Is Texas quintessentially “Southwestern”

[BG918]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Dallas doesn't feel remotely Western to me. Again, to me, like Oklahoma, just much more urban and cosmopolitan. Probably the most similar largish metro would be Kansas City.

OK, and North TX are Great Plains with Southern influences.

I’ve lived in Dallas, OKC and Tulsa and think while they are somewhat similar there are also key differences. Texas cities have a feel to them that you don’t find in Oklahoma, the culture is just different. OKC is the most similar to DFW sort of like a smaller version and more like Fort Worth with colder winters. Tulsa is more like an eastern river valley city so not like OKC or Dallas except in its suburban areas which are similar. Tulsa is also more like a Mid-South city in its appearance, culture and climate like a smaller Nashville or larger Little Rock.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

Is that on the road or as the crow flies?

On the road, using the 10 interstate.

As the crow flies, I read Houston is about 650 miles from El Paso. Either way, Houston is closer, literally.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Dallas doesn't feel remotely Western to me. Again, to me, like Oklahoma, just much more urban and cosmopolitan. Probably the most similar largish metro would be Kansas City.

OK, and North TX are Great Plains with Southern influences.

KC feels a little western to me. Or at least it feels like a transition zone from east to west. Whatever you want to call it, it's definitely not Cleveland. Dallas feels more western than KC to me. I would group Dallas in with the interior southwest before I'd group it with the southeast. I've also always thought of OK as more western than southern. Arkansas and Louisiana are fully within the South/southeast. Oklahoma is the "frontier".

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

KC feels a little western to me. Or at least it feels like a transition zone from east to west. Whatever you want to call it, it's definitely not Cleveland. Dallas feels more western than KC to me. I would group Dallas in with the interior southwest before I'd group it with the southeast. I've also always thought of OK as more western than southern. Arkansas and Louisiana are fully within the South/southeast. Oklahoma is the "frontier".

The cattle culture of the western plains--the huge cattle drives with genuine cowboys from Texas to the stockyards and slaughterhouses in places like Kansas City--is one thing but while it's certainly "western", it's not "southwestern". The Southwest is mostly too arid for cattle and the economic history and culture are very different, based mainly on irrigated farming where there is water and small, scattered settlements (until the modern era of air condtioning and huge water projects like the Colordao River dams).

So yes, while Dallas or KC are "western", they aren't really "southwestern", just as the plains indians on horses were not like the pueblo indians of the Southwest.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by LA21st

On the road, using the 10 interstate.

As the crow flies, I read Houston is about 650 miles from El Paso. Either way, Houston is closer, literally.

downtown to downtown I measure (using the Google Earth ruler) ~670 miles to Houston and ~700 miles to LA. You probably do hit the LA metro area closer than the Houston metro area, but it's close. San Diego is only ~630 miles downtown to downtown so that is indeed closer. Dallas is ~570 miles downtown to downtown.

One thing is sure, El Paso is closer to Beaumont, CA than Beaumont, TX.

[LA21st]

It always gets messy comparing suburban boundaries.
Its much easier downtown to downtown for these kinds of things.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

The cattle culture of the western plains--the huge cattle drives with genuine cowboys from Texas to the stockyards and slaughterhouses in places like Kansas City--is one thing but while it's certainly "western", it's not "southwestern". The Southwest is mostly too arid for cattle and the economic history and culture are very different, based mainly on irrigated farming where there is water and small, scattered settlements (until the modern era of air condtioning and huge water projects like the Colordao River dams).

So yes, while Dallas or KC are "western", they aren't really "southwestern", just as the plains indians on horses were not like the pueblo indians of the Southwest.

Very true, the cattle culture is a distinctive historical (and present day) trait for this part of the country. It is definitely different than the more agricultural/farming culture of the Midwest though Kansas and northern Oklahoma are more like that now than they were in the past.

Ranching is still prevalent in a good chunk of Texas and parts of Oklahoma, and the western cowboy culture that goes with that still exists (boots, cowboy hats, big trucks, etc).

Oklahoma is interesting in that it has that western cowboy culture like Texas but also has a strong Native American history/influence which is generally more of a southwestern cultural trait in the US. There is also an unmistakable Southern influence that blends in as well, similar to what you see in Houston and parts of East and the Upper Gulf Coast of Texas.

[Tyrone Shoes]

Originally Posted by 10023

Texas should probably be 4 states.

Funny you should say this...when I was in college (U.Texas) back in the late 80's I had a Geography prof predict the break up of the U.S. into regional nations (like what later happened with the break up of the Soviet Union). West coast, North East, Florida etc. He felt Texas would secede first forming The Republic of Texas into five states also taking Oklahoma and Louisiana maybe New Mexico with us.

[TexasBoi]

Originally Posted by LA21st

On the road, using the 10 interstate.

As the crow flies, I read Houston is about 650 miles from El Paso. Either way, Houston is closer, literally.

The saying is that El Paso is closer to LA then t is to Texarkana. Likewise, Texarkana is closer to Chicago then it is El Paso.

[TexasBoi]

Originally Posted by jd3189

This was a idea that came to mind after going through the Florida thread.

To state my case, is it possible that everyone here and even outside this discussion can fully agree that Texas is “Southwestern” in the purest sense, without argument?

Texas seems to embody both Southern and Western influences.

It was a part of the Confederacy, was the last state to give up slavery, and has very strong historical ties to the rest of the South via the Gulf. Houston’s culture seems to be greatly influenced by New Orleans and there is a very strong Southern presence in Eastern Texas. Even that area geographically is filled with swamps and wetlands, no different from the Louisiana bayous.

However, Texas was once a part of Spain/Mexico. It was the frontier for American settlers headed westward in search for a new start of life. El Paso is pretty much in an arid climate and it’s in Western Texas that one is reminded of the cowboy culture.

Texas seems to be a transitional place, a place that invokes both characteristics of the South and the West in equal proportions.

Am I wrong or right in this assumption? Texan forumers are strongly encouraged to share their views.

I would say Houston influence is a bit more Southern and SW Louisiana than New Orleans plus of course, Mexico and central America. Like Dallas is to Oklahoma, Houston is to Gulf Coast Louisiana. Houston is easily the most Southern major city in Texas to me.

[strongbad635]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Dallas doesn't feel remotely Western to me. Again, to me, like Oklahoma, just much more urban and cosmopolitan. Probably the most similar largish metro would be Kansas City.

OK, and North TX are Great Plains with Southern influences.

Having lived in Dallas from 2004-2006, I agree with this assessment. Dallas feels MUCH more Midwestern than it does Western. I also lived in Los Angeles from 2012-2016. I feel like Houston, Austin, and San Antonio feel more "western" than Dallas. Fort Worth has that cowboy/rancher feel to it, but that isn't necessarily synonymous with "western" so much as it is with "great plains."

[strongbad635]

Originally Posted by TexasBoi

I would say Houston influence is a bit more Southern and SW Louisiana than New Orleans plus of course, Mexico and central America. Like Dallas is to Oklahoma, Houston is to Gulf Coast Louisiana. Houston is easily the most Southern major city in Texas to me.

I was surprised that the architecture in Houston has many characteristics of the French/Louisiana style to it. They tolerate living in 3-4 story houses more here. You see a lot of New Orleans-style urbanism and ironwork, even on newer buildings.

My impression of Houston, having lived here almost 4 years, is a fascinating mix. Gulf Coast/Cajun in architecture, food, and some culture. Florida-like as far as the climate and palm trees everywhere. Southern as far as much of the history and peoples' perceived notions of the lineage. And cosmopolitan, big-city feeling in so many ways with the diverse population and growing progressive political leanings.

[Tyrone Shoes]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Dallas feels "western" to me, as does Austin. I think the better analogy for the Florida discussion is whether California is "southwestern".

Well the Austin mayor and silly council want to be located in Washington, Oregon or N. Cali. We don't call it 'The Peoples Republic of Austin' for nothing.

[Obadno]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JREkqCvLzSo

I think this is pretty spot on.

[mrnyc]

i was thinking it makes more sense for texas to be divided in half down the middle, but certainly, if it has not been done already as a thought experiment, you could do something like the five ohios for a state as big as texas, no?

[Austin55]

I've always felt like Oklahoma Cities were fairly midwestern more than anything else. But I'd feel weird about calling Oklahoma a part of the midwest.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by Austin55

I've always felt like Oklahoma Cities were fairly midwestern more than anything else. But I'd feel weird about calling Oklahoma a part of the midwest.

Oklahoma, maybe more so than any other state, is at a crossroads of multiple regions. Elements of the South, Midwest and West with some areas being fully in those regions (i.e. swampy cypress forests in SE Oklahoma aka “Little Dixie”, vast corn and wheat farms in north-central Oklahoma, yucca-topped mesas in the Panhandle, etc) but not a plurality of any of them.

Back to the topic Austin and San Antonio have more of a southwest influence than DFW and Houston. The prevalence of limestone in the building vernacular and the drier landscape likely play into that. Obviously El Paso being pretty much in the Southwest next to New Mexico is going to have a different appearance and culture, and is more tied to NM and AZ or even Mexico than the rest of Texas.

[kcexpress69]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

KC feels a little western to me. Or at least it feels like a transition zone from east to west. Whatever you want to call it, it's definitely not Cleveland. Dallas feels more western than KC to me. I would group Dallas in with the interior southwest before I'd group it with the southeast. I've also always thought of OK as more western than southern. Arkansas and Louisiana are fully within the South/southeast. Oklahoma is the "frontier".

KC probably feels western if you're from the rustbelt, and even though both cities are in the same state, it shares nothing in common with St. Louis. Living here most of my life, I can acknowledge that it definitely is or was a cowtown, but it doesn't feel western like say Denver, Albuquerque, or Phoenix. Geologically, if it was placed in the middle of the high plains, like maybe western Nebraska or western Kansas, where there are fewer trees and more of a badlands type setting, then I could go along with that premise.

There are many parts to Oklahoma. This sounds strange, but it kinda reminds me of a mini-Texas. In the east, you have the Ozark-Ouachita mountains which gives it the southern flavor, the central part, it's similar to Missouri and eastern Kansas (minus the Flint Hills in Kansas), southwestern Oklahoma, you have the Wichita Mountains, which in no way compares to the Guadalupe range in Texas, but it is a pretty neat place to visit. And finally, the western part, including the panhandle, reminds you of the high plains.

As far as Texas goes, it's really hard to give it a certain physical or social distinction because of its size. I will say this though, Austin is the doorway between the southeast and southwest!!

[TexasPlaya]

Originally Posted by kcexpress69

KC probably feels western if you're from the rustbelt, and even though both cities are in the same state, it shares nothing in common with St. Louis. Living here most of my life, I can acknowledge that it definitely is or was a cowtown, but it doesn't feel western like say Denver, Albuquerque, or Phoenix. Geologically, if it was placed in the middle of the high plains, like maybe western Nebraska or western Kansas, where there are fewer trees and more of a badlands type setting, then I could go along with that premise.

As far as Texas goes, it's really hard to give it a certain physical or social distinction because of its size. I will say this though, Austin is the doorway between the southeast and southwest!!

Culturally and geographically, which usually go hand and hand. I'd say I35 is a good dividing line of Texas between "southern" culture and "southwestern and great plains" culture. Most of the agricultural is south of I35.

[Crawford]

Are Lubbock and Amarillo more or less the same culturally/overall feel? They seemed almost interchangeable.