Postcard — October 20, 2017, 12:41 pm

Creation Myth

For Texas’s nonwhite majority, there’s little to celebrate about a land grab perpetrated by white settlers

Photograph by the author

This past spring, while driving to the Gulf Coast of Texas and turning the radio dial, I caught the tagline for a country-music station: “We’re bigger than Texas, but we prefer to stay in our borders.” A dig at immigrants, a parochial declaration of pride, or both? The Mexican border was almost four hundred miles away, yet these days, it loomed everywhere.

I was making my way to the “birthplace of Texas liberty,” where hundreds of historical reenactors were performing the battle that secured independence for the breakaway Republic of Texas from Mexico in 1836. Every year since the early 1980s, Texans have assembled to celebrate the eighteen-minute skirmish, which paved the way for Texas’s annexation by the United States. That provocation led to the Mexican-American War—or the “American Invasion,” as it’s known in Mexico—whose unpopularity generated the first American antiwar movement. It ended in 1848 with a jagged chunk of Mexican territory roughly the size of France, Germany, and Spain combined joining its neighbor to the north.

Mere days after the battle, curious tourists began making their way to the site. What greeted them were the decaying corpses of hundreds of dead Mexican soldiers, a fact that incensed Peggy McCormick, a slave-owning widow whose husband had been granted the land to help colonize Texas. She demanded that the bodies of the dead men be buried. According to Texan lore, Sam Houston, the leader of the Texan army, refused, telling her, “Madam, your land will be famed in history as the classic spot upon which the glorious victory of San Jacinto was gained!” McCormick then replied, “To the devil with your glorious history! Take off your stinking Mexicans.”

Houston’s vision won out. San Jacinto Day became the state’s first official holiday in 1874, and the tourists kept coming. Finding myself back in my home state, I joined them.

As far as reenactments go, San Jacinto is no Gettysburg, which draws thousands of role-players to re-create the Civil War battle every July. Still, the day is commemorated with a religious, if obligatory, fervor. If Texas has a creation myth, it was born at the Alamo and then solidified at San Jacinto. Not for nothing are the major dates of the war against Mexico referred to as the state’s “high holy days.” Public-school students are indoctrinated in the glories of the revolution in a process that begins in the fourth grade and continues into the seventh, when students are forced to sit through an entire year of Texas history (as the writer John Spong wryly put it, an age when “the kids are old enough to grasp the material but not so mature that they question the orthodoxy”). And like many religions, it’s increasingly being discarded by those who consider it outdated or find themselves excluded by its doctrines. For the state’s non-white majority, there’s little to celebrate about a land grab perpetrated by white settlers.

When I arrived at the battlefield, a thousand acres of marshy swampland tucked next to the Buffalo Bayou, I walked toward a path leading to the field where the Mexican and Texan armies had spread out their tents. Golf carts zipped families to and from the encampments. I met seventy-seven-year-old Tom Green, a former reenactor with the Sons of the Republic of Texas, a heritage organization whose membership is limited to men who can prove their ancestors date back to the time before Texas became a state. A virtually all-white legacy group, the Sons are currently trying to diversify, which, Green told me, is “really hard” due to their strict requirements, in addition to the fact that most black Texans at the time were enslaved. (But, he cheerfully tells me, “We’ve found black people whose ancestors married into a white family that you can trace.”)

“Look how many people have moved into Texas and don’t know a thing and a world about Texas, because they didn’t have Texas history.” Tom spent his days giving presentations to bored college students. “Why they don’t love their history more than they do is a real problem. And I don’t know the answer to that.”

I offered that it might not feel relevant to them.

“It doesn’t make any difference! That’s right. Especially if you’ve got any Hispanic blood in you at all. That’s part of the problem there. Sometimes we’re a little too forceful with our history, you know. We insult people without realizing it and all that.”

At the Mexican encampment, down by a reflecting pool, a welcome sign encouraged visitors to step back in time, talk to the soldados and their officers, and ask to examine the weapons of the day. When I walked over a little before noon, visitors were in the middle of checking those weapons. Meanwhile, twenty or so beer-bellied men and one woman were standing at attention as their commander, garbed in a blue wool coat, stalked up and down the line barking orders (in English, aside from the occasional “¡Viva Mexico!”). They were mostly white, as in white white, though I spotted a couple of brown-skinned men in their ranks.

By a cluster of canvas tents, Jerry Tubbs, the main coordinator for all the reenactors (he preferred the term “muzzleloaders”), was squinting at a notebook in his hand. In Jerry’s telling, Mexicans “weren’t necessarily the bad guys,” though Santa Anna, he reckoned, was “a piece of garbage.” “Before, people would say, ‘I would drop dead before I put on a Mexican uniform,’” he told me. “Now they’re saying this is the side to be on—we have more fun!”

The “fun” he’s referring to is expensive. Jerry brought his own tent (cost: $1,000) and his own custom-made brass cannon ($8,000). “You see that guy right there with his brown vest and his uniform and everything? He’s spent around $2,500.”

What’s the appeal of spending so much money to wear a wool uniform and sweat all day? I wondered.

He turns contemplative. “It’s about the love of Texas history. To keep Texas history alive. If we don’t do it, no one else is,” he said. Jerry is from Louisiana and moved to Houston in 1972 (“the best move he ever made!” someone called out). He found out about local reenactment groups from a gun shop. “Like they always say, if you forget history, you’re bound to repeat it. And there’s a lot of people in our government, if it weren’t for gun owners like us, you know, we’d probably be under martial law.”

Texas pride was on display throughout the fairgrounds, with entire families decked out in Texas-themed ball caps and T-shirts that proclaimed: Life is Better in Texas, TGIFT: Thank God I’m From Texas, and Made in Texas. One man had tattooed his devotion on his forearm—an outline of the state, surrounded by a mounted cannon and the San Jacinto monument. “This was all freehanded. Right here, I’m going to get ‘Come and Take It.’ The Alamo will probably be right here,” the owner of the forearm told me, twisting his arm and pointing to a patch of virgin skin.

“My kids don’t get history taught in school anymore,” he said, his mood suddenly melancholy. He lit a cigarette and took a drag. He’d brought his two school-age children with him today. “You ask my kids what they know about the Battle of San Jacinto, the Battle of the Alamo, they don’t know anything.”

Behind all this fretting about history was a deeper anxiety. “This land was Mexican once, was Indian always and is. And will be again,” promised Gloria Anzaldúa. White Texans have been in the minority since 2004; by the end of this decade, Latinos alone will outnumber the state’s white residents. In 2011, the former director of the Census Bureau looked at the trends in Texas’s population and issued a blunt warning: “It’s basically over for Anglos.” It isn’t, of course, at least not yet, but they’re losing control of their mythical narrative, if not the actual levers of power.

All day, I’d been exhorted to go back in time, a dream that has a renewed appeal for some and is a nightmare for others. The promised border wall and anti-immigrant legislation—such as SB 4, an anti-sanctuary-city bill that made it through the Texas statehouse a week after my trip—were all efforts not only to delay the future but to turn back the clock.

I approached a man at the Texan encampment. His name was Scott Jones, from San Antonio.

“What does the war for independence symbolize for you?” I asked him.

“You’ve moved here with your families, you’ve settled, this is now your home. And it’s just . . . the thought of that being taken from you. It’s something to stand up and fight for.”

I left as the men in the camp gathered to psych themselves up for battle.

“Texas army! Atteeeeen-shun! Everybody got their guns today?”

“Men, today we’re going to fight the battle against the hated Santa Anna. I hope you feel the same way about him as I do.”

A cheer rose from the assembled Texans. “Hoo-yah!”

I joined the crowds making their way to the battlefield and found a spot by the sound booth, where families were lounging on picnic blankets and camping chairs, bathed in an air of placid anticipation. On opposite ends of the soccer-field-size lawn, we could see the Texans and the Mexicans in their camps—some on horseback, others lined up with muskets propped against their shoulders.  

A woman with a pack-a-day voice had been here before. “I remember Santa Anna one year came out on his horse drunk,” she said.

The loudspeakers crackled to life, and a disembodied voice began to narrate the scene before us. Cheers erupted from the crowd when the Texans walked out, carrying a flag emblazoned with Lady Liberty, one breast bared. “The Alamo has fallen! They’re all dead!” one man shouted as he walked by. A young blond boy being pulled in a wagon cart began shrieking. There was a note of real fear in his howl.

Reenactments, I soon discovered, are dull affairs. For long stretches at a time, nothing happened, except the back-and-forth of cannon fire. And adding to the confusion of everyone watching, the narration rarely matched what was happening on the field. When the men finally clashed, it was too late. They’d already lost the crowd, and the people around me began to grumble:

“Nothing happened. No one fell. They fired like six times. You think someone would get hit.”

“Why are they still firing?”

“Doesn’t look like they’re going into battle to me.”

Suddenly, it all felt so foolish, a bunch of grown-ass men in ridiculous, outlandishly expensive outfits, shooting blanks in the air. A steady stream of people started leaving the battlefield.

“There was a lot of errors,” Jerry Tubbs told me afterward. To start, his truck had broken down twice on the way to the event. Then a fight had broken out between two reenactors that he’d had to defuse. And, finally, there were the missteps and breakdowns of the battle reenactment itself. This year’s narrator, a wealth manager-cum-amateur historian, was new to the sport, and he had insisted on making edits to the usual script. “I had a bad feeling from the get-go about this one.”

Share
Single Page

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

December 2017

Document of Barbarism

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Destroyer of Worlds

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Crossing Guards

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“I am Here Only for Working”

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Dear Rose

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Year of The Frog

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Destroyer of Worlds·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In February 1947, Harper’s Magazine published Henry L. Stimson’s “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb.” As secretary of war, Stimson had served as the chief military adviser to President Truman, and recommended the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The terms of his unrepentant apologia, an excerpt of which appears on page 35, are now familiar to us: the risk of a dud made a demonstration too risky; the human cost of a land invasion would be too high; nothing short of the bomb’s awesome lethality would compel Japan to surrender. The bomb was the only option. Seventy years later, we find his reasoning unconvincing. Entirely aside from the destruction of the blasts themselves, the decision thrust the world irrevocably into a high-stakes arms race — in which, as Stimson took care to warn, the technology would proliferate, evolve, and quite possibly lead to the end of modern civilization. The first half of that forecast has long since come to pass, and the second feels as plausible as ever. Increasingly, the atmosphere seems to reflect the anxious days of the Cold War, albeit with more juvenile insults and more colorful threats. Terms once consigned to the history books — “madman theory,” “brinkmanship” — have returned to the news cycle with frightening regularity. In the pages that follow, seven writers and experts survey the current nuclear landscape. Our hope is to call attention to the bomb’s ever-present menace and point our way toward a world in which it finally ceases to exist.

Illustration by Darrel Rees. Source photographs: Kim Jong-un © ITAR-TASS Photo Agency/Alamy Stock Photo; Donald Trump © Yuri Gripas/Reuters/Newscom
Article
Crossing Guards·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Ambassador Bridge arcs over the Detroit River, connecting Detroit to Windsor, Ontario, the southernmost city in Canada. Driving in from the Canadian side, where I grew up, is like viewing a panorama of the Motor City’s rise and fall, visible on either side of the bridge’s turquoise steel stanchions. On the right are the tubular glass towers of the Renaissance Center, headquarters of General Motors, and Michigan Central Station, the rail terminal that closed in 1988. On the left is a rusted industrial corridor — fuel tanks, docks, abandoned warehouses. I have taken this route all my life, but one morning this spring, I crossed for the first time in a truck.

Illustration by Richard Mia
Article
“I am Here Only for Working”·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

But the exercise of labor is the worker’s own life-activity, the manifestation of his own life. . . . He works in order to live. He does not even reckon labor as part of his life, it is rather a sacrifice of his life.

— Karl Marx

Photograph from the United Arab Emirates by the author. This page: Ruwais Mall
Article
The Year of The Frog·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

To look at him, Sweet Macho was a beautiful horse, lean and strong with muscles that twitched beneath his shining black coat. A former racehorse, he carried himself with ceremony, prancing the field behind our house as though it were the winner’s circle. When he approached us that day at the edge of the yard, his eyes shone with what might’ve looked like intelligence but was actually a form of insanity. Not that there was any telling our mother’s boyfriend this — he fancied himself a cowboy.

“Horse 1,” by Nine Francois. Courtesy the artist and AgavePrint, Austin, Texas
Article
Dead Ball Situation·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

What We Think About When We Think About Soccer, by Simon Critchley. Penguin Books. 224 pages. $20.

Begin, as Wallace Stevens didn’t quite say, with the idea of it. I so like the idea of Simon Critchley, whose books offer philosophical takes on a variety of subjects: Stevens, David Bowie, suicide, humor, and now football — or soccer, as the US edition has it. (As a matter of principle I shall refer to this sport throughout as football.) “All of us are mysteriously affected by our names,” decides one of Milan Kundera’s characters in Immortality, and I like Critchley because his name would seem to have put him at a vocational disadvantage compared with Martin Heidegger, Søren Kierkegaard, or even, in the Anglophone world, A. J. Ayer or Richard Rorty. (How different philosophy might look today if someone called Nobby Stiles had been appointed as the Wykeham Professor of Logic.)

Tostão, No. 9, and Pelé, No. 10, celebrate Carlos Alberto’s final goal for Brazil in the World Cup final against Italy on June 21, 1970, Mexico City © Heidtmann/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images

Factor by which single Americans who use emoji are more likely than other single Americans to be sexually active:

1.85

Brontosaurus was restored as a genus, and cannibalism was reported in tyrannosaurine dinosaurs.

Moore said he did not “generally” date teenage girls, and it was reported that in the 1970s Moore had been banned from his local mall and YMCA for bothering teenage girls.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today