Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was surprised when I first heard of Texas and Oklahoma referred to as being part of the south. I had always, and still do think of them as either mid-western/plains states. To me civil war definitions are ancient history and do not accurately place a state in a particular region, whether it's south, southwest, deep south or whatever.
Texas has always been a southern state in my mind, but it's not just any southern state-it's TEXAS. Culturally much the same as the South for a good piece into it. Texas becomes more Southwestern as one gets closer to ElPaso, but someone out there is bound to consider themselves Southern.
For a little trivia, El Paso is roughly 800+ miles from the Tx/La border; roughly the same distance well into the Carolinas from the same point.
The sun has risen
The sun has set
Doggone, I'm still in Texas yet!
I was surprised when I first heard of Texas and Oklahoma referred to as being part of the south.
Curious. When DID you first hear of this? No offence, but the connection of Texas' (and to a lesser, yet very relevant extent in its own way, Oklahoma's) connection to the South is not anything which doesn't have deep roots in history and definition. It is not like it sprang ex-nihlo....
Quote:
I had always, and still do think of them as either mid-western/plains states.
Why and how? Texas shares almost nothing (save topographical similarities in some parts), with the central and northern Midwestern plains states. The whole culture and history is different. The Plains are a geographical region (but even this is limited) but not a cultural nor historical one in the sense of a bond and shared identity with one another.
In terms of whole states, those north of Oklahoma easily self-identify with the Midwest. Texans, on the other hand, overwhelmingly identify with the South. So do a noted majority of Oklahomans. (all according to sociological studies which incorporate self-identification as part of the determination).
Quote:
To me civil war definitions are ancient history and do not accurately place a state in a particular region, whether it's south, southwest, deep south or whatever.
That was the original intention of the thread. Since, at one time, the South WAS defined as the Old Confederacy and the same held true for so many, many, years... then what is the criteria that defines it, today?
For instance, the Confederate experience and definition map of the historical South may well be "ancient history"...but are its legacies part of the criteria which make those states "Southern" today? Kentucky pretty much embraced it all after the War, which is largely a reason it is usually considered Southern (I know I consider it Southern).
Anyway, just wanted to make a few points here as to original intent!
I'll say the same answer as in the other thread "What makes the North "Northern." The 13th colonies settled in the East Coast of the US. So some settled in the South and some settled in the North. That's what makes it Southern.
I was surprised when I first heard of Texas and Oklahoma referred to as being part of the south. I had always, and still do think of them as either mid-western/plains states. To me civil war definitions are ancient history and do not accurately place a state in a particular region, whether it's south, southwest, deep south or whatever.
I tend to think of them as Southwest.
Well in the case of Texas it's big enough I think of it as both Southern and Southwestern.
I don't think I'd heard of Oklahoma as Southern until I came here. It wasn't in the Confederacy really. It does have a strong Southern cultural influence, but its history and such is considerably different.
Well in the case of Texas it's big enough I think of it as both Southern and Southwestern.
I don't think I'd heard of Oklahoma as Southern until I came here. It wasn't in the Confederacy really. It does have a strong Southern cultural influence, but its history and such is considerably different.
>>>>>
It wasn't in the Confederacy really.
<<<<<
Well, for the Native Americans tribes that fought for the Confederacy like my own tribes (Choctaw/Creek), I take just a little offense to that.
Plus, the vast majority of Okies come from Southern stock, even if they are not Native American. At least in my family lineage, my Daddy's family came from Georgia and my mother's family came from Mississippi and North Carolina. Heck, my anglo Grandpa was named after Robert E. Lee, LOL!
So, I'm confused why anyone would doubt Oklahoma's (or Texas'!) Southern status. I think there is a pervasive problem in our schools nationwide to not properly teach regional/cultural affiliation. Growing up in South-Central Oklahoma we were always taught that Oklahoma was a Southern state with heavy western (read Cowboy) influence.
Growing up I had never heard of Oklahoma associated with the Midwest, and only occasionally associated with the Southwest....and usually this was in terms of the "Old Southwest"....Southern, but with a ranching/Cowboy culture infused with it. I can see this a little more because OK City and Tulsa have a touch of Albuquerque in 'em, but OK City/Tulsa are much more akin to Fort Worth and Little Rock. If you've been to Little Rock/Fort Worth then you have a pretty good idea what to expect in Oklahoma's major cities, with the outlying areas obviously being much more rural and Southern without the excess of transplants.
My guess is that, again, our educational system (across the nation) does not spend much time on teaching regional affiliation based mainly on culture (in which case Oklahoma is overtly Southern throughout the vast majority of the whole state based on dialect, food choices, and commitment to Southern Baptist evangelicalism). Plus, Oklahoma is generally a forgotten state in the national media and therefore, Oklahoma is not really embedded in the conciousness of American society like other Southern states such as Texas, Georgia, or Tennessee = which receive quite a bit of press.
Finally, there will always be an elitist or "pure" view of the South by Deep South states such as Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, and to a lesser extent Louisiana. For instance, I spent some time in Nashville and I overheard an Alabaman telling a Tennessean he was not truly Southern. So, I'm sure this mindset plays into the "forgottenness" factor in terms of regional affilation of Oklahoma as well.
Last edited by Bass&Catfish2008; 08-10-2009 at 12:34 AM..
I have seen posted on another website where someone said that Deep Southerners tend to only count states in the Deep South as "The South" and if you not them, you are "something else". I pointed out that there is an Upper, Mid and Deep South and they thanked me for pointing out the differences.
This is one thing that is different. In Texas, people may actually comment on your accent. In the south, we don't have to comment. Also, Texas has a HUGE population, and lots of urban areas, which generally means you lose some of your culture influences.
One thing I've noticed about Texas is this: although East Texas has similar characteristics to the south, the rest of the state does not. A lot of it has influences similar to the West like cowboys, chili cookoffs, ranches, etc. which are not found in the South.
Also small things like sweet tea and BBQ (in the deep south, it is always implied that bbq is pork bbq, which is not the case in Texas). Take a look at this map, in my opinion, this is exactly modern day south where sweet tea is enjoyed:
I'm sure a few of these things have been pointed out, but I hope I didn't offend you.
This map is inaccurate because I've found Sweet Tea in restaurants in Austin. There's even a new company that was started in Texas called "Sweet Leaf Tea" (also started in Austin) which is an Iced Tea company with many flavors but Sweet Tea being its signature brand. It's gaining popularity all over Texas.
Another way to put it is, what subjective or objective criteria is it which would make no one exclude Mississippi or Alabama from the South, yet debate the status of say, Texas, Florida, Virginia, or even Arkansas?
As a native Texan who not only embraces "Southern studies" as an avocation, but considers myself every bit as Southern as anyone in the Deep South, this question is one I have always pondered over.
Historically speaking, today's Deep South states have no more claim to the appellation "Southern" than does Texas (or any of the other above mentioned states). For many, many years after the War Between the States, the South was simply understood to mean those that made up the Old Confederacy (and often embraced Kentucky as well). Distinctions between which were "more Southern" were not made for quite a while. Texas and Virginia were the South equally with Georgia and South Carolina. It was unquestioned fact.
BUT...as time when on (and I have my own thoughts on why, which I will share later), the definition seemed to "evolve" to the point that, nowadays, some in the Deep South feel they are the ONLY Southerners, and can exclude states which traditionally belonged, with confidence. Why for instance, would Mississippi be undeniably Southern while Texas is debatable, even though both fought equally hard and long and devoted in the Confederacy?
I don't make that observation in a note of bitterness at all, but as one truly interested in WHY it is so?
I might add that this topic is mainly intended as one for Southerners to speak on, but of course not limited to those from outside the region. In fact, outsider input might be informative/insightful as well.
Soooo, without further ado...what characteristics make the South Southern?
I think it's the lattitude.......sorry, couldn't help myself....
Well, for the Native Americans tribes that fought for the Confederacy like my own tribes (Choctaw/Creek), I take just a little offense to that.
Plus, the vast majority of Okies come from Southern stock, even if they are not Native American. At least in my family lineage, my Daddy's family came from Georgia and my mother's family came from Mississippi and North Carolina. Heck, my anglo Grandpa was named after Robert E. Lee, LOL!
So, I'm confused why anyone would doubt Oklahoma's (or Texas'!) Southern status. I think there is a pervasive problem in our schools nationwide to not properly teach regional/cultural affiliation. Growing up in South-Central Oklahoma we were always taught that Oklahoma was a Southern state with heavy western (read Cowboy) influence.
Growing up I had never heard of Oklahoma associated with the Midwest, and only occasionally associated with the Southwest....and usually this was in terms of the "Old Southwest"....Southern, but with a ranching/Cowboy culture infused with it. I can see this a little more because OK City and Tulsa have a touch of Albuquerque in 'em, but OK City/Tulsa are much more akin to Fort Worth and Little Rock. If you've been to Little Rock/Fort Worth then you have a pretty good idea what to expect in Oklahoma's major cities, with the outlying areas obviously being much more rural and Southern without the excess of transplants.
My guess is that, again, our educational system (across the nation) does not spend much time on teaching regional affiliation based mainly on culture (in which case Oklahoma is overtly Southern throughout the vast majority of the whole state based on dialect, food choices, and commitment to Southern Baptist evangelicalism). Plus, Oklahoma is generally a forgotten state in the national media and therefore, Oklahoma is not really embedded in the conciousness of American society like other Southern states such as Texas, Georgia, or Tennessee = which receive quite a bit of press.
Finally, there will always be an elitist or "pure" view of the South by Deep South states such as Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, and to a lesser extent Louisiana. For instance, I spent some time in Nashville and I overheard an Alabaman telling a Tennessean he was not truly Southern. So, I'm sure this mindset plays into the "forgottenness" factor in terms of regional affilation of Oklahoma as well.
Yes, but Oklahoma wasn't a Confederate state even if it was in alliance. So far as I know there is no Oklahoma secession document. I'm not even sure if all the tribes sided with the Confederacy.
However I don't think I said Oklahoma was "Midwest" as I don't think of it as Midwest. I traditionally thought of it as part of The West or The Southwest. Now its high Southern Baptist population may make it Southern, but even then I'd think of it as more like a colony of the South. Not really original to the region.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
