Is Austin a southern, southwestern, or western city? (Houston, El Paso: homes, construction)

[doctorjef]

Bideshi, this objectively just isn't true. There are very great cultural differences between Lufkin, Ft Worth, Austin, Harlingen, and Lubbock, to cite a few examples. You might credibly argue that there is more that unites these disparate regions of the state than separates them. However, you can't ignore that Palestine and Dumas really aren't the same; or Bandera and Marshall. Yeah, there may be a sense of being Texan, but I'd argue that it's more subjective than objective. I know that when I lived in Beaumont, I found it so radically different from Central TX, North TX and the Panhandle, that I couldn't really feel it was properly Texas at all. It's just not so simple with such a big and diverse land mass with a pretty big population spread all over it. What I would agree on overall is that Texas is Texas and that it can't be properly understood in relation to any single cultural or geographical area of the surrounding USA or Mexico.

[Bideshi]

I am an "oversimplifier" which much frustrated my professors; what I meant was that Austin has a unique persona which I can only think of as Austin, not midwest or southern. I was too cryptic; please accept my apology.

[doctorjef]

No need to apologise, and agreed on your point about Austin's unique personality (though others who aren't so sympathetic to Austin will disagree).

[atx58]

Out of curiosity in the real southwest (El Paso, Albuquerque, Phoenix) does everybody pronounce Guadalupe like Guadaloop, and Manchaca like Manshack?

[scm53]

This is a fascinating discussion -- all of the different ways of looking at the same thing, like the blind men, each with their own different description of the elephant.

Raised in Texas, college in SC, lived all over the country. Eleven years in Austin ('84 - '95). Dallas, Germany, and now Norfolk, but hopefully headed back to Austin after the first of the year. All that to say that Austin, like most of Texas, has been influenced by all of the cultures that came along with the six flags that have flown over the state. Each influence is stronger in one part of the state than in another, but they are all there, in each place. That's why Marshall is very much like Mississippi -- culturally, horticulturally, topographically -- but it is still different, because it is in Texas. Galveston has much in common with New Orleans (including a common speech pattern close to Brooklyn), but is Texas.

So, now we get to Austin -- where the six influences are more in balance than any other city in the state. Eat at Threadgill's, and you are eating Eddie's mom's food, from Mississippi. We eat BBQ like the rest of the south, but thanks to our Czech and German butchers, it is beef, not pork. Certainly, we love our Mexican food, and thanks to RC Gorman and Amado Pena, southwestern art. Austinites are probably the only people in the state that can point to a tangible piece of French influence (albeit, from the Republic days). And I hope some of you can look at the Confederate flag, and see the good things represented in the sacrifice of people like Albert Sidney Johnston and John Bell Hood. People that were willing to put their lives on the line over a principle. We can argue about the 20th century view of the worthwhileness of that principle, and still honor what the sacrifice meant. And of course, the unique perspective of being the only state formed from a treaty with a sovreign nation. I think the fierce independence of Texans in general, and Austinites in particular, wouldn't exist without the historic fact of the Republic of Texas.

When I lived in Germany, they would tell me they weren't anal -- that was the Swiss. Called them distilled Germans -- everything you like, and dislike, in Germans, in greater concentrations. I think Texans are like that -- distilled Americans. And Austinites are distilled Texans, just with all of the components about in equal balance.

Pray that my final interview goes well and I get to come home. Like the Mexicans, who are too far from God, and too close to the US, I am too close to NY, and too far from Texas.

[orbius]

Central Texas was settled by Germans who arrived prior to the Civil War and then took over after because they were the main group in the state sympathetic to the Union prior to the Civil War. These Germans then brought in Central/Eastern European immigrants to settle Central Texas post civil war to give themselves clout over the then resentful Southern political majority. Central Texas and where the millions of new settlers settled around Texas is 100% distinct from the rest of Texas for this reason. Most Central Texans didnt suffer during the Civil War, didnt resent the United States post Civil War. I think to be considered a Southern town that community had to have had the experience of losing the Civil War and being occupied post Civil War.

Thats why most of Texas doesnt feel 'Southern', because its mostly not. There was a huge coordinated immigration effort conducted by the German power base of the state to gain a majority of political power here.

The population numbers back this up. From 1870-1880(post Civil War) the population of Texas doubled. And doubled again from 1880-1900.

This isnt a Southern state! Southerners are a minority in Texas. Its a post Civil War immigrant state. Immigrants who came from the North of the US seeking land or European immigrants seeking the same.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by orbius

Central Texas was settled by Germans who arrived prior to the Civil War...

I think to be considered a Southern town that community had to have had the experience of losing the Civil War and being occupied post Civil War...

Thats why most of Texas doesnt feel 'Southern', because its mostly not.

It is a mistake to take a snapshot of one period, and extrapolate to today. Austin is an amalgam of what has happened over centuries. Prior to the capitol moving permanently to Austin in 1845, Travis county was settled by Southerners -- The Wilbarger brothers, from Kentucky, Reuben Hornsby, from Georgia, Jacob Harrell, from Tennessee. (My own family came to Hays county from Georgia). In fact, the southern influence was so strong that John Webber was forced to move to Hidalgo county because of animosity over his mixed race marriage. So to try to deny the southern heritage of Austin, is revisionist history.

Second, Austin WAS occupied by Union troops, starting in the spring of 1865, and lasting until 1870. While Travis county did vote against secession, 600 Travis county residents (out of a total population of around 3,500) volunteered and fought with the Confederacy. Land values fell by almost 25% following the war. While Austin wasn't destroyed like say, Atlanta or Columbia, neither were many cities in the south. If your city had to be razed to be today considered "Southern", then many places fail that test.

Finally, to your last point -- pretty subjective judgement. Austin isn't Jackson, Mississippi, but it isn't Jackson, Michigan, either. It is Texas, and to be Texas, it has to have a southern influence. It is in the culture -- simple things like holding doors for people, taking your hat off indoors, "where you tip your hat to the ladies, and the rose of San Antone". That may be changing, as non-Texans start making up a larger proportion of the state. But today, Texas is a southern state, and as long as it is, there is a unmistakable part of Austin that reflects Southern values, sensibilites, and culture.

[orbius]

Originally Posted by scm53

It is a mistake to take a snapshot of one period, and extrapolate to today. Austin is an amalgam of what has happened over centuries. Prior to the capitol moving permanently to Austin in 1845, Travis county was settled by Southerners -- The Wilbarger brothers, from Kentucky, Reuben Hornsby, from Georgia, Jacob Harrell, from Tennessee. (My own family came to Hays county from Georgia). In fact, the southern influence was so strong that John Webber was forced to move to Hidalgo county because of animosity over his mixed race marriage. So to try to deny the southern heritage of Austin, is revisionist history.

Second, Austin WAS occupied by Union troops, starting in the spring of 1865, and lasting until 1870. While Travis county did vote against secession, 600 Travis county residents (out of a total population of around 3,500) volunteered and fought with the Confederacy. Land values fell by almost 25% following the war. While Austin wasn't destroyed like say, Atlanta or Columbia, neither were many cities in the south. If your city had to be razed to be today considered "Southern", then many places fail that test.

Finally, to your last point -- pretty subjective judgement. Austin isn't Jackson, Mississippi, but it isn't Jackson, Michigan, either. It is Texas, and to be Texas, it has to have a southern influence. It is in the culture -- simple things like holding doors for people, taking your hat off indoors, "where you tip your hat to the ladies, and the rose of San Antone". That may be changing, as non-Texans start making up a larger proportion of the state. But today, Texas is a southern state, and as long as it is, there is a unmistakable part of Austin that reflects Southern values, sensibilites, and culture.

To the victors go the spoils. The Germans of Central Texas who supplied several thousands troops to the Union during the Civil War are still to this day the 'elite' in this town. Thats why Austin is liberal at the top and totally not 'Southern', the Germans who settled in Austin fled Germany after the 1848 revolution. They wanted to do away with the aristocracy and have a liberal Democracy. They were in danger of persecution in Germany so they came to Texas.

As far as population and how Southerners are represented in the state in 1860 at the start of the Civil War the mostly Southern population numbered 600,000. In 1900 the population was over 3,000,000. So by 1900 Southerners representation was that of a 1/5th minority. Southerners at that point were a politically weak minority of the state mostly living in the far Eastern part of the state.

So Texas is a new state without much of the baggage of the Civil War because most of the residents here came after the Civil War.

I'm not denying Southern influences in parts of the State. But frankly Austin has very little of that.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by orbius

To the victors go the spoils. The Germans of Central Texas who supplied several thousands troops to the Union during the Civil War are still to this day the 'elite' in this town. Thats why Austin is liberal at the top and totally not 'Southern', the Germans who settled in Austin fled Germany after the 1848 revolution. They wanted to do away with the aristocracy and have a liberal Democracy. They were in danger of persecution in Germany so they came to Texas.

As far as population and how Southerners are represented in the state in 1860 at the start of the Civil War the mostly Southern population numbered 600,000. In 1900 the population was over 3,000,000. So by 1900 Southerners representation was that of a 1/5th minority. Southerners at that point were a politically weak minority of the state mostly living in the far Eastern part of the state.

So Texas is a new state without much of the baggage of the Civil War because most of the residents here came after the Civil War.

I'm not denying Southern influences in parts of the State. But frankly Austin has very little of that.

I promised myself that I wasn't going to get into this thread again (for reasons cited in post #107), but I have to address this one. LOL

Without getting into whether Texas is a Southern state or not (again, my opinion was stated in the aforementioned post...others disagree and I respect that...and it is a question that will never be settled to everyones satisfaction) But anyway, -- with all due respect -- your stats on population influence are just plain wrong. Where do you come by these figures that Southerners represented only 1/5 of the population of Texas in 1900? Even today --with sizeable percentage of residents orginating from California and/or northern states -- it is not true, much less at the turn of the century. And I am not even counting native Texans, for this purpose, as Southerners (I am talking about those originally from the southeastern states)

After the WBTS, the overwhelming majority of newcomers were those from the southeast looking to get a new start in Texas. This is one reason why "Texas tawk" is, linguistically speaking, just one of many varieties of Southern American English, and the Southern Baptist Church is easily the largest protestant denomination in the state.

But you speak of politics. Ok, if the Southern influence was only 1/5 of the total population and a "weak political minority", then why was Texas a "Solid South" Democratic state up until at least the 1970's (when it shifted in tandem with many other former states of the Confederacy to Republican)? Why were "Jim Crow" laws adopted in the same basic way and wave of that of the same above? That is just to note a few of the more obvious ones, I could list scores of them. Your figures just make no sense at all, and again I say this with all due respect.

BTW -- speaking of the German population. Here is a very interesting article I came across recently. I admit to being taken aback by it, as all the Texas history I ever read (and I am very interested in the subject), always said the majority of Germans were staunch Unionists. Well, this obviously credentialed researcher gives a different take on it. Here it is:

Letter From Texas: Gott Mit Uns : Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture

Interesting!

Again, I am not trying to re-hash the enduring question of Texas' regional affiliation, particularly on this thread (and we, for good reason, avoid it on the main one as it has been done to death and folks are tired of it! LOL). I only wanted to counter-point some of your stats and historical information about Texas.

Finally, I DO agree with you that, despite its Southern origins and history, Austin is today probably one of the "least Southern" major cities in the former Confederate States (Miami excepted, of course! LOL).

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by scm53

This is a fascinating discussion -- all of the different ways of looking at the same thing, like the blind men, each with their own different description of the elephant.

Raised in Texas, college in SC, lived all over the country. Eleven years in Austin ('84 - '95). Dallas, Germany, and now Norfolk, but hopefully headed back to Austin after the first of the year. All that to say that Austin, like most of Texas, has been influenced by all of the cultures that came along with the six flags that have flown over the state. Each influence is stronger in one part of the state than in another, but they are all there, in each place. That's why Marshall is very much like Mississippi -- culturally, horticulturally, topographically -- but it is still different, because it is in Texas. Galveston has much in common with New Orleans (including a common speech pattern close to Brooklyn), but is Texas.

So, now we get to Austin -- where the six influences are more in balance than any other city in the state. Eat at Threadgill's, and you are eating Eddie's mom's food, from Mississippi. We eat BBQ like the rest of the south, but thanks to our Czech and German butchers, it is beef, not pork. Certainly, we love our Mexican food, and thanks to RC Gorman and Amado Pena, southwestern art. Austinites are probably the only people in the state that can point to a tangible piece of French influence (albeit, from the Republic days). And I hope some of you can look at the Confederate flag, and see the good things represented in the sacrifice of people like Albert Sidney Johnston and John Bell Hood. People that were willing to put their lives on the line over a principle. We can argue about the 20th century view of the worthwhileness of that principle, and still honor what the sacrifice meant. And of course, the unique perspective of being the only state formed from a treaty with a sovreign nation. I think the fierce independence of Texans in general, and Austinites in particular, wouldn't exist without the historic fact of the Republic of Texas.

When I lived in Germany, they would tell me they weren't anal -- that was the Swiss. Called them distilled Germans -- everything you like, and dislike, in Germans, in greater concentrations. I think Texans are like that -- distilled Americans. And Austinites are distilled Texans, just with all of the components about in equal balance.

Pray that my final interview goes well and I get to come home. Like the Mexicans, who are too far from God, and too close to the US, I am too close to NY, and too far from Texas.

Excellent, EXCELLENT post!