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.
You'll find that in DEEP East Texas, but NOT in Houston.
No you won't find that in Houston but you won't find it in Atlanta either. You'll find that in Vidor, and Lufkin. But no where else. And yes a place DOES need to have a significant amount of a certain fauna type to be considered part of that region IMHO. And I explained why Dallas isn't as southern as ATL. I said music, food,.[/quote]
That's the problem I don't know WHAT is essentially southern anymore. Because what seems southern to alot of people you can find them in northern states also. For me personally what is southern is what you'll find in a majority of southern states. Make a list of things that you'll find in most southern states and I'll tell you what part of Texas has those things. Just make a list for me.
No you won't find that in Houston but you won't find it in Atlanta either. You'll find that in Vidor, and Lufkin. But no where else. And yes a place DOES need to have a significant amount of a certain fauna type to be considered part of that region IMHO. And I explained why Dallas isn't as southern as ATL. I said music, food,.
Dallas lies on the plains. Where else in the south are there plains? The whole south is coniferous forest. Houston Dallas Atlanta are ALL southern. But Dallas and Houston are not AS southern. Maybe Houston, because of it's location in Texas. But Dallas? I made my case, No one made there case why it IS AS southern.
Thats why I say that we should focus on similarities rather than the differences in determining southern states...Because though there are differences found throughout Texas, there will be differences found EVERYWHERE in the South...but the similarities
Spot on, Solytaire!
This is the point that I (and of course you and Mr.McCoy in particular) are and have been trying to make all along. That is, in a nutshell, why is it that the defintion of "the South" should be determined and measured against a pardigm of the states commonly considered Deep South today? What exactly are those qualities that make a state "Southern"?
As you say, the deliniation always seems to be on an east/west axis. Why is it never explored in the opposite direction? Sure, there are many differences between Texas and Georgia. But there are many, many, more differences between Arizona and Texas. And no question with Colorado.
Hollywood, I think, has a lot to do with it. Just as it has presented Texas as the epitome of a "western state" so has somehow this Gone With the Wind standard become synonymous with the "true South". Both are innacurate.
I started it, in fact, and will just "paste" the original point:
What is it, that makes the South "Southern"?
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?
********************
The South has never been a monolithic region. It is more defined by similarities of history and culture...and equally important...a self-identification with considering oneself to live in the South and be a "Southerner".
You'll find that in DEEP East Texas, but NOT in Houston.
No you won't find that in Houston but you won't find it in Atlanta either.
Quote:
You'll find that in Vidor, and Lufkin. But no where else.
I highly doubt you know the exact towns in East Texas you'll find it.
Quote:
And yes a place DOES need to have a significant amount of a certain fauna type to be considered part of that region IMHO.
Fauna? What do animals have to do with anything? I assume you meant "flora" and if so that's a ridiculous opinion. I doubt anyone has ever been driving cross country and waited until they saw pines to say "okay NOW i'm in the south." Plus, missouri, kentucky, ohio, virginia, and maryland have pines. So according to you they're more southern than Texas. Even if that is your opinion, you're free to it but as i said before, it is written anywhere.
Quote:
And I explained why Dallas isn't as southern as ATL. I said music, food,.
The original cultures of all three cities is southern. Country music, southern gospel, jazz, the blues, country cooking, soul food, and BBQ. So what Houston and Dallas has a lot of Mexicans? The Latino flavor in Houston is a "guest culture", meaning that it's not home in Southeast Texas. By your logic, Chicago isn't really midwestern because of all the Mexicans.
And what about all those cities throughout Central and North Texas where blacks and whites individually outnumber Hispanics?
That's the problem I don't know WHAT is essentially southern anymore. Because what seems southern to alot of people you can find them in northern states also.
Exactly. It seems that if a city or state rises in prominence, and begins to attract more people from all over the country and even the world, all of a sudden it's not Southern anymore, or its "Southerness" is put into question.
I too would like to see a list of what makes a place Southern.
Exactly. It seems that if a city or state rises in prominence, and begins to attract more people from all over the country and even the world, all of a sudden it's not Southern anymore, or its "Southerness" is put into question.
I too would like to see a list of what makes a place Southern.
Honestly, I think a predominate cultural lineage involving these things are the start of a pretty good list of Southern qualities:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMcCoySays
...Country music, southern gospel, jazz, the blues, country cooking, soul food, and BBQ.
in addition to things like geographic position, a history of shape note gospel singing, Confederate membership/Secession, mostly Baptist denominations, and mannerisms/renowned hospitality. In my opinion I think the lengthy history of these things ARE very specific to southern culture,
However to define what is culturally Southern today is very hard as ANY place experiencing healthy growth and prosperity is less likely to be recognizable as Southern...(Atlanta, Raleigh, Houston, Dallas, Austin, NOVA) it just kind of comes along with the territory, it seems.
Last edited by solytaire; 06-19-2009 at 02:42 PM..
So is Southern culture one that is incapable of evolving? Like the DC area, for example. What was once defined as a Southern area(not just the Virginia side, but the Maryland side and the actual city of DC itself) is no longer considered one, because of numerous reasons, chiefly being "diluted" and people from all over the world coming and living there? If the South is supposed to be diverse, then why are some areas considered, and ones that don't fit outdated ways and stereotypes that once isolated the region are not?
So is Southern culture one that is incapable of evolving? Like the DC area, for example. What was once defined as a Southern area(not just the Virginia side, but the Maryland side and the actual city of DC itself) is no longer considered one, because of numerous reasons, chiefly being "diluted" and people from all over the world coming and living there? If the South is supposed to be diverse, then why are some areas considered, and ones that don't fit outdated ways and stereotypes that once isolated the region are not?
I was thinking that too...because if you notice Mississippi and Alabama are supposed to be the bastions of Southern culture...and neither are very progressive, nor have they ever been really..At the same time, if Southern is currently synonymous with being non-progressive then one of two things has to happen:
Either people redefine what is Southern as far as recent economic prosperity, new age multiculturalism, and education (ie the New South) in order for people to accept that the South will have some areas that dont quite fit the outdated mold.
Or they can concede that the only thing that qualifies as Southern culture is some stagnant state that doesnt embrace elements that precede prosperity.
If its the latter, then there are quite a few places in the South that are not Southern anymore, and there will be no place in the "South" with significant population growth and wealth.
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.
You'll find that in Vidor, and Lufkin. But no where else. And yes a place DOES need to have a significant amount of a certain fauna type to be considered part of that region IMHO. And I explained why Dallas isn't as southern as ATL. I said music, food,.[/quote]
