Question? Does the states inhabitants have anything to do with the states location? (live in, mold)
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 have had native Texans argue with me about this point, but facts are facts.
For the reasons you mention above, Texas (when looking at its entire region) has always been settled from Midwestern, Southern, and Latin cultural hearths. The German and Czech migration into that state was more representative of what was happening in the Midwest. It was rare in the South.
I had a boyfriend from Texas with a real thick Southern accent (I am from Alabama). I always assumed he was just as waspy as I was. When he told me he was part Czech, I was shocked.
Yeah, every state developed with some unique flair.
and you are right, the German and Czech influences are more representative of the midwest.
The South got different spatterings of Ethnic Europeans.
The Appalachian mountains got a good dose of the Irish, The Atlantic South got a helping of the British, the Mississippi Delta got two shakes of the French, Texas got the Germans and the Czechs.
People like to look at the south in monolithic terms. The United south is not as united as people make it seem. There are ranges of influences all across the thing.
As for your Bf with the accent, when you head west from Houston to Austin/ SA you find all sorts of weirdness there. My BF has a really thick southern accent too, he is german on both sides and was raised in the hill country
You see things from an odd and interesting perspective. Tell people South of the panhandle in Florida they are "Southern" and see what kind of reaction you get.
Wikipedia has all sorts of articles discussing what makes up Southern culture.
Southern culture is a mixture of British, French, and Spanish influence. The British influence started from the Carolinas and moved westward. When I say "British" I am including Scottish and Irish , an ethnic group that started off settling further inland in the hills unlike the English.
The French and Spanish (not Mexican) influences in the South are older than the British, so I find it funny the way you mention them the way you do above as if the much later Mexican and German influence should be given the same treatment. There are people in Southern Alabama with Spanish ancestory, and it is NOT because they recently came here from Cuba or Mexico. Everybody knows that the French in Louisiana are Southern.
Then of course, there is the African American influence and Native American.
Once you start talking about Italian, German, Czech, Polish, Russian, and Swedish ancestories, you are talking about ancestories that are more or less foreign to the South. They may exist in small pockets, but they don't make up the overall cultures like they do in the Northeast and Midwest.
So when you start talking about Germans and Czechs migrating into Texas in the 1800's, that is when Texas starts taking on a more Midwestern flavor.
And yes, I agree that the RECENT Latin migration into Texas would be more or less Southwestern, although that is an element that has been present in Texas almost from the beginning.
To answer your question, when speaking of geography, yes, Florida is in the South. When saying "Southern" as a cultural reference, then please be careful how you use it. The peninsula of Florida for the most part is more Northeastern than Southern. This isn't hard to figure out.
I love your post. You seem to be a history buff like me. I do know all about the settlement patterns of the US. I do know of the spaniard influence waaaay before the mexican influence. I used the mexican influence because that is one of the top reasons people use to claim that Texas is not southern. they state that it has too much mexican culture.
Little do they know that Texas was inhabited by a variety of North american native tribes when the Europeans first visited, and not any of the the tribes from the area now known as mexico.
A lot of them also claim that Texas doesn't have the black Culture that the SE has, but what they don't know was that waaaaay back before the slave trade was even swinging, Africans accompanied Europeans on exploration missions in Texas.
I know to be careful when explaining things, but some people are not even careful in looking at the sentences that people write. The example that I keep using of DFW being the largest metro in the south has nothing to do with culture, but 7 out of ten people will come up to you and tell you that DFW is in the SW, the west or the midwest (when in actuality it is not), it just shares aspects of these places, but it is located in the south.
But hey, people spend months here arguing whether DC is a southern city or a northern one
And that is fine. I don't know any native Texan (and I am one of them) who doesn't first and foremost say that Texas is TEXAS. But, when placed within a region of the United States, it is essentially a Southern state. For all its proud automomy in legend and folklore and in our (Texas, by gawd!) minds, most of the things we think of as uniquely Texan are actually deeply rooted in the American South as to origins and shaping of the state. One of the most noteable areas is in the language. "Texas talk" is, linguistically speaking, only one of many sub-varities of what is broadly known as Southern American English.
And perhaps most importantly, is that (at least according to the most extensive socio-regional studies ever done) the vast majority of Texans do indeed consider themselves to live in the South and think of themselves Southerners. True, because Texas has a strong and unique independent character of its own, such a feeling is not generally as "intense" as the way someone from the Deep South might feel their "Southerness"...but it is very real and can be verified.
I have never understood why some people think that being Texan and Southern are exclusive of one another. It makes no sense, at least IMHO. We Texans are both.
True true. I am a Texan and darn tooting proud of it. But Texas is located in the south. it was admitted into the union as a southern/slave state. Its development patterns are southern, its economy for most of its history was southernlike. It is unique yes, but so is Louisiana, Florida, Tennessee , etc
I don't understand the hostile attitudes towards the southern label. I am proud of it. I represent the future but the past does not represent me. I have nothing to be ashamed of in my southern state
Well, Texas Reb, if you want to tell me Texas was mostly settled by Southerners, I will be happy to accept that .
How is the current Northern and Midwestern influx into the state affecting things culturally?
well most of the influx are to the behemoths of Houston and DFW. These are more cosmopolitan cities so the newcomers are and their culture are more or less assimilated.
not quite so in the hill country though, that place is being attacked from all walks of life (native texans, californians, midwesterners, northerners), and the culture changes are more apparent there than in other parts of the state.
I am already regretting what the charming german towns such as Fredricksburg and Gruene will look like in a few years. I would hate to see them overrun by Starbucks, walmarts, fast food joints and mexican restaurants
Well, Texas Reb, if you want to tell me Texas was mostly settled by Southerners, I will be happy to accept that .
LOL Well, I am not exactly "telling" you that, so much as simply stating a fact of Texas history. What I am really saying is that as the nation expanded westward, the essential development of Texas was very much rooted in that settlers from the southeastern states were the shaping force. Go back 25 (or whatever) years before Texas was opened up for settlement, then the same could be said about Alabama and Mississippi. That is, that the cultural hearth areas (Upper and Lower Colonial South) you speak of had pretty much the same impact on Texas in terms of the dominating influences.
Quote:
How is the current Northern and Midwestern influx into the state affecting things culturally?
Very good question...and my answer would be an unqualified (drum roll, please!)...I am not sure yet! LOL
Texas remains an essentially Southern state, true to its roots and origins. But no doubt the times are changing. But I DO think it has to be put into a proper perspective. I mean, no question that the large urban areas of the state (DFW, Austin [*groans aloud*] , San Antonio, etc) are getting even less and less TEXAN, to say nothing of Southern!
My brother and a sister live in the "metroplex area" and when I go visit them and their families, and stop here or there, I sometimes feel like I am in a foriegn country (or at least in yankeeland! LOL). I actually one time had a black lady ask me if I was from Texas (I was checking into a motel room for the night) and her reason for asking was "honey, you don't sound like you are from around here! LOL).
But again, IMHO? The true Texas (as I subjectively define it) is not to be found in those large cities. But in the smaller towns and rural areas which really do make up the vast majority of the state. And those areas -- even if uniquely Texan -- retain their basic Southern origins and character. And also, it is important to note that even in those large metropolitan areas? If one gets off the "beaten path" a bit, the Southern character is still evident and present. Anyone who goes to say, south Dallas can easily see and feel it. It is just that the migration of non-Southerners and all has overwhelmed its essence. If that makes sense. *sighs*
Although Texas received way more German immigration than most of the South there were Southern states that received some notable German immigration. German Moravians had an important role in Winston-Salem, North Carolina's history.
North Carolina also has some counties where Lutherans are relatively common and North Carolina plus Kentucky has some counties where Mennonites are relatively common. (Although as it wasn't in the Confederacy maybe Kentucky doesn't count as Southern, but I think it usually is counted as Southern anyway)
True true. I am a Texan and darn tooting proud of it. But Texas is located in the south. it was admitted into the union as a southern/slave state. Its development patterns are southern, its economy for most of its history was southernlike. It is unique yes, but so is Louisiana, Florida, Tennessee , etc
I don't understand the hostile attitudes towards the southern label. I am proud of it. I represent the future but the past does not represent me. I have nothing to be ashamed of in my southern state
A-Men, my friend!
Something else I wanted to note -- or at least re-emphasize -- is that the hispanic majority-minority in Texas is a compartively recent phenomenon. Up until the 1970's -- if I remember correctly without going to look it up -- African-Americans had that position (in 1870, blacks were 30% of the state population).
This is another reason why Texas -- as a whole -- cannot accurately be considered part of the same "Southwest" of New Mexico and Arizona. As Raymond Gastil, in his classic work "Cultural Regions of the United States" put it:
Unlike the Interior Southwest, neither aboriginal Indian nor Spanish-American culture played a central role in the definition of the area. The people of Texas are mostly from the Lower, Upper, and Mountain South and these Southerners easily outnumbered the Spanish speaking and Indian people even before the state joined the Union. Therefore, when we refer to a large Spanish-speaking population in Texas, we are primarily speaking of a relatively recent immigrant population, quite different from the core areas of the Interior Southwest."
The molding force of Texas was of an anglo/black duality. Not that much different than any other Southern state. As I mentioned earlier, sometimes this wasn't harmonious, but it was solid and real.
Something else I wanted to note -- or at least re-emphasize -- is that the hispanic majority-minority in Texas is a compartively recent phenomenon. Up until the 1970's -- if I remember correctly without going to look it up -- African-Americans had that position (in 1870, blacks were 30% of the state population).
This is another reason why Texas -- as a whole -- cannot accurately be considered part of the same "Southwest" of New Mexico and Arizona. As Raymond Gastil, in his classic work "Cultural Regions of the United States" put it:
Unlike the Interior Southwest, neither aboriginal Indian nor Spanish-American culture played a central role in the definition of the area. The people of Texas are mostly from the Lower, Upper, and Mountain South and these Southerners easily outnumbered the Spanish speaking and Indian people even before the state joined the Union. Therefore, when we refer to a large Spanish-speaking population in Texas, we are primarily speaking of a relatively recent immigrant population, quite different from the core areas of the Interior Southwest."
The molding force of Texas was of an anglo/black duality. Not that much different than any other Southern state. As I mentioned earlier, sometimes this wasn't harmonious, but it was solid and real.
Yes, this is what I have been emphasizing from the begining. some Johnny come lately will come to Texas and see a lot of the latin influences and try to argue with people who know better that Texas is such and such. That is why I posed the question in the original post that when latins become the majority minority in certain areas of the SE will their southern status change too?
TexasReb, sounds good! I don't want you to think I was being argumentative by saying "well if that is what you want to tell me". That isn't what I meant at all.
I grew up thinking Texas was always very Southern, but then the older I got, the more I learned it had other elements. Having a Texan boyfriend who was part Czech was a huge eye opener. You hardly run into someone like that in Alabama. That seems to be more common in the Upper Midwest.
By the way, what is the "hill country" region of Texas?
Yes, this is what I have been emphasizing from the begining. some Johnny come lately will come to Texas and see a lot of the latin influences and try to argue with people who know better that Texas is such and such. That is why I posed the question in the original post that when latins become the majority minority in certain areas of the SE will their southern status change too?
Yep, I caught that. And it was an excellent question and consideration. And one that ought to make some of the "Deep South purists" think on it! (god love 'em...many are close friends and some are distant kin! LOL)
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.
. 
