OKC vs Peer Cities

[bluedogok]

I agree with this. St. Louis is the westernmost city of the Northeastern/Midwestern ilk. When I think Missouri, I never think of St. Louis. I always think of Kansas City, or the vast farm country in the central part of the state, or "Missour-uh" in the southern part of the state anchored by Springfield and Branson. People talk about Dallas being where the East ends and Ft Worth where the West begins, but Texas, like Oklahoma is still culturally Dixie.

Dallas is just a jumbled mess of everywhere. When I lived there in 91-93 I used to joke that Dallas had nothing to do with Texas, it was just where all the people moving from the northeast and midwest stopped and ended up staying on their way to California.

[PWitty]

That's how I see it. STL may be overall larger and more historically urban, but it also has a lot of blight problems that puts KC in a better position in my opinion. Now I am not saying St Louis is a bad city, but if I was going to live in Missouri my first choice would be Kansas City. Kansas City is underrated nationally simply because it has the word "Kansas" in its name and people from the coast apply to it the stereotypes that go with that. St Louis on the other hand is more closely associated with blue state Illinois, garnering it more respect among the urban elite.

I would disagree with this at some level. When I think of Missouri I do think of KC but that is because I am from the KS side of the metro and you can't talk about KC without talking about Missouri. At the same time, I also think of St. Louis. And if you have ever been to the Illinois side of the St. Louis metro, in no way would you ever want to associate that with Illinois. When I think of Illinois all I think about is Chicago, much the same way I think about NYC when I think about NY.

To add to that, KC by far and away has more ties to the University of Kansas than it does to Missouri University. With Lawrence so close and the KUMC right on the state line it's hard not to.

[bchris02]

Louisville/Oklahoma City (Louisville is prettier, but the Thunder trump anything they have IMO)

Personally I think Louisville is ahead of OKC by a healthy margin in a few key areas. Their CBD, as a whole is noticeably more active and they have plenty of parks, fountains, and plazas. Louisville also has quite a bit of retail downtown as well as street level businesses. They also have Fourth St Live, which is like a smaller version of Kansas City's Power and Light district. OKC still has some ground to cover outside of Bricktown. In addition, they have other urban districts that for the most part are farther along in the gentrification process than OKC's districts with a very vibrant arts and live music scene for a city it's size. On top of that, the natural landscape of northern Kentucky is beautiful and there is a lot of nearby outdoor recreation. OKC and Louisville however are very similar however by most statistical measurements, be it population, demographics, economic clout, and even by Richard Florida's creative class index. A lot of what's great about Louisville is also happening in OKC, but I think they are currently about 5-10 years or so ahead of us.

[OKVision4U]

They are ahead. But Kentucky is a pretty state to start w/. If you haven't been, then you are missing something.

OKC should catch them when the Park / River / Convention Hotels are in place. Then we will be on the same page. OKC is certainly more Visible than Louisville.

[soonerguru]

It will be even better when they complete their streetcar between the River Market, Downtown, and UnionStation!

Too bad they didn't put it down Main connecting Downtown, Westport and the Plaza. Pretty big miss bit they couldn't get it passed.

[soonerguru]

I would say only West Texas is truly Southwestern. I would define West Texas as anything west of the I-35 corridor but not including it. DFW, Austin, and San Antonio are still Southern but west of there it gets Southwestern. For Oklahoma, I would say the Panhandle is Southwestern but most of the interior of the state fits more with the South. All of Oklahoma and Texas does have more Southwestern influence than say Tennessee or Alabama, but I would say Southern culture is still the dominant culture for the most part.

Nope.

[BoulderSooner]

Oklahoma is the southern plains .. it has some of the culture of the southwest and some of the south .. but it doesn't fit with either .

[adaniel]

People have been trying to compartmentalize this state for ages. I doubt people in Altus, Woodward, or Enid would consider themselves the south. Likewise I don't think people in Antlers or Idabel identify with the southwest. OK straddles about 3 or 4 cultural regions, if you really think about it.

[Dubya61]

People have been trying to compartmentalize this state for ages. I doubt people in Altus, Woodward, or Enid would consider themselves the south. Likewise I don't think people in Antlers or Idabel identify with the southwest. OK straddles about 3 or 4 cultural regions, if you really think about it.

I like Joel Garreau's "Nine Nations of North America" (from 1981, admittedly)
Google Image Result for http://www.overmorgen.com/weblog/files/2009/01/09/nine_nations_of_north_america.gif
which has us in something called "The Breadbasket" or Colin Woodard's "American Nations"
World Wide Woodard: Presenting the (slighty revised) American Nations map
that places us in Greater Appalachia.
I think some of those Midwest, Southwest, South groupings are insane when it comes to Oklahoma.

[betts]

Personally I think Louisville is ahead of OKC by a healthy margin in a few key areas. Their CBD, as a whole is noticeably more active and they have plenty of parks, fountains, and plazas. Louisville also has quite a bit of retail downtown as well as street level businesses. They also have Fourth St Live, which is like a smaller version of Kansas City's Power and Light district. OKC still has some ground to cover outside of Bricktown. In addition, they have other urban districts that for the most part are farther along in the gentrification process than OKC's districts with a very vibrant arts and live music scene for a city it's size. On top of that, the natural landscape of northern Kentucky is beautiful and there is a lot of nearby outdoor recreation. OKC and Louisville however are very similar however by most statistical measurements, be it population, demographics, economic clout, and even by Richard Florida's creative class index. A lot of what's great about Louisville is also happening in OKC, but I think they are currently about 5-10 years or so ahead of us.

Oh, I mostly agree. I think they're ahead of us in most of those parameters, but not by that much. I just think that if I could choose which of the two cities I'd prefer to live in, it would be no contest. For me, having an NBA team trumps any natural beauty and slight increase in urbanization they have. That's why I rank them equally. And that's one of the reasons I rank some of the other cities below us. I think Omaha has a far better Bricktown-like area in their Old Market, and they've got better retail than we do, for the most part. But, the Thunder give us an advantage that's hard to top. If Jacksonville had a better or more loved NFL team, I'd rank them ahead of OKC for that reason ( and the beach), but they don't.

[Spartan]

I've been to every single one of these cities. Some of them I've spent a fair amount of time in. And here's my ranking:

New Orleans
Louisville/Oklahoma City (Louisville is prettier, but the Thunder trump anything they have IMO)
Memphis/Salt Lake City (different positives and negatives, but about the same to me)
Jacksonville (I love the beach there too, but as far as urban areas go, OKC is far more appealing).
Richmond (maybe...might even be below Omaha and Birmingham)
Omaha (Omaha and Birmingham are the most appealing of the slightly smaller cities)
Birmingham
Albuquerque
Buffalo/Rochester/Hartford (none of these I find very appealing)
Tulsa
Tucson

I agree with this list, except I would realistically put SLC just ahead of OKC. We can all admit that, thanks to being beneficiaries of our light rail system, SLC has progressed past us enough to be a role model with TOD and LRT.

Buffalo, by the way, is a beautiful city reminiscent of the City Beautiful era. Kind of a miniature Cleveland..

Tulsa should be higher but isn't because they have no plan, no direction, no development, nothing except decline. Declining cities lose points.

[Teo9969]

To be sure, Oklahoma is it's own state much more so than every state outside of California, Texas, Alaska, Hawaii, and Florida. You could maybe throw in Colorado, because it's not southwestern and it's far more interesting than any of the other Rocky Mountain states.

It has influences from the Southwest, the South, the Midwest, Texas, and has the added history of being Indian Territory and hosting a large contingent of Native Americans today. Oklahoma also has a far greater hispanic population than LA, AR and certainly the southeastern states.

Oklahoma, Texas and California are the only states to be major players in the early oil days, and because of how much Big Oil affects our economy, it is easy to see how this state could never be a Southern state, never be a strictly agricultural "plains" state, and has never had the manufacturing (nor the weather or politics) to be a Midwestern state.

Furthermore, OKC and Tulsa belong to the "Texas Triangle" emerging mega-region. As time progresses, Texas and Oklahoma will become more like each other.

[bchris02]

Tulsa also loses points because of its massive parking craters with no plans whatsoever to remedy the situation.

Louisville has done an outstanding job at balancing density and parking. Given the demographic and population similarities, that city should definitely be a model for OKC. I believe we will be able to catch up with them in 5-10 years providing there isn't an economic collapse. Think OKC with a fully gentrified Midtown, SoSA, Uptown, completed Central Park surrounded by mid-rise residential, completed convention center with hotel, and a CBD with substantial big name retail and you have Louisville today.

[OKCisOK4me]

People have been trying to compartmentalize this state for ages. I doubt people in Altus, Woodward, or Enid would consider themselves the south. Likewise I don't think people in Antlers or Idabel identify with the southwest. OK straddles about 3 or 4 cultural regions, if you really think about it.

When I see these Southern or Southwest labels on Oklahoma, I seem them as geographical terms. For the cultural perspective, I agree with you in that Oklahoma was built on the principals of the settlers that came here, which came via the East/Northeast to open land to claim their stake. A majority of those were what, German? Irish? Italian? How many settlers came from the Southeast or Texas? The flair of Oklahoma is a montage of genetic lines that to me came from the Northeast but created their own traditions, quite like the Pilgrims came to America to not be persecuted. That's why Oklahoma will never identify with a certain region based on the styles of life you see today.

[bradh]

I don't give two craps about mass transit in ranking SLC above OKC, it gets the nod for the sole reason of being next door to great skiing!

[bchris02]

When I see these Southern or Southwest labels on Oklahoma, I seem them as geographical terms. For the cultural perspective, I agree with you in that Oklahoma was built on the principals of the settlers that came here, which came via the East/Northeast to open land to claim their stake. A majority of those were what, German? Irish? Italian? How many settlers came from the Southeast or Texas? The flair of Oklahoma is a montage of genetic lines that to me came from the Northeast but created their own traditions, quite like the Pilgrims came to America to not be persecuted. That's why Oklahoma will never identify with a certain region based on the styles of life you see today.

I agree that Oklahoma has a unique combination of influences from different parts of the country, but I would still say it, at least from OKC eastward, has more in common with the South than the Southwest. Is Oklahoma more similar in culture to Tennessee or Arizona? Both states are two states away in each direction. I would say definitely Tennessee. Other than Native American heritage, Oklahoma lacks real connection with the true Southwest in my opinion. I've lived in inland Southern California and have spent lots of time in Arizona through my childhood so I know the culture pretty well. Oklahoma is, in my opinion, SOUTHwest, vs Arizona and New Mexico being southWEST.

[Teo9969]

I agree that Oklahoma has a unique combination of influences from different parts of the country, but I would still say it, at least from OKC eastward, has more in common with the South than the Southwest. Is Oklahoma more similar in culture to Tennessee or Arizona? Both states are two states away in each direction. I would say definitely Tennessee. Other than Native American heritage, Oklahoma lacks real connection with the true Southwest in my opinion. I've lived in inland Southern California and have spent lots of time in Arizona through my childhood so I know the culture pretty well.

Oklahoma may be more similar to Tennessee than Arizona, but its relationship to both of those states is very little. So if OK relates to AZ at 10%, then it relates to Tennessee at 15%. So while Tennessee definitely shares more in common, it is still completely inaccurate to label OK as a remotely southern state. We have more in common with Iowa than we do with Louisiana and about as much with Iowa as we do with Arkansas.

[bchris02]

Oklahoma may be more similar to Tennessee than Arizona, but its relationship to both of those states is very little. So if OK relates to AZ at 10%, then it relates to Tennessee at 15%. So while Tennessee definitely shares more in common, it is still completely inaccurate to label OK as a remotely southern state. We have more in common with Iowa than we do with Louisiana and about as much with Iowa as we do with Arkansas.

I would say more like 30-40% to Tennessee. There are cultural differences but Oklahoma does share significant cultural similarities with the upper South. I agree about Louisiana though. However, the western half of Arkansas is very similar to Oklahoma culturally, though its very different geographically.

This map, I believe is a good indicator of the boundaries.

[BG918]

Tulsa should be higher but isn't because they have no plan, no direction, no development, nothing except decline. Declining cities lose points.

Tulsa isn't growing at the same rate as OKC but is not declining either. And there is quite a bit of development going on in the city, either planned or under construction.

[Teo9969]

I would say more like 30-40% to Tennessee. There are cultural differences but Oklahoma does share significant cultural similarities with the upper South. I agree about Louisiana though. However, the western half of Arkansas is very similar to Oklahoma culturally, though its very different geographically.

This map, I believe is a good indicator of the boundaries.

Link?

Would be interested to see dates on that study, a description and definition of terms, and methodology.

This map, in conjunction with the map you posted is also important in dissecting the correlation of OK to other states:



Finally, I have a hard time accepting that accents are a good method by which to determine cultural proximity in the US. Especially since people in our generation all sound very similar regardless of where they are from. The history of Oklahoma alone keeps it from having very much in common with the South...OK's history is more in-line with Arizona than it is Tennessee. Every Oklahoman can probably identify with the "Wild West" heritage because of the Native American heritage and the "Cowboys and Indians" trope. We can't identify in any way with the Confederacy.

Our culinary predilections are distinctly I-35 corridor: Meat and Potatoes...particularly Steak or Hamburgers...we're Ranchers/Cattle people...something specifically not southern. We're also very much adopting Chipotle/Spicy into our average menu, and that's a southwestern thing.

I just would like at least some sort of cultural comparisons or signifiers for where you're deriving your thoughts. So far it's been "This is what I think" without any sort of tangible reference as to why. I don't see a whole lot of southern culture that we favor...in fact, if something is comparable to the South, it is exactly that: Comparable, but not Alike.

[progressiveboy]

Link?

Would be interested to see dates on that study, a description and definition of terms, and methodology.

This map, in conjunction with the map you posted is also important in dissecting the correlation of OK to other states:



Finally, I have a hard time accepting that accents are a good method by which to determine cultural proximity in the US. Especially since people in our generation all sound very similar regardless of where they are from. The history of Oklahoma alone keeps it from having very much in common with the South...OK's history is more in-line with Arizona than it is Tennessee. Every Oklahoman can probably identify with the "Wild West" heritage because of the Native American heritage and the "Cowboys and Indians" trope. We can't identify in any way with the Confederacy.

Our culinary predilections are distinctly I-35 corridor: Meat and Potatoes...particularly Steak or Hamburgers...we're Ranchers/Cattle people...something specifically not southern. We're also very much adopting Chipotle/Spicy into our average menu, and that's a southwestern thing.

I just would like at least some sort of cultural comparisons or signifiers for where you're deriving your thoughts. So far it's been "This is what I think" without any sort of tangible reference as to why. I don't see a whole lot of southern culture that we favor...in fact, if something is comparable to the South, it is exactly that: Comparable, but not Alike.

Oklahoma is not the deep South but considered the upper South. We have neighboring states of Arkansas and to the southeast Louisiana. Texas to the South as well. Our topography of growing magnolia trees, live oaks, crept myrtle are foliage and trees that grow in the South. Hell, Okies even drink sweet tea along with a diet very southern. Oklahoma is considered a state in the upper South according to "Southern Living". Oklahoma is "not" a midwestern state. Lesson 101 Geography!!

[adaniel]

When I see these Southern or Southwest labels on Oklahoma, I seem them as geographical terms. For the cultural perspective, I agree with you in that Oklahoma was built on the principals of the settlers that came here, which came via the East/Northeast to open land to claim their stake. A majority of those were what, German? Irish? Italian? How many settlers came from the Southeast or Texas? The flair of Oklahoma is a montage of genetic lines that to me came from the Northeast but created their own traditions, quite like the Pilgrims came to America to not be persecuted. That's why Oklahoma will never identify with a certain region based on the styles of life you see today.

True. A lot of SE Oklahoma was indeed settled by Italians, while a lot of the first wave of Tulsa's oil barons were WASPs and Irish from NY and Chicago. The only real concentrated movement of southerners into OK were Native Americans and the slaves they brought with them.

Finally, I have a hard time accepting that accents are a good method by which to determine cultural proximity in the US. Especially since people in our generation all sound very similar regardless of where they are from. The history of Oklahoma alone keeps it from having very much in common with the South...OK's history is more in-line with Arizona than it is Tennessee. Every Oklahoman can probably identify with the "Wild West" heritage because of the Native American heritage and the "Cowboys and Indians" trope. We can't identify in any way with the Confederacy.

Our culinary predilections are distinctly I-35 corridor: Meat and Potatoes...particularly Steak or Hamburgers...we're Ranchers/Cattle people...something specifically not southern. We're also very much adopting Chipotle/Spicy into our average menu, and that's a southwestern thing.

I just would like at least some sort of cultural comparisons or signifiers for where you're deriving your thoughts. So far it's been "This is what I think" without any sort of tangible reference as to why. I don't see a whole lot of southern culture that we favor...in fact, if something is comparable to the South, it is exactly that: Comparable, but not Alike.

Never thought about it that way. I've noticed on my visits that most people in the south consume a ton of pork while eating just a fraction of the beef we eat here. Part of that is just the nature of our geography. We had miles of flat, treeless prairie that was perfect for cattle grazing compared to most of the SE. And our cuisine is definitely infused with a lot of southwest/Mexican influences. Fried jalapenos, tacos, guacamole, etc., you really don't see a lot of that deep in the south but everyone I know here eats this stuff almost daily.

I'll add that today's contemporary Oklahoma is definitely influenced by the south. But trust me, if you go to Atlanta or Nashville and ask where OK is, few will say in the Southeast. To them, its: no former confederate state+no SEC team=not southern. But that's fine with me. I frankly love our blend of cultures and influences here.

[Plutonic Panda]

Tulsa isn't growing at the same rate as OKC but is not declining either. And there is quite a bit of development going on in the city, either planned or under construction.

Tulsa is depressing and the majority of people I interact with when I am there, are cocky, stuck up, and have no clue how fast OKC is growing and why it is a million times the city Tulsa will ever be.

Also, please note, I am not trolling on Tulsa, just the past 10 times I've been there, esp. seeing Bcrhis comparing a few of Tulsa's districts, there is nothing at all special to them. The people I've spoken with are just stuck up and snobby. It is like a mega Edmond, to me.

[bchris02]

Tulsa is depressing and the majority of people I interact with when I am there, are cocky, stuck up, and have no clue how fast OKC is growing and why it is a million times the city Tulsa will ever be.

I have met quite a few people who have moved from Tulsa to OKC, but haven't met a single person in the year I've lived here who moved or wanted to move to Tulsa.

[bchris02]

Oklahoma is not the deep South but considered the upper South. We have neighboring states of Arkansas and to the southeast Louisiana. Texas to the South as well. Our topography of growing magnolia trees, live oaks, crept myrtle are foliage and trees that grow in the South. Hell, Okies even drink sweet tea along with a diet very southern. Oklahoma is considered a state in the upper South according to "Southern Living". Oklahoma is "not" a midwestern state. Lesson 101 Geography!!

Agree with this. Oklahoma is upper-South as opposed to deep South. There is a significant difference in the two cultures. Southern cuisine is probably the dominant cuisine here. Country music, our area's most popular genre, is rooted in the South. Tea is sweet by default. Oklahoma is the capital of the Bible Belt and Southern hospitality. Southern Baptist is the dominant religion here (it's not in the Southwest or the Midwest or even in Kansas). The only thing Oklahoma is really missing compared to the Southern states is its historical tie with the Confederacy and an SEC football team. Oklahoma wasn't a state during the time of the Civil War but if it was, I have little doubt it would have been a part of the Confederacy.