Is East Texas culturally part of the Deep South? (Houston: home, versus)

[llmrkc07]

The golden triangle is most definitely southern and the rest of East Texas. I think if someone is to say its not did not spent much time here.

[tstone]

Originally Posted by llmrkc07

The golden triangle is most definitely southern and the rest of East Texas. I think if someone is to say its not did not spent much time here.

Agreed. That whole area almost stands apart from the rest of Texas. But what's Port Arthur, 25-30% Hispanic nowadays? Those "956" guys dropped hints in their graffiti when I worked there for about 4 yrs.

[llmrkc07]

Originally Posted by tstone

Agreed. That whole area almost stands apart from the rest of Texas. But what's Port Arthur, 25-30% Hispanic nowadays? Those "956" guys dropped hints in their graffiti when I worked there for about 4 yrs.

I agree, the hispanic populations has boomed there. There is also a pretty good asian population as well. The Golden Triangle does stand out from the rest of East Tx an Texas in general, the only thing that keeps us on par with the rest of TX is the oil indusry.

[Nairobi]

Originally Posted by tstone

I think that says more about what kind of people you try to avoid than what kind of influence SE TX has. I'm also a native Houstonian and would have just as much in common with either someone from Appalachia, or a gringo from South TX. There was a time in the "recent" past where South TX was full of southerner cotton farmers (complete with the Nolan Ryan type accent), but that whole area has suffered a perfect example of white flight/exodus in "recent" times. By "recent" I mean the past 50 years as mentioned above. Which is roughly 1/3rd of the time Texas has been a state. Before our lives are over, that "recent" is going to mean the majority of the time Texas has been a state.

Wow, and just like that, I'm a racist who doesn't like Mexicans. You got there kinda quick.

Houston has become a very large area, and Acres Homes isn't exactly Clear Lake. I guess we can only base our opinions off of our own experiences.

[soletaire]

I think Houston tends to have stronger ties to east texas than one would initially believe. I often hear about such and such up in east texas, or so and so up in east texas from Houstonians. They talk about it kind of as if Houston were just an offshoot of East Texas, with the only key difference being the City vs. the Country, rather than the Northeast of Texas vs. the Coast of Texas. The main difference that I noticed though, is the reference point that Houstonians use to refer to East Texas; which is to say that they dont seem to make much of a distinction between East Texas and Deep East Texas. It seems like Ive heard several Houstonians refer to places like jasper, and kountz, and diboll, as just "up in East Texas".

[Nairobi]

Originally Posted by soletaire

I think Houston tends to have stronger ties to east texas than one would initially believe. I often hear about such and such up in east texas, or so and so up in east texas from Houstonians. They talk about it kind of as if Houston were just an offshoot of East Texas, with the only key difference being the City vs. the Country, rather than the Northeast of Texas vs. the Coast of Texas. The main difference that I noticed though, is the reference point that Houstonians use to refer to East Texas; which is to say that they dont seem to make much of a distinction between East Texas and Deep East Texas. It seems like Ive heard several Houstonians refer to places like jasper, and kountz, and diboll, as just "up in East Texas".

And that's the heart of it. Aside from our attachment to the "German Belt" and the obvious traits of being a coastal town, Houston is merely urban East Texas.

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by soletaire

I think Houston tends to have stronger ties to east texas than one would initially believe. I often hear about such and such up in east texas, or so and so up in east texas from Houstonians. They talk about it kind of as if Houston were just an offshoot of East Texas, with the only key difference being the City vs. the Country, rather than the Northeast of Texas vs. the Coast of Texas. The main difference that I noticed though, is the reference point that Houstonians use to refer to East Texas; which is to say that they dont seem to make much of a distinction between East Texas and Deep East Texas. It seems like Ive heard several Houstonians refer to places like jasper, and kountz, and diboll, as just "up in East Texas".

So does Dallas.

Dallas - Northeast
Houston - Southeast.

Ya'll are going to have to come up with better arguments than this.

[Nairobi]

Originally Posted by blkgiraffe

So does Dallas.

Dallas - Northeast
Houston - Southeast.

Ya'll are going to have to come up with better arguments than this.

I don't recall anyone saying that Dallas didn't have strong ties with East Texas, but it was never a part of the region. Houston was/is.

Now, what you got?

[soletaire]

Originally Posted by blkgiraffe

So does Dallas.

Dallas - Northeast
Houston - Southeast.

Ya'll are going to have to come up with better arguments than this.

You're right, but Im well aware of both Dallas' and Fort Worth's cultural ties to East Texas...I would never suggest otherwise. I know we are speaking about cultural designations, but relative geography is a key determinant of culture (not the sole determinant of course). So, in my opinion, when the common reference point between Houston and Dallas is east texas, then one must consider how far east each city is texas in order to make an accurate triangulated comparison, even culturally speaking. For the most part, Dallas/Ft. Worth has a slightly more distant relative geography to its part of east texas (Northeast Texas) than Houston does to its part of east Texas (Southeast or Deep Texas). Therefore, Dallas would be considered very close to Northeast Texas, but Houston would be even closer, respectively to southeast Texas. That is, IF one chose to deliberately exclude Houston from the very definition of east texas itself. However the case for dallas, to me, is more cut and dry because it sits entirely within its own region, both universally and reflexively called north texas - though Ive heard dallasites refer to mesquite as east texas.

Additionally, Houston's geographic designation depends entirely on whether one considers it too far south of east texas on a north-south axis to be considered east texas proper, not whether it sits at the longitudinal equivalent of the rest of east texas (both southeast and northeast texas). Which is in direct contrast to dallas' appellation being uncontentious at all, due to it undoubtedly being too far west on an east-west axis to be considered a part of east texas proper, and having a completely separate geographic identity of north texas; with the reference point of course still being east texas. But thats just how I see it and this isnt about Houston and Dallas so Ill just agree to disagree so as not to derail the thread.

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by Nairobi

I don't recall anyone saying that Dallas didn't have strong ties with East Texas, but it was never a part of the region. Houston was/is.

Now, what you got?

Hot fries and water.

Originally Posted by soletaire

You're right, but Im well aware of both Dallas' and Fort Worth's cultural ties to East Texas...I would never suggest otherwise. I know we are speaking about cultural designations, but relative geography is a key determinant of culture (not the sole determinant of course). So, in my opinion, when the common reference point between Houston and Dallas is east texas, then one must consider how far east each city is texas in order to make an accurate triangulated comparison, even culturally speaking. For the most part, Dallas/Ft. Worth has a slightly more distant relative geography to its part of east texas (Northeast Texas) than Houston does to its part of east Texas (Southeast or Deep Texas). Therefore, Dallas would be considered very close to Northeast Texas, but Houston would be even closer, respectively to southeast Texas. That is, IF one chose to deliberately exclude Houston from the very definition of east texas itself. However the case for dallas, to me, is more cut and dry because it sits entirely within its own region, both universally and reflexively called north texas - though Ive heard dallasites refer to mesquite as east texas.

Additionally, Houston's geographic designation depends entirely on whether one considers it too far south of east texas on a north-south axis to be considered east texas proper, not whether it sits at the longitudinal equivalent of the rest of east texas (both southeast and northeast texas). Which is in direct contrast to dallas' appellation being uncontentious at all, due to it undoubtedly being too far west on an east-west axis to be considered a part of east texas proper, and having a completely separate geographic identity of north texas; with the reference point of course still being east texas. But thats just how I see it and this isnt about Houston and Dallas so Ill just agree to disagree so as not to derail the thread.

Culturally; Dallas and Tyler/Longview are just as similar as Beaumont/Port Authur and Houston. I don't think you could really say Tyler is more like Houston than Dallas. Houston is located in different region as well from Northeast; yet it's being considered as part of east Texas. I could make just as a strong arguement for Dallas as you guys have for Houston.

I've said it before, but Tyler felt very much like Central Texas [Waco] with just more trees.