Texas; is it part of the South or the Southwest? (Dallas: construction, fences)

[solytaire]

Originally Posted by TexasReb

Solytaire? Standing ovation! A -plus point plus one.

thanks bud...likewise.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by doctorjef

Have you ever spent any time in the predominantly Anglo, protestant eastern third of New Mexico? It's a f'n annex of West Texas!

Very true, DocJ! So wouldn't you say that -- as concerns the topic at hand -- that it is eastern New Mexico which more resembles West Texas, than the other way around?

This is an important distinction. It is the small slice of eastern New Mexico that inherited the Southern characteristics of Texas (due to migration patterns), as opposed to that it is West Texas was ever impacted by the interior/desert Southwest charactistics of of New Mexico or Arizona. Even most of West Texas, those who settled it were overwhelming of southeastern origin, and has a certain "Southern core" -- manifested in the dominance of the language, the Southern Baptist Church, voting patterns, self-identification, etc -- that will always remove it from being part of a "Southwest" of the desert SW states.

[Westerner92]

In my opinion, the fact that this topic has been brought up so many times shows that Texas is somewhat ambiguous in its regional identity. As a Lubbockite, I feel like this part of the state is equally Southern and Southwestern, and even a little Midwestern. To me, it's almost as if the South is the "mother region" so to speak, but we have taken our own identity, taking on just as many Southwestern and Midwestern aspects. There is no denying that Lubbock has much more in common with cities like Colorado Springs, Wichita, and Tucson than it does with Shreveport, Little Rock, and Beaumont, all of which are roughly the same distance from here.

[Redlionjr]

Originally Posted by solytaire

True, and I dont disagree with that at all..but keep in mind what I was trying to convey about the 2/3's thing...I think it pretty notable that the vast majority of the States population lives closer to Palestine Texas, than it lives to Lubbock Texas...To me, that relative location of most of the state's population impacts from which direction the state has been influenced. And keeping this in consideration, I think the question could even be: "Texas, is it a part of the South or Northern Mexico?"

What I also think is interesting is that even out in West Texas or a place like Amarillo, while not prevalent, Southern influences still arent hard to find. Whereas, one would be hard pressed to find Southwestern influence in Longview.

I think you'll be able to find some Picante Sauce or some southernwestern styled chips at a Wal-Mart in Longview but that's as close to southwestern you'll get

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by Westerner92

In my opinion, the fact that this topic has been brought up so many times shows that Texas is somewhat ambiguous in its regional identity. As a Lubbockite, I feel like this part of the state is equally Southern and Southwestern, and even a little Midwestern. To me, it's almost as if the South is the "mother region" so to speak, but we have taken our own identity, taking on just as many Southwestern and Midwestern aspects. There is no denying that Lubbock has much more in common with cities like Colorado Springs, Wichita, and Tucson than it does with Shreveport, Little Rock, and Beaumont, all of which are roughly the same distance from here.

VERY well put, Westerner!

But with that said (and sincerely), I don't get this "Midwestern" identity at all. It has come up more and more, but other than the influence of some Midwesterners moving into some larger cities in Texas, I don't quite understand this aspect. What in the world does Texas have in common with the Midwest?

Also (again, seeing and appreciating your point) what does Lubbock have more in common with as connected to Colorado Springs, Wichita, or Tucson, than it does Shreveport, Little Rock, or Beaumont? Other than topography? Does history, voting patterns, church membership, dialect, city ordinances, etc, match best which way?

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by doctorjef

I just re-read the OP and I have to very much disagree that Dallas and Houston would be considered part of the Southwest. Frankly, if you have to force either one into a category, I'd put them in the South. In contrast, if you have to force Austin and San Antonio into one category, I'd place them in the Southwest. I'd be hard-pressed, as I indicated above, to have to categorise Fort Worth as one or the other.

Why on Austin and San Antone, DocJ?. I can more see San Antonio than Austin, but could you REALLY place either in the same Southwest as with a Sante Fe, Phoexix or Tuscon?

Both have strong Southern origins and roots. Even San Antonio is still advertized as "A Blend of Old Mexico and the Old South".

[solytaire]

Originally Posted by TexasReb

VERY well put, Westerner!

But with that said (and sincerely), I don't get this "Midwestern" identity at all. It has come up more and more, but other than the influence of some Midwesterners moving into some larger cities in Texas, I don't quite understand this aspect. What in the world does Texas have in common with the Midwest?

Also (again, seeing and appreciating your point) what does Lubbock have more in common with as connected to Colorado Springs, Wichita, or Tucson, than it does Shreveport, Little Rock, or Beaumont? Other than topography? Does history, voting patterns, church membership, dialect, city ordinances, etc, match best which way?

Was gonna say that myself...I mean, I think one could even make the case that a city like Dallas or Lubbock are plains cities...but that alone wouldnt preclude them from being southern..nor would it make them midwestern by default in my eyes..it would just mean that they are southern plains cities.

Myself, I think the whole eastern identity peters out around vicksburg, mississippi altogether...For the most part, homes look different, fewer hills, people dont live right next to one another, not as many old structures etc.

[doctorjef]

In regard to the Midwestern aspect pertaining to Lubbock and the South Plains specifically, when I lived in Lubbock I was acutely aware of the idea that we were at the bottom of the Great Plains, a vast region stretching northward and widening out as far west as Colorado east of the Rockies and as far east as Iowa, as far north as the Dakotas and Saskatchewan (sp?). Lubbock is farming country, like so much of the Midwest and Great Plains (even though there's ranching farther north in the Panhandle and in various parts of the Great Plains). There's a monument in downtown Lubbock that portrays the early settlers and it just captures the image of settlers to the West and Plains -- they sure don't have an Old South character. The place is more like Kansas in a lot of ways than anything very Southern. Southern cuisine lives on a little, but hash browns are probably more common at breakfast there than are grits.

In a different way I think Fort Worth, where I've lived for about 7 years on two different occasions (punctuated by a sojourn in Colorado between the two periods) has a Midwestern aspect that one might equate to other big historic cowtowns like Kansas City. The ranch country to the west of Fort Worth is far more Western, but FW itself incorporates an aspect of the Midwest -- even in its old early and mid-20th century architecture.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by doctorjef

Perhaps it's due to some phase of the Moon or something -- over on the Delaware forum someone reawakened an old thread, now 8 pages, called "Is Delaware in the Souuuuth?" You might not think there should be much debate about that question, but you'd be wrong.

maybe you are assuming too much based on current circumstances

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by solytaire

Ive traveled back and forth throughout the south and southeast quite a bit by now..and I can honestly say that there is something undeniably Southern about Texas at its core. The last time I was in South Carolina, I couldnt help but notice its uncanny resemblance to Tyler, Tx (particularly around small towns like Bennettsville) or anywhere else in East Texas..no ifs, ands or buts about that one in my opinion...and Charleston felt like a smaller, less hispanic Houston. And I think when it boils down to it, DFW is southern. Not midwestern nor southwestern..beyond its aesthetics, those components just arent strong enough to completely characterize the city.

Plus, Ive noticed that many many old southern stereotypes just arent quite as vibrant as they probably once were in any of the southern states Ive been to. I didnt see anyone sipping mint juleps or whatever in the Carolinas nor Tennessee. Not all of the residents had accents either.

I dont deny that Texas has its own unique identity, and it certainly isnt southeastern..but it cant be considered completely estranged from the rest of the south. Whereas, a great many of its characteristics (accents, history, climate, geography, topography, origin of hispanic population, origins of black and white populations etc.) CAN be considered completely estranged from the Southwest in my opinion.

I will say this though, there is a rather noticeable difference between the old south and the new south. States like Virginia, the Carolinas, and Tennessee seem to have several old structures standing around, and several civil war memorials...I noticed that somewhere around Mississippi those things begin to become less obvious.

Excellent post

+1