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.
Yes, from a root cultural perspective, Houston is closer to cities like Charleston and Savannah than it is to Austin or San Antonio; for one, Houston, Charleston, and Savannah all have a strong African-American component to their cultural fabric, and a variety of popular architectural-styles of the Southeast, such as Victorian or Colonial Revival, can be seen throughout many neighborhoods of the three cities. Austin and San Antonio cannot say the same.
The differences between Houston and the Atlantic coast from Virginia to Florida are smaller than those between the city and Austin/San Antonio.
I strongly disagree. "Root cultural" perspective? The original settlers in Texas came from the mid-south, especially Tennessee. Then you had the Germans, Czechs, and Poles who settled in substantial concentration in the area between Houston and Austin / San Antonio (the Germans also went further west into the Hill Country). Much of the European immigration occurred through New Orleans and Galveston, not the Atlantic Coast.
I don't see the architectural comparison either. We share architecture with New Orleans and the Deep South, that's been well-established; Galveston may have shared some architecture with Savannah / Charleston, but its period of building happened well before Houston's, for the most part. And the craftsman bungalow is found all through the Midwest as well as the South, as well as in California; it's hardly distinctive to the Southeast Atlantic Coast.
So, it is definitively shown that our greater affinities lie with central Texas, not with Virginia / Carolinas / Florida.
Oh and one more thing: a large African-American population extended into areas northwest of Houston as well (Brazos River corridor and Dallas area). Does this make them more associated with Virginia / Carolinas / Florida than with Austin / San Antonio? No of course not.
After the native americans were driven out, the most populous area of Texas (the eastern 2/3's of the state) and the area of Texas that was originally settled early on by blacks and whites was mostly settled by people from the upper south (Arkansas, Tennessee, & Missouri) and the deep south (most notably Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana).
I strongly disagree. "Root cultural" perspective? The original settlers in Texas came from the mid-south, especially Tennessee. Then you had the Germans, Czechs, and Poles who settled in substantial concentration in the area between Houston and Austin / San Antonio (the Germans also went further west into the Hill Country). Much of the European immigration occurred through New Orleans and Galveston, not the Atlantic Coast.
Houston's white settlers came not only from mid-South areas like Tennessee, but also from Lower-South states like Alabama, or Georgia (all of which are Southeastern states, by the way). The specific European groups you describe did have substantial influences across Houston and into Central Texas, and Galveston/New Orleans were significant ports in terms of receiving European immigrants; however, significant amounts of European immigration also occurred in the Atlantic South, especially in Charleston, which had a substantial Jewish population.
In the end, though, I will say that the culture of Houston aligns closer in culture with Gulf Coast cities like Mobile, or New Orleans than with cities in either Central Texas, or the Atlantic South. However, Houston, and the rest of the Gulf Coast, share the commonalities such that they align closer with the Atlantic South than they do with Central Texas. The strong African-American influences, and the historical economic orientations of the region (plantation-orientated with access to the globe via sea-port) allow the Gulf Coast(including Houston) to align with the Atlantic South closer than it would with Central Texas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LocalPlanner
I don't see the architectural comparison either. We share architecture with New Orleans and the Deep South, that's been well-established; Galveston may have shared some architecture with Savannah / Charleston, but its period of building happened well before Houston's, for the most part. And the craftsman bungalow is found all through the Midwest as well as the South, as well as in California; it's hardly distinctive to the Southeast Atlantic Coast.
The building period for Houston is later than Charleston and Savannah's, but as soon as building began, the stock still reflected many styles common in those Southeastern cities at the time; historic areas of Houston still have quite a bit of Victorian, as well as Colonial Revival influences as seen in those Southeastern cities. The Craftsman bungalow is far from the only style I was referencing in that regard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LocalPlanner
So, it is definitively shown that our greater affinities lie with central Texas, not with Virginia / Carolinas / Florida.
Oh and one more thing: a large African-American population extended into areas northwest of Houston as well (Brazos River corridor and Dallas area). Does this make them more associated with Virginia / Carolinas / Florida than with Austin / San Antonio? No of course not.
Actually, the fact that those areas of Texas have the African-American populations you describe illustrates the affinities Texas has with the Southeast contrary to what is popularly believed.
Anyways, the difference is, though, that Houston, in conjunction with a substantial African-American population, also experiences enough of the commonalities with the Atlantic South, such as strong influences in its culture from the African-American community, and the particular historical fabric (architecture, plantation-seaport economy) in that the city, along with the rest of the Gulf Coast, aligns closer to the Atlantic South than it would with Central Texas. Other than the references to the German/Czezh/Polish population, you haven't really shown how Houston aligns closer with Central Texas than it does with the Atlantic South.
The building period for Houston is later than Charleston and Savannah's, but as soon as building began, the stock still reflected many styles common in those Southeastern cities at the time; historic areas of Houston still have quite a bit of Victorian, as well as Colonial Revival influences as seen in those Southeastern cities. The Craftsman bungalow is far from the only style I was referencing in that regard.
Actually, the fact that those areas of Texas have the African-American populations you describe illustrates the affinities Texas has with the Southeast contrary to what is popularly believed.
Anyways, the difference is, though, that Houston, in conjunction with a substantial African-American population, also experiences enough of the commonalities with the Atlantic South, such as strong influences in its culture from the African-American community, and the particular historical fabric (architecture, plantation-seaport economy) in that the city, along with the rest of the Gulf Coast, aligns closer to the Atlantic South than it would with Central Texas. Other than the references to the German/Czezh/Polish population, you haven't really shown how Houston aligns closer with Central Texas than it does with the Atlantic South.
Your architectural arguments do not hold up at all. What makes Victorian something that is distinctively Atlantic Coastal? You'll find it as much in California, maybe more so, than in Houston. It's not actually that dominant in Houston, really. Certainly not near as much as the Craftsman style, or the Deep South shotgun house. And Colonial Revival is found in the Northeast and Midwest too. When I see images of Charleston / Savannah / Wilmington, I don't see anything that says, "gosh, that could be Houston" besides live oaks with Spanish moss.
So anywhere in Texas that had cotton plantations and a substantial African-American community relates more to the Carolinas than it does to Central Texas? By your reasoning, Waco belongs in a region with the Carolinas, not with Austin. Obviously, that's wrong. And Corpus Christi is a region of large cotton farms, tied to a major port. It obviously doesn't belong with the Carolinas either.
I doubt anyone would dispute the close affinity between Houston and the lower Mississippi Valley, extending to Mobile or Pensacola, nor the historical heritage ties to Tennessee and even Alabama; those ties at least equal or exceed those with Central Texas. But southern Virginia, the Carolinas, and north Florida, on the same level - to the point where those ties exceed those with Central Texas or even the Midwest (Katy was founded by Midwesterners)? Clearly not, and the case you have put forth does not hold up.
Your architectural arguments do not hold up at all. What makes Victorian something that is distinctively Atlantic Coastal? You'll find it as much in California, maybe more so, than in Houston. It's not actually that dominant in Houston, really. Certainly not near as much as the Craftsman style, or the Deep South shotgun house. And Colonial Revival is found in the Northeast and Midwest too. When I see images of Charleston / Savannah / Wilmington, I don't see anything that says, "gosh, that could be Houston" besides live oaks with Spanish moss.
The particular kind of Victorian (Queen Anne) and Colonial Revival styles seen in those Atlantic coast cities can also be seen in the older areas of Houston. Those styles did make up a substantial part of the city fabric (until the bungalow style took over); outside of Galveston, a large collection of Victorian homes can be found in Old 6th Ward just west of Downtown. Homes built in Houston between 1850 towards the early 20th century tend to reflected Greek Revival and Queen Anne styles common in the Atlantic South at those times.
With the presence of the shotgun house in Houston, again, makes it clear that the city most belongs with Gulf Coast locations, such as New Orleans, Mobile, or even Tampa, than it does with the Atlantic South, or Central Texas. However, the cultural traits the Gulf Coast possesses are such that it aligns closer to the Atlantic South than it does with Central Texas.
To be fair, though, Houston has done quite a bit of bull-dozing to its historical structures, which can give people trouble in finding where its affinities lie, as the cues (architecture in this case) aren't available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LocalPlanner
So anywhere in Texas that had cotton plantations and a substantial African-American community relates more to the Carolinas than it does to Central Texas? By your reasoning, Waco belongs in a region with the Carolinas, not with Austin. Obviously, that's wrong. And Corpus Christi is a region of large cotton farms, tied to a major port. It obviously doesn't belong with the Carolinas either.
Again, the fact those cities possess those traits at all show how much closer Texas is tied with the Southeast than is commonly thought. However, neither Waco or Corpus have the combination of those factors that allow them to align with the Atlantic South as close as Houston and Southeast Texas do. Corpus Christi, for instance, never had the African-American influence, and other cultural influences as seen in the Southeast. Houston, on the other hand, had African-Americans making up over half the city population for a substantial period of time. Big difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LocalPlanner
I doubt anyone would dispute the close affinity between Houston and the lower Mississippi Valley, extending to Mobile or Pensacola, nor the historical heritage ties to Tennessee and even Alabama; those ties at least equal or exceed those with Central Texas. But southern Virginia, the Carolinas, and north Florida, on the same level - to the point where those ties exceed those with Central Texas or even the Midwest (Katy was founded by Midwesterners)? Clearly not, and the case you have put forth does not hold up.
Again, other than the particular European populations (Germans, Czechs, Poles), you haven't really shown anything that would tie Houston with Central Texas. Even if the influences from the South Atlantic to Houston are small, such influences still exceed those from Central Texas.
It means nothing that Katy was founded by Midwesterner, because even if that were true, you still have places like Miami that were founded by Northerners; in both cases, you don't see heavy influences from those regions in either of the cities' cultural fabric.
Germans and Czechs settled central texas slightly later, after the migrants from the southeast and upper south had established a foundation in the area...
Also, why all the talk about cotton production in Houston? Cotton was much more of a North Texas, South Texas, Central Texas, and West Texas thing. But much like Louisiana, Arkansas, Georgia, the Carolinas and parts of Mississippi, the Houston area was largely a rice (Rice University, Rice Village), sugarcane (Sugar Land, Imperial Sugar) and lumber (Northern areas of Houston) producer before oil and gas refineries became the specialty of the area.
Germans settled from Galveston/Houston to the Hill Country as early as the 1830s. Awhile back I read Houston was 1/3rd German when Texas became a state, the other thirds being Anglo and Black. I think a lot of that history is lost here as whites intermixed. The Hill Country has stayed true to its roots (some places to the point they look at you funny if you're the wrong shade of white) but I think that is changing too.
Regarding Czechs they originally settled in the area between Austin and Houston, many of whom spread out to the two cities.
And speaking of Austin, it was also 1/3rd black in early history as well. Though they've been great at "gentrifying," pushing history east and sweeping the rest under the rug.
I'm sure some Texas history professors would love to discuss this one. Otherwise I'm going to bow out of this tiring thread. Something doesn't smell right about this one.
Germans settled from Galveston/Houston to the Hill Country as early as the 1830s. Awhile back I read Houston was 1/3rd German when Texas became a state, the other thirds being Anglo and Black. I think a lot of that history is lost here as whites intermixed. The Hill Country has stayed true to its roots (some places to the point they look at you funny if you're the wrong shade of white) but I think that is changing too.
Regarding Czechs they originally settled in the area between Austin and Houston, many of whom spread out to the two cities.
And speaking of Austin, it was also 1/3rd black in early history as well. Though they've been great at "gentrifying," pushing history east and sweeping the rest under the rug.
I'm sure some Texas history professors would love to discuss this one. Otherwise I'm going to bow out of this tiring thread. Something doesn't smell right about this one.
Germans did settle in Houston, no doubt, but alot of people then want to say that such settlements somehow exclude Houston from the Southeast. Cajuns from Canada settled in South Louisiana, Cubans settled in South Florida; such settlements do not exclude those areas from being considered Southeastern.
Germans settled from Galveston/Houston to the Hill Country as early as the 1830s. Awhile back I read Houston was 1/3rd German when Texas became a state, the other thirds being Anglo and Black. I think a lot of that history is lost here as whites intermixed. The Hill Country has stayed true to its roots (some places to the point they look at you funny if you're the wrong shade of white) but I think that is changing too.
Regarding Czechs they originally settled in the area between Austin and Houston, many of whom spread out to the two cities.
And speaking of Austin, it was also 1/3rd black in early history as well. Though they've been great at "gentrifying," pushing history east and sweeping the rest under the rug.
I'm sure some Texas history professors would love to discuss this one. Otherwise I'm going to bow out of this tiring thread. Something doesn't smell right about this one.
Very interesting read...I had read that the Germans & Czechs didnt arrive to Texas until the early 1840's after the Southeastern Migrants had settled much of the Eastern 2/3rds of the state in the 1830's..but your link seems to suggest that they arrived a bit earlier in 1831...but then again I was reading about the Czechs not necessarily the Germans specifically, so theres no doubt that your link is spot on...but nevertheless, from what I understand, migration to the state by American anglos from the Southeast began somewhere around the 1820's.
"Stephen F. Austin, had the grant confirmed and in Dec., 1821, led 300 families across the Sabine River to the region between the Brazos and Colorado rivers, where they established the first American settlement in Texas. Austin is known as the father of Texas.
The newly independent government of Mexico, pleased with Austin's prospering colony, readily offered grants to other American promoters and even gave huge land tracts to individual settlers. Americans from all over the Union, but particularly from the South, poured into Texas, and within a decade a considerable number of settlements had been established at Brazoria, Washington-on-the-Brazos, San Felipe de Austin, Anahuac, and Gonzales."
Last edited by soletaire; 07-07-2015 at 06:22 PM..
True...its definitely a Gulf Coast Texas city in the South Central, that could easily be considered Southeastern by many. But I would have to guess that the TSU graduate who considers Houston to be the Southwest hasnt been to the actual Southwest before...because the differences, both culturally, and materially are pretty stark. That is, unless he meant "Southwest" in the historical context. In which case the Houston area certainly would be considered the Southwest, along with Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and all points west of the Mississippi river.
Never said i agreed, just giving you a point of view from some of the folks that represent the large AA population here. The only reason we can relate to other southeast cities more is because we are black and live in the south. Thats it! We dont talk act, dress, cook, live the same its all different but I will not knock Houston being southern though.
All that is being said is that we have a large AA population, somewhat of the same architecture and topography and that some how puts us with the rest of the SE region . As a 4th generation black Texan, i disagree. I also don't believe that Louisiana and Arkansas are SE states (so maybe this is why I find Yn0hTnA theory to be off) but maybe there are, but just from my experience they are not. So in the case of Yn0hTnA, all Southern cities are SE cites, because all cities in the south display all the traits given. Houston is a Southern city. South Eastern NO!!
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.
. As a 4th generation black Texan, i disagree. I also don't believe that Louisiana and Arkansas are SE states (so maybe this is why I find Yn0hTnA theory to be off) but maybe there are, but just from my experience they are not. So in the case of Yn0hTnA, all Southern cities are SE cites, because all cities in the south display all the traits given. Houston is a Southern city. South Eastern NO!!
