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.
Welllllllllllllllllllllll....pardon us all to hell.
What an arrogant, condescending statement.
I couldn't agree more. It seems like condescending arrogance is the rage these days. Hmm, must be from the example set at the top, but it sure get old.
Ok, I get it, I shouldn't have brought it up. I'll never do that again.
Oh hey, did anyone else notice that Dallas and Houston are both on that list? I wonder which one is better.
Yet, it's hi ho, hi ho, off to the races we go again with the ever so old and tiresome Dallas/Houston debate of which is better. Seriously? You know exactly what you're doing.
Cathy, sis? I was just thinking that this is about the only thing you and I disagree on! LOL
I agree with you that Texas contains a mix of cultures...something like Louisiana. Ours happens to be Mexican, and theirs, French. But what I maintain and always will, is that the dominant influence on Texas is decidedly Southern in origin. I understand what you are saying about the lack of a "southern vibe" in west Texas. True, it is a totally different world than East Texas.
But? Still, it is one of the strongest bastions of the Southern Baptist Church, and -- according to that linguistic study I have posted before, is -- especially in rural areas -- a part of the state where the "Southern twang" (i.e. of origins mostly from Tennessee and north Alabama) are the least undiluted by modern day movements and TV influences and etc. And extremely likely to say "coke" for a soft-drink! LOL
But seriously, of course, I understand where you are coming from. I hope you know that.
I am just saying -- and I know and respect that you disagree -- that even West Texas (at least that part not in the trans-pecos), topography not withstanding, has more underlying "Southern" influences than can be detected just by travelling thru it.. Luv ya, Texas sis!
LOL! I grew up just north and east of here, still very much culturally the same. While Southern influences may be present in West Texas to a small degree, it isn't so overpowering as in East Texas! I felt like I was going to just drown in MS--and it dawned on me when I was there why I didn't like East Texas. ET is too much like MS (no offense intended)---and I got the distinct impression that I was definitely in THE South.
Whether or not we were "Southern" just wasn't on the radar. I had to go to and live /work in a true really very Deep South state to even have an idea of what that meant, and just how very far removed from that West Texas is, even when I was a child.
There is no other part of Texas that has that overpowering southern feel to it!
FWIW......diners and home cooking places in northern NM and CO serve grits for breakfast!! Go figure that one out!
I couldn't agree more. It seems like condescending arrogance is the rage these days. Hmm, must be from the example set at the top, but it sure get old.
Had you read on, you would see me explain myself, and Cathy seemed to understand exactly what I meant to say. So much for your disapproval of yet another thing I've said (surprise, surprise).
=Jack Lance;33383142]OK I have had my breakfast, I had fried eggs, blindfolded. Now blindfolded is a Texas , southwestern term for cooking eggs, In the "South" they would call it basted eggs, but I call it blindfolded because I am from Texas and not the south. In fact there is a whole genre of cooking that differentiates Texas cuisine from southern. I hate GRITS, and I always have, and in every greasy hole in the wall breakfast joint I have ever eaten in in Texas Hash Browns were the default side order with your bacon and eggs over grits. When one speaks of southern cooking are they talking about Texas ? NO they are talking about food indigenous to the "Deep South" I wont even go into whether anybody considers Tex-Mex southern, the answer is of course not. Food is an intricate part of culture and the food of Texas and the "Southwest" is obviously considered different from "southern" food.
LOL This is too far-fetched to take seriously. Ok, ok, I get your point that you don't consider yourself a Southerner. As it is, according to the earlier posted surveys, neither do about 10% of the respondents in Mississippi and Alabama! Hmmmm...
But anyway, no biggie. I couldn't care less if you do or not. My only issue is with what I sometime get the sense of...a somewhat supercilious and self-superior attitude on your part when it comes to those of us who think otherwise. It wouldn't be an issue otherwise. But again, that is just you and you are entitled to your opinion.
But to the point, do you seriously believe that classic Texas cuisine can be totally separated from the rest of the South? Uhhh, just mildly put?...ever heard of the tradition of eating black-eyed peas on New Years Day? LOL
Even Tex-Mex is different from the "Mexican food" one will find in the interior southwestern states. Ask someone from Arizona or New Mexico if they consider Tex-Mex true "Mexican" food. Investigate for yourself.
Fried catfish, fried okra, chicken-fried steak, turnip greens, and cornbread, cold-sliced tomatoes, pan-fried chicken, cream gravy to the point of being an "art" unto itself... (to name just a few of dozens of examples). What are they?
And where do you think the BBQ tradition of Texas came from? True, beef is more popular in most of Texas than in the Deep South, but the process is the exact same...just often uses a different meat..... (If you never had any of that? Wellll, I am sorry you may have been deprived of such an experience in real "comfort food" eating!)
I will give you the nod on grits not being served by default. BUT...just about any established eating joint in the state (as in one where the "real folk" go for breakfast), you can get grits if you want them. Personally, I like both! LOL
Quote:
First Texasreb, not only do you discount what might be seen as a southwestern identity in Texas you seem to deny that there is ANY southwestern identity at all , I'm not sure if your arguing that the "Southwestern" identity does not exist in any form.
WOW! Where did you come by THAT conclusion at all??? I never once said there was no such thing as a "Southwestern identity". Show me where I did...
No, what I said -- and still do -- is that the "southwest" of New Mexico and Arizona" is of a whole different character -- both historically and culturally -- that the "southwest" of Texas and (to a somewhat lesser extent) Oklahoma.
Quote:
Not every reference to Southwest is merely a directional indicator. I am not arguing that Texas is included or should be with Arizona and New Mexico, but more that Texas is a separate identity from the South, not that Texas is exclusive of the south.
I can see your point, of sorts...but it still begs the basic question that no one who believes Texas is totally separate from the South ever really answers the basic question of just what defines the South...? As in, which states are the "true South" -- by one's own subjective definition -- and why are all of them so different from Texas? And to in on it specifically? What does, say, Arkansas, have more in common with Georgia than with Texas?
Quote:
Why shouldn't Texas be in a region where it is the influencer and not the influenced? Are you saying Texas can only "tag" along when it comes to its regional identity? When you place Texas in the South I believe you are diminishing Texas's import for Texas in my opinion would always be second fiddle in a southern alignment, the "deep south" will always be considered the true south and Atlanta will always be the true southern cultural capital, Texas would then play a sidekick role as that other guy .
Oh, please! and LMAO. Do me a favor, JL...and don't try to flip this question with the intention of putting me on the defensive. Sorry, but I am a veteran of this game/ploy...
The simple answer is...wellll...simple. That is, to start, to fall back on the position that Texas is Texas first and foremost, is tantamount to "preaching to the choir". We ALL know that (or at least 99% of us do! LOL).
BUT...any state is going to be placed within a larger region when it comes to groupings for whatever purpose. Soooo, my basic position is that, historically and culturally, Texas belongs with the southeastern states, in making up The South. Those were the states that influenced the character and development of Texas. On the other hand? Nothing at all from New Mexico and/or Colorado or whatever influenced Texas.
But ok, that leads into your rhetorical question of why can't Texas be the "influencer"? Well, there is a small slice of eastern New Mexico where it was (I don't know about today, but it at one time was known as "little Texas".)
To say Texas would play a "sidekick" role if placed within the South is (IMHO), diminishing Texas' importance in the whole scheme of things on your part. Yes, Atlanta might well be the capital of the southeast, but as Nairobi said, Dallas or Houston is the capital of the southwest (as in western South!).
Did you know that the application "Empire State of the South" was first used to mean Texas? Or that the "Dixie Classic" college bowl started in Texas? Or that it was Galveston that first used -- as a tourist attraction -- the moniker of "Playground of the South"? And that the "Strand" district was known at the "Wall Street of the South"? And I could go on and on...but I think you get the point.
Quote:
Texasreb You were a teacher and that is great, so Texas was at least for a time trying to establish a southwestern identity in its schools , are you sure that time is over, and are you sure that was just some brief experiment in a separate identity, or was it a indication that Texas wants or at least wanted to be separate at one time? Are you sure any reference to Texas being a southwestern state or at least not a southern one, has been expunged from our public schools?
There is no question that at one time, Texas -- lead by political and business concerns (LBJ lead the charge) attempted to establish a "southwestern" identity in the sense of an identity totally different from the southeast. But even LBJ, after he was out of office, pretty much said, it was all a shuck. At that time in history, the South had a very negative image (hypocritical Yankees...but that is a different issue) in the eyes of rest of the country so he (he had a LOT of clout) gave orders to his campaign staff to play up Texas' "western" facets. Because? There is a phone call he made once (that one can look up), he just didn't believe "a Southerner" could ever be elected president. I mean, he referred to himself as a Southerner.
This is direct from his memoirs ("The Vantage Point"):
"(in running for office) I did not believe, any more than I ever had, that the nation would ever unite indefinitely behind any Southerner. On reason I was convinced was that the Metropolitan press of the Eastern seaboard would never permit it. My experience in office confirmed this...the derisive articles about my clothes, my manner, my accent...I was also thinking of a more deep-seated and far reaching attitude -- a disdain for the South that seems to be woven into the fabric of Northern experience...
...growing up, I was never part of the Old South...but I was part of Texas. I felt a special identification with its history and its people. And Texas is part of the South -- in the sense it shares a common heritage and outlook that differs from the Northeast, Middle West, or Far West.
That Southern heritage meant a great deal to me. It gave me a feeling of belonging and a sense of continuity."
Ok, ok, y'all, I realize I have written a treatise. Sooooory!
=Cathy4017;33389325]LOL! I grew up just north and east of here, still very much culturally the same. While Southern influences may be present in West Texas to a small degree, it isn't so overpowering as in East Texas! I felt like I was going to just drown in MS--and it dawned on me when I was there why I didn't like East Texas.
Well sis -- and you know I hugs ya! -- I just don't quite understand what influences in West Texas are stronger than the Southern?
Quote:
ET is too much like MS (no offense intended)---and I got the distinct impression that I was definitely in THE South.
Oh, heck no, hon. I take no offence at all. I am not from Mississippi. Yes, my primary ancestral roots are there -- and I know I would feel more at home there than in, say, New Mexico or Colorado -- but I never want to leave the part of Texas I grew up in!
Quote:
There is no other part of Texas that has that overpowering southern feel to it!
Yes, I see what you are saying. I guess the only thing I would quibble with (not with you at all, but the larger scheme of things) is that....wellll, how to say it...? I guess it is that yes, if one accepts that the Deep South is the basis for comparison as to what is "Southern" or not? Then I would agree -- even though I don't accept the validity of the independent variable -- that yes, I would definitely agree with you only East Texas as that feel. But I guess that is the key thing...I don't accept the Deep South paradigm, as the epitome of what the South is all about and what it is...
Quote:
FWIW......diners and home cooking places in northern NM and CO serve grits for breakfast!! Go figure that one out!
LOL Wellll, perhaps they cater to lots of Texans/Southerners?
LOL This is too far-fetched to take seriously. Ok, ok, I get your point that you don't consider yourself a Southerner. As it is, according to the earlier posted surveys, neither do about 10% of the respondents in Mississippi and Alabama! Hmmmm...
But anyway, no biggie. I couldn't care less if you do or not. My only issue is with what I sometime get the sense of...a somewhat supercilious and self-superior attitude on your part when it comes to those of us who think otherwise. It wouldn't be an issue otherwise. But again, that is just you and you are entitled to your opinion.
But to the point, do you seriously believe that classic Texas cuisine can be totally separated from the rest of the South? Uhhh, just mildly put?...ever heard of the tradition of eating black-eyed peas on New Years Day? LOL
Even Tex-Mex is different from the "Mexican food" one will find in the interior southwestern states. Ask someone from Arizona or New Mexico if they consider Tex-Mex true "Mexican" food. Investigate for yourself.
Fried catfish, fried okra, chicken-fried steak, turnip greens, and cornbread, cold-sliced tomatoes, pan-fried chicken, cream gravy to the point of being an "art" unto itself... (to name just a few of dozens of examples). What are they?
And where do you think the BBQ tradition of Texas came from? True, beef is more popular in most of Texas than in the Deep South, but the process is the exact same...just often uses a different meat..... (If you never had any of that? Wellll, I am sorry you may have been deprived of such an experience in real "comfort food" eating!)
I will give you the nod on grits not being served by default. BUT...just about any established eating joint in the state (as in one where the "real folk" go for breakfast), you can get grits if you want them. Personally, I like both! LOL
WOW! Where did you come by THAT conclusion at all??? I never once said there was no such thing as a "Southwestern identity". Show me where I did...
No, what I said -- and still do -- is that the "southwest" of New Mexico and Arizona" is of a whole different character -- both historically and culturally -- that the "southwest" of Texas and (to a somewhat lesser extent) Oklahoma.
I can see your point, of sorts...but it still begs the basic question that no one who believes Texas is totally separate from the South ever really answers the basic question of just what defines the South...? As in, which states are the "true South" -- by one's own subjective definition -- and why are all of them so different from Texas? And to in on it specifically? What does, say, Arkansas, have more in common with Georgia than with Texas?
Oh, please! and LMAO. Do me a favor, JL...and don't try to flip this question with the intention of putting me on the defensive. Sorry, but I am a veteran of this game/ploy...
The simple answer is...wellll...simple. That is, to start, to fall back on the position that Texas is Texas first and foremost, is tantamount to "preaching to the choir". We ALL know that (or at least 99% of us do! LOL).
BUT...any state is going to be placed within a larger region when it comes to groupings for whatever purpose. Soooo, my basic position is that, historically and culturally, Texas belongs with the southeastern states, in making up The South. Those were the states that influenced the character and development of Texas. On the other hand? Nothing at all from New Mexico and/or Colorado or whatever influenced Texas.
But ok, that leads into your rhetorical question of why can't Texas be the "influencer"? Well, there is a small slice of eastern New Mexico where it was (I don't know about today, but it at one time was known as "little Texas".)
To say Texas would play a "sidekick" role if placed within the South is (IMHO), diminishing Texas' importance in the whole scheme of things on your part. Yes, Atlanta might well be the capital of the southeast, but as Nairobi said, Dallas or Houston is the capital of the southwest (as in western South!).
Did you know that the application "Empire State of the South" was first used to mean Texas? Or that the "Dixie Classic" college bowl started in Texas? Or that it was Galveston that first used -- as a tourist attraction -- the moniker of "Playground of the South"? And that the "Strand" district was known at the "Wall Street of the South"? And I could go on and on...but I think you get the point.
There is no question that at one time, Texas -- lead by political and business concerns (LBJ lead the charge) attempted to establish a "southwestern" identity in the sense of an identity totally different from the southeast. But even LBJ, after he was out of office, pretty much said, it was all a shuck. At that time in history, the South had a very negative image (hypocritical Yankees...but that is a different issue) in the eyes of rest of the country so he (he had a LOT of clout) gave orders to his campaign staff to play up Texas' "western" facets. Because? There is a phone call he made once (that one can look up), he just didn't believe "a Southerner" could ever be elected president. I mean, he referred to himself as a Southerner.
This is direct from his memoirs ("The Vantage Point"):
"(in running for office) I did not believe, any more than I ever had, that the nation would ever unite indefinitely behind any Southerner. On reason I was convinced was that the Metropolitan press of the Eastern seaboard would never permit it. My experience in office confirmed this...the derisive articles about my clothes, my manner, my accent...I was also thinking of a more deep-seated and far reaching attitude -- a disdain for the South that seems to be woven into the fabric of Northern experience...
...growing up, I was never part of the Old South...but I was part of Texas. I felt a special identification with its history and its people. And Texas is part of the South -- in the sense it shares a common heritage and outlook that differs from the Northeast, Middle West, or Far West.
That Southern heritage meant a great deal to me. It gave me a feeling of belonging and a sense of continuity."
Ok, ok, y'all, I realize I have written a treatise. Sooooory!
Oh you are not going to like this Texasreb
Encyclopedia Britannica counts Texas as part of the "Southwest Region" with Ok, Az, & Nm
there is a great video to the right of the article that really goes into depth on the region
Uh Galveston was known as the "Wall Street of the Southwest" BTW
Throughout the 19th century, the port city of Galveston boomed; and the Strand, which is very close to the harbor, grew into the region's main business center. For a time, it was known as the "Wall Street of the Southwest."
Look I can tell this is very important to you. Not only have you put forth an articulate and passionate argument and defense of the South in this thread but in the other thread dealing with Texas regional character as well. I also remember our collision last summer over the thoughts and actions of Sam Houston where again you vehemently defended the Southern identity of Texas.
I did get a chance to peruse that other thread and it appears just about every argument that I have made in this thread had already been made my several others in the other thread. So I am not sure we are going anywhere in this exchange. In school I learned what I leaned, and as a teacher you should realize how much that would influence my thinking until my dying day. I read the text, I saw the maps, I took the test, that all said Texas is southwestern and scored an A because I studied and accepted what my teacher said as fact. All else I have posted is either borrowed from the internet or just my empirical observations.
Hopefully this will not actually ever really be that important. I can not see another situation were a Southern revolt would suck Texas into making another stupid decision. So if there are no political or commercial ramifications the point is actually moot.
Last edited by Jack Lance; 02-08-2014 at 11:16 PM..
Encyclopedia Britannica counts Texas as part of the "Southwest Region" with Ok, Az, & Nm
Soooo? The real point is, does the grouping make sense? I mean, I can find a hundred different maps to prove anything at all. I know of some that include New Mexico in "the Southern Region", and some that actually exclude North Carolina.
Quote:
there is a great video to the right of the article that really goes into depth on the region
Did you even read what it said? I doubt it...or you would not have posted it! But anyway, here it is:
Southwest, region, southwestern United States, historically denoting several geographic areas in turn and changing over the years as the nation expanded. After the War of 1812, the Southwest generally meant Missouri, Arkansas, and Louisiana; after Texas was annexed, it, too, was included. In the wake of the war with Mexico, the Southwest embraced most, but not all, of the territory that was acquired under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848), including land often considered part of the “West”—i.e., New Mexico, Arizona, and all or parts of Oklahoma, Colorado, Utah, and Nevada, as suited the convenience of the user of the term. It ordinarily excludes California.
Quote:
Uh Galveston was known as the "Wall Street of the Southwest" BTW
Throughout the 19th century, the port city of Galveston boomed; and the Strand, which is very close to the harbor, grew into the region's main business center. For a time, it was known as the "Wall Street of the Southwest."
Nope, it wasn't. I even went so far as to write the tourist bureau in Galveston about it, because when we were down there last year it seemed that some literature called it "Wall Street of the South" and some others "Wall Street of the Southwest" Want to see the response I got back? I will be glad to share it.
By the way, I couldn't open your link, but I DID go to the Galveston website and got this:
By the end of the 19th century, the city of Galveston had a population of 37,000. Its position on the natural harbor of Galveston Bay along the Gulf of Mexico made it the center of trade in Texas. It was one of the largest cotton ports in the nation, in competition with New Orleans.[25] Throughout the 19th century, the port city of Galveston grew rapidly and the Strand was considered the region's primary business center. For a time, the Strand was known as the "Wall Street of the South. In the late 1890s, the government constructed Fort Crockett defenses and coastal artillery batteries in Galveston and along the Bolivar Roads. In February 1897, Galveston was officially visited by the USS Texas (nicknamed Old Hoodoo), the first commissioned battleship of the United States Navy. During the festivities, the ship's officers were presented with a $5,000 silver service, adorned with various Texas motifs, as a gift from the citizens of the state.
Here are another few links and excerpts (among dozens of others I can provide):
Galveston has a long and colorful history, starting in the 16th century with the Akokisa and Karankawa Indians. Other famous visitors include Jean Lafitte, and Cabez De Vaca. Galveston really took off in the 1800's and claims Texas' first electricity, phone system, bank, and newspaper (which is still on the island as the Galveston Daily News). Galveston grew in the 1850's and soon became known as "the wall street of the south."
As the 19th century progressed Galveston became a major commercial and financial center, known as the "Wall Street of the South." The Hurricane of 1900 devastated Galveston with the deadliest natural disaster ever to strike America.
... and in a different direction...? Welllll....
Galveston Island, Texas | TourTexas.com
At its Golden Era in the late 1800s, Galveston Island was known as the “Playground of the South” – a booming tourist destination built on its attractive beaches, convenient location, high-traffic port and numerous attractions. Galveston has reclaimed that title in recent years with an influx of new attractions and cruise ships that keep drawing visitors to this charming historic beach town on the Texas Gulf Coast.
A Gulf Coast gem is becoming a 'Playground of the South' all
Back in the late 1800s, the moniker “Playground of the South” applied because the area offered attractive beaches, a convenient location, a high-traffic port and many attractions.
Are you beginning to see a pattern here? The original application was (whatever) of the South. The appellation (which was a Johnny come lately) "of the Southwest" was pretty much only to differentiate from Gulf cities like New Orleans, or whatever, of the Southeast.
In ANY event, even when the "Southwestern" label began to be applied, there was no "Southwest" as in the sense of including New Mexico and Arizona. The "Southwest" just meant the western part of the South.
Your test fails....
Quote:
Look I can tell this is very important to you. Not only have you put forth an articulate and passionate argument and defense of the South in this thread but in the other thread dealing with Texas regional character as well. I also remember our collision last summer over the thoughts and actions of Sam Houston where again you vehemently defended the Southern identity of Texas.
Wellll, I appreciate that, Jack. But actually, it seems more important to you to prove Texas isn't essentially Southern that it is to me to prove it is. Reason is, I KNOW it is Southern....and that most Texans concur. If you don't that is fine. No problem at all.
LOL, Don't patronize me, JL....but here is the link so others can see it as well....and make their own decision.
I did get a chance to peruse that other thread and it appears just about every argument that I have made in this thread had already been made my several others in the other thread. So I am not sure we are going anywhere in this exchange.
I agree with you there. We just proceed from different perspectives, and nothing wrong with that at all....
Quote:
In school I learned what I leaned, and as a teacher you should realize how much that would influence my thinking until my dying day. I read the text, I saw the maps, I took the test, that all said Texas is southwestern and scored an A because I studied and accepted what my teacher said as fact. All else I have posted is either borrowed from the internet or just my empirical observations.
Yes, I understand that. I too grew up hearing that Texas was "Southwestern"...but it wasn't until later on (when I began to realize I had a taste for history and regional studies), that I discovered (at least to my own satisfaction), that Texas "southwestern" identity (as in kinship with New Mexico and Arizona), simply made no sense. That it was "southwest" only in that it was the western/frontier part of the South. How could it be otherwise...?
Quote:
Hopefully this will not actually ever really be that important. I can not see another situation were a Southern revolt would suck Texas into making another stupid decision.
How was it a stupid decision? I have asked this before of you. What alternatives did Texas have? Fight with the North? LOL C'mon...that is so outlandish as to be historically ludicrous. Matter of fact, it was only Sam Houston's refusal to call the Texas Legislature into special session that delayed events in the state (as in secession), as long as it did. Otherwise, Texas could -- most likely would -- have been the 3rd, perhaps even 2nd, to secede. Of course, no way to prove that...but I will cite that the vote for the John Breckinridge (the Southern Democrat candidate) was higher in Texas than any other Southern state. And that the vote for secession was higher (percentage wise) than any other state than South Carolina.
So it is one thing to argue from result. It is another to actually have to be there and live in the day with the situation and the options. Soooo, would you have sided with the North....?
Anyway, gotta hit the sack. Enjoyed it and have a good night! Everyone!
Well sis -- and you know I hugs ya! -- I just don't quite understand what influences in West Texas are stronger than the Southern?
Oh, heck no, hon. I take no offence at all. I am not from Mississippi. Yes, my primary ancestral roots are there -- and I know I would feel more at home there than in, say, New Mexico or Colorado -- but I never want to leave the part of Texas I grew up in!
Yes, I see what you are saying. I guess the only thing I would quibble with (not with you at all, but the larger scheme of things) is that....wellll, how to say it...? I guess it is that yes, if one accepts that the Deep South is the basis for comparison as to what is "Southern" or not? Then I would agree -- even though I don't accept the validity of the independent variable -- that yes, I would definitely agree with you only East Texas as that feel. But I guess that is the key thing...I don't accept the Deep South paradigm, as the epitome of what the South is all about and what it is...
LOL Wellll, perhaps they cater to lots of Texans/Southerners?
The "Western" influence--as well as that of Spain/Mexico is far stronger in West Texas than East Texas. Where do you think all of those Texas cattle came from? Spain/Europe. Where do so many of the terms we use (rodeo, lariat, other variations of many other words)--Spain/Mexico. You keep saying that our ranching heritage is southern--I say it's European/Spanish/Mexican. So we're going to have to agree to disagree here. Look at all the place names all over the state!
I feel FAR more comfortable in either NM or SW CO than I ever did in MS or even ET.
The "Deep South" IS the epitome of all things southern. How could it not be? MS (and other so-called "Deep South" states) absolutely wallow in their Confederate past--they bleed it. It is inescapable--food, culture, climate, geography--all scream "THE South." While I wouldn't trade my time there for anything as a learning experience, I'd shoot myself through the head if I had to live there again for any length of time.
I wasn't the only one in my family who felt that way, either. All of us were glad when all family was back home in West and Central Texas where they belonged! Had it not been for a job, they wouldn't have gone to deep ET to begin with. It's just DIFFERENT. I don't know how else to put it. WT was largely frontier and mostly unsettled at the time of the Civil War, so even though TX was a Confederate state, it was nothing like the others, at least not outside of the aforementioned deep ET.
I never wanted to see another crockpot of butterbeans, collard greens or a plate of unadorned grits when I got back to West Texas. If I hadn't been able to get much of what I needed in Brandon (with a few exceptions) to make Mexican/other food at home, I really would have gone crazy!
OTOH, those who are used to ET and its lush green/humidity/vegetation come out here and consider it dry, barren and desolate. I well understand that, and it does work both ways. I don't mean to put ET down---it's just not for me, and I feel very, very much out of place there, just as many East Texans probably feel the same way about WT. It's just not "home."
BTW, you can eat just about anything if you put enough cheese and green chiles in it......about the only way to eat grits, LOL!
But wow - I could immediately sense the deeply southern culture of the state. It's not the "deep south" but it's definitely southern in character and flavor, especially along the eastern half.
I'd go so far as to say all of that is very true for your area, but also confine that to the eastern THIRD, if that much. While far East Texas is so much like the true Deep South state of MS that I had a hard time telling the difference--I don't get that same vibe in any other part of the state, especially West Texas.
Well, I'd go so far as to say that I feel very southern vibes throughout at least half the state, but hey, that's just me. Maybe I am more cognizant of what's "southern" since I've lived in the deep South for so many years of my life.
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.
Seriously? You know exactly what you're doing. 
and LMAO. Do me a favor, JL...and don't try to flip this question with the intention of putting me on the defensive. Sorry, but I am a veteran of this game/ploy...
