Abe Lincoln Vampire Hunter

by Andrea Elizabeth

If you enjoy northern propaganda where southern soldiers only win battles because it’s really hard to kill the undead, and you think Lincoln and Mary Todd are saints, and that he only campaigned to end slavery (like my Pennsylvanian husband was brought up believing), then your suspension of disbelief wont be interrupted in Abe Lincoln, Vampire Hunter (rated R for violence and briefly exposed dead lady). If not, then it’s still interesting. I can’t get lost in movies hardly anymore, anyway.

like a beast

by Andrea Elizabeth

Cat in lap, young dog chewing rug label, other cat upstairs with homeworking daughter, other dog sleeping somewhere. The dead dog said hi Wednesday when I mowed past his grave “like a beast”, which is how my husband described my riding mowing. He said I’m faster and get closer to the trees than he does. I took a turn because he doesn’t know which flowers to leave alone.

Happy Namesday, George.


Orthodoxy and Feminism

by Andrea Elizabeth

This is a really good article: Orthodoxy and Feminism



by Andrea Elizabeth

Or, the Italian identity isn’t as poor-relation, southern Europeans, but as northern dominating Mediterraneans!

a reasonable facsimile

by Andrea Elizabeth

It struck me in Elisabeth Gaskell’s North and South, BBC version, that people in Northern and Southern England mirrored in many ways the northern and southern cultures in America, mainly industry vs. rural laid-backness. This was further brought home recently when I studied my ancestral heritage where I learned that the South was populated by poor people from south-western England and the North from the more educated, affluent north east of England. And now we have Spain, the southern country in Europe, immigrating further south in Central America. It looks like people seek out and copy what they’re used to, in climate, culture, and geographic proximity.

So then why did the Italians go to New York instead of inhabiting Florida? Ah, they were recruited.

It’s the horses, stupid

by Andrea Elizabeth

“It’s the ‘blank’ (economy), stupid” was coined by James Carville, who will here represent the Louisiana French influence in Texas.

The Spanish brought the horses, whom the Indians adopted. They also invented horse powered cattle ranching, the biggest stereotype people have about Texas. The original Texas white settlers were farmers and brought slaves to harvest cotton fields. Texas is still a huge producer if not the number 1 producer of cotton in the U.S. Cowboy ranching in west Texas developed later. Now there’s a big English Dressage contingent in our area 30 miles west of Fort Worth, which is where the west beings, aka Cowtown. But the most famous dressage horses are the Spanish Lipizzaner Stallions – so there.

Spanish vs. English, not getting much into French colonialization of North America

by Andrea Elizabeth

Apparently the English were more efficient in their use of natural resources. The Spanish were much more embroiled with the Native Americans in trying to convert and enslave them. They pretty much spent themselves in Central America before pushing north. Perhaps they were more feudal in their approach and the English were more capitalist. I get the sense the French were more individualist in comingling with the natives. I’m sure matters at home had a lot to do with how much energy they, including Germany and Denmark, could expend.


by Andrea Elizabeth

But what about the Spanish, you say? Spain and newly independent Mexico were the intermediate powers between the Indians and then the Scottish, German, and Tennessee pioneers. Their explorers where the first Europeans to map out the area and name a bunch of things, but their claim didn’t last. The Indians were still in control, which is why the pioneers needed the canon that the Mexican government wanted to take back in Gonzales, and why the settlers went to war. The Mexicans hadn’t really nationalized the area. Why the Spanish didn’t really settle the northern regions is a mystery to me.

Texas 2

by Andrea Elizabeth

And not only that. The Appaches, Comanches, and Caddos are part of it, but they didn’t know the difference between either side of those rivers either. They probably thought of east Texas woodlands and the gulf coast as different places than west Texas plains or southwest Texas mountains or the blended hill country in the middle. Austin and Houston lassoed them all together and sprinkled blue holy water on them and pronounced them and all who came before and after as most blessed. If you don’t agree, take it up with them.

writing about Texas rather than taking a road trip through the bluebonnets, gosh dern it

by Andrea Elizabeth

What is it about Texas? There is something about the geography and geology, but not entirely because if you didn’t know where the borders were, you may not recognize the difference between the other sides of the Rio Grande, Sabine, and Red Rivers as significantly different any more than either sides of the Brazos or Guadelupe are. There’s something about the people born here. It’s a person thing. I reckon it has something to do with the Alamo and gaining independence. Blood of the martyrs? Sam Houston, Stephen F. Austin? I think their intentions made this a whole ‘nother country, and the flora, fauna, rocks, springs, and banks of rivers are all set apart by it.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33 other followers