Orleans more similar to cities in the east? I think I agree with you, especially when it comes to STL, but am curious to see your reasoning for this statement.

If we're just talking in terms of east and west (no midwest distinction), I think Kansas City could be argued to be the last eastern city. It's still pretty green and has lots of old brick building stock. It definitely has western influences, but I think you really start to feel like you've left the east behind when you get just west of KC and into the relentlessly flat and golden/brown Kansas prairies.

NOLA feels distinct from any other part of the US, though. I don't think it feels particularly eastern or western. It's walkable and historic, but so is San Francisco, and no one is calling that eastern. It looks and feels very unique, imo, whereas St. Louis feels pretty similar to Cincinnati, parts of Chicago...points east and north of it.

Not to speak out of turn but the argument for StL has always been the large amount of zero lot line construction (so far west) e. g. rowhouses - obviously used to be a lot more. St. Louis does weirdly have similar feels to Baltimore specifically…which also has some similarities to New Orleans making a weird lost triangle of its own.

NOLA looks like a Carribean city, but yeah, it has elements of an Eastern, perhaps even Northeastern, feel. Catholic, clannish, lots of Italians and Irish, hyperlocal accents, narrow streets, strong sense of place. History and pedigree matter, at least for U.S. standards.

It definitely doesn't feel anything like a Sunbelt city. Even Charleston and Savannah feel like Sunbelt cities once you get outside the historic cores.

I’ll add that St. Louis is the first city along I-70 or I-64 that I start seeing huge new construction Mormon Temples - a further argument that Missouri and by extension St. Louis are proto-western.

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist...ri-Temple1.jpg
churchofjesuschrist.com

I’m pretty sure the West at the latitude of STL doesn’t begin before Kansas City, and it’s 100% certain that East Texas isn’t “Western” so a definite “no” on NOLA being the line.

San Antonio, Austin, Arlington (it’s the motto of Ft Worth that it’s where the West begins…) and OKC would be the last Eastern cities - putting New Orleans firmly in the East.

The West begins where it starts to be dry, not at the Mississippi.

yes, i would never argue that the contemporary west begins before the Flint Hills, really, at Manhattan, KS (nice town). Theres a gap in the bluffs just across the Kansas state line at downtown KC that feels like a runner up.

Lawrence KS really feels like the first westerly college town too. Theres a Native American college in town of course.

https://earthzine.org/wp-content/upl.../09/image1.png


[Green —> …… = East

<— Yellow] …… = West

/thread :P

^^^ Looks like Texas is the biggest transitional state between East and West. And that map makes a lot of sense. The Western US is drier overall and shaped by mountains, valleys, deserts, and plains. The Eastern US is wetter, more humid, and more green overall, being surrounded by more bodies of water ( Great lakes, rivers, Gulf of Mexico, etc).


By those definitions, I would say Amarillo is one of the Easternmost Western cities and Dallas could be considered one of the most Westernmost Eastern cities

Yes, definitely. The Missouri Territory and later Super Kansas when Denver was founded was somewhat similar in territorial scope but Texas stands alone now in spanning the humid to the dry.

haven't the mormons been building grand new temples everywhere over the past several decades?

i mean, here's a new-ish mormon temple just outside of freaking boston:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4117...7i13312!8i6656

TX spans a great distance. Note that California, which shares with Texas the top two spots for greatest linear driving distance within a single state in the Lower 48, has an even more extreme contrast (from the Oregon border at the Pacific to the Mexico-Arizona (Yuma) triple border area).

Bigger states = more internal variation. Unsurprisingly ;)

Tiny nitpick, San Antonio is further west than Dallas and is about the westernmost point of the green zone (it’s also the western limit for a bunch of Eastern vegetation, again unsurprisingly).

I agree that New Orleans does have a distinct feel, though I definitely feel that it gives off a significant eastern vibe. I lived there for about 4 years, and I would find myself taking mental notes of things and experiences (both subtle and overt) that reminded me of Pittsburgh or Buffalo or Philly or Brooklyn. Its historical factors really set the stage:

• Major port of entry for European immigrants pre-Civil War and post, with the same northern/eastern American mix of Irish, Sicilians/southern Italians, eastern Europeans.
  
• Majority Catholic population
  
• Ethnic/racial diversity from early on
  
• Manufacturing industry = urban, blue collar workforce
  
• Strong economic ties to the north
  
• Under Federal control for most of Civil War, which only increased northern $ and influence flowing

Just a much more cosmopolitan city than anywhere else in the South, reflecting the very diverse influence.

After living there, I always said it feels like a northern blue collar city dropped down in the Deep South, with a bunch of European and Caribbean basin influence. A good gumbo, basically... and I'm sure I'm far from the first to ever say that.

Emporia and the Flint Hills region is the first thing that feels solidly "westernish", if KC itself doesn't. Kansas City has common architectural features that remind me of Detroit, especially all of those 1910/1920s apartment buildings, but in a semi-arid climate. The hot wind has a way of blowing through KC that simply doesn't happen further east.

St. Louis definitely sits in a semi-arid climate zone as compared to Chicago or Indianapolis. The woods in Missouri simply don't get as thick as they do east of the Mississippi.

Where St. Louis is unusual is in its brick type, which makes the place look older than it is. Pittsburgh also has brick and stone that is quite distinct. By contrast, the brick and stone in Cincinnati is very brittle. You can literally kick chips and dust off the side of any stone foundation in Cincinnati.

huh???

st. louis gets more annual precipitation than chicago does, and i would hardly call chicago a "semi-arid" climate.


STL annual average precipitation: 41.7"

MDW annual average precipitation: 40.9"

source: wikipedia


the conventional definition for "semi-arid" is places that get between 10 - 20 inches of precipition per year.

no place on or east of the mississippi qualifies by that definition.

As a lifetime Kansas Citian, I've NEVER considered Kansas City to be an eastern city. St. Louis? Meh, Midwestern rustbelt, like Cleveland and Detroit.

yeah, that resonates with me.

as a lifelong chicagoan, when i hear the phrase "eastern city", my mind IMMEDIATELY goes to bos-wash.

the cities of the midwest/rustbelt are in another category in my mind.