There are many unanswered questions that I and many other Louisville residents have about our great city. This series begs for an answer to those questions, or at least an understanding ear.
This week's "What the Fleur" comes from a reader who wants to know what the fleur is up with local overuse of the term Kentuckiana:
Dear Ms. Elliott,
In all honesty, do you not see a problem with this Kentuckiana jargon?
Regardless of how close who is to what, Kentucky and Indiana are in two different regions, one is in the North and the other in the Southeast. They are two different states with different cultures, heritages, and traditions. Kentucky's Southern image has been damaged by this, and Louisville as a city has all but lost most of her identity. Who knows what Louisville is today? Southern Living Magazine still includes Louisville as a major city of the South, but how can you say this when you have a northern state attached to its name? It simply does not work.
I remember in the 70s a sign read "Welcome to Louisville, Gateway to the South." One of our mayors did not like this image for the city, but, of course, he was from Indiana.
I was born and raised in Louisville, Kentucky, not Louisville, Indiana, or Kentuckiana. I love the city, even though I do not live there any longer. This should be a prime topic for our Governor to take on for the new election--save Kentucky's identity!
I now live 60 miles south of the city, which I think has given me a little different perspective. While growing up in Louisville, you did not hear the term "Kentuckiana" when referring to Louisville. It seems in the past five years it has spread not only in Louisville but all through Central Kentucky. In Elizabethtown alone, there are several businesses named Kentuckiana.
States for the most part are very protective of their heritage and cultural boundaries. Other states/cities do not compromise their identity like Louisville/Kentucky has done. In the Chattanooga, Tennessee, area, you do not hear such a phrasing, and Tennessee and Georgia are both in the same U.S. region with no natural boundary, such as a mass of water, separating the two states. Look at the care and rivalry New Jersey and New York take in protection of their identity.
There is a new billboard on I-65 that says "University of Louisville, Kentuckiana's college." I was in shock when I saw it last week. It is the University of Louisville in the state of Kentucky!
It may be different if Kentucky and Indiana were in the same geographic regions, but they are not. And the two states are not connected, they are separated by a symbolic natural line--the Ohio River. How can you take two regions that have different ties and make them one?
We have very little in Kentucky as far as events and so on, with most of those occurring in Louisville. Why do we dare share it? What does Indiana share with us? I am glad our northern neighbors love living in Southern Indiana, and yes, they are most likely a good chunk of the Louisville, Kentucky, economy. But they are not Louisville, Kentucky, citizens.
I contacted every possible person that may be able to shine some light on this, news media in Louisville, Kentucky, and Louisville government officials, and the majority agree with me but say it's not something that can't be controlled. One person at the Courier-Journal pretty much said it is "too late, it spread like wildfire over night." The Louisville Tourism Council did alter their brochure, saying that the opening page does now give a definition of what Kentuckiana means. What does it mean? It is not just Louisville any more. It is all of Central Kentucky and still spreading.
Do you have a What the Fleur? question you've been dying to learn the answer to or just get off your chest? If so, send your questions to me in an email at louisville.guide@about.com. You might be featured in next week's installment!
Photo © Scott Hancock / Big Stock Photo
Comments
I have found the “Kentuckiana” phrasing getting out of hand for several years. All of the Louisville area radio and television stations are using it with full force and this is most likely due to gaining advertising clients from both states. I do agree with the writer, The factual bottom line is that there are two states and one city involved. Louisville is in Kentucky, not Indiana. The word “Kentuckiana” is ficticious and no doubt confusing to tourist and visitors.
I also agree that Kentucky is a southern state with it’s people, lifestyle, history and sites all reflecting that culture. Indiana is a mid-west state, which I am not exactly sure what that means–The West actually starts in Missouri, right? I would say that Indiana would be considered Northeastern, just as Ohio and perhaps Illinois would be. (*****Can someone explain what the Midwest is ?). One thing that amusses me about the two states, is the different accents—”You guys” and “Y’all”…Now there is a big difference in vocals. (smile).
Has it damaged tourism? Maybe, but Louisville seems to be OK with it and Kentucky never makes a big deal out of it. Louisville has suffered from identity theft for over 50 years. It never knows what it wants to be—Kentucky, Indiana, Southern or Western. Geographically, Louisville is a city in a Southeastern state. The University of Louisville or (Kentuckiana) is in the Big East Conference and that is more than likely due to their head basketball coach, but does it belong there? Look how far fans have to travel up north to attend away games. Louisville like to attach itself and to Indiana it has, but for some reason it does not want the Knetucky or Southern image.
I think the leadership of the Louisville government need to sit down and have serious discussion about the for the city. Personally, I think it is too late for any changes, but it would not hurt to start adding some Kentucky personality into Louisville. Anyone ever thought, perhaps this is why there are no major sports team in the city.
It should be Louisville, Kentucky! The Hoosiers have many large cities that include Indianapolis, South Bend, Forty Wayne, Evansville, Gary, Carmel, Muncie, Etc. Owensboro, Kentucky’s 3rd largest city does not even come close to the population of Indiana’s 12th largest city of Anderson. Why should Indiana have claim to Kentucky’s largest and most influential city? The people are different in terms of lifestyle as well, Kentucky is a much slower pace of people than those of Indiana. Personally, I do not like the Kentuckiana name and find myself switching channels on both radio and television when hearing them. This year, I heard the “Kentuckiana Derby” for the first time and it made my skin crawl. Why do Kentucky citizens not protest this. I will not cheer for the University of Kentuckiana either!