You might call Laredo the most patriotic city in North America. Laredo celebrates "el grito" but also goes gaga for GW. This town isn't just a Mexican-American border city; it's got a Mexican and an American identity. It's sort of like when the Blues Brothers claimed, in response to whether they could play a country-western bar: "We can play country AND western."
You can see Laredo's duality reflected in the names of the streets of Laredo. Washington Street runs parallel to Victoria Street (the first president of Mexico). One more block over is Houston Street. (Sam Houston, after kicking Santa Anna's butt at San Jacinto, went on to become the first President of Texas.) You'll find a jumble of Spanish, Mexican, American, and Texan presidents, historical figures, cities, and states on the street signs. Given that whole "Seven Flags over Laredo" thing, this makes for some odd signage. In one case, there is the intersection of Jefferson & Davis. There is also a Lincoln & Davis. Hmmm…
I also noticed that there is a Juarez Street in both Laredo and Nuevo Laredo. In fact, if you look on google maps, you can follow Juarez south from Laredo and trace its imaginary path across the river, where it become Juárez (I suppose the Border Patrol keeps the accent mark out). I wonder: was there once a bridge there, in place of the Convent Street bridge two blocks over? Or are we just coincidentally celebrating another historical figure? Benito Juarez was one of Mexico's most important presidents and reformers. Your guess is as good as mine.
Don't go too fast on the way to Laredo; you might miss it and find yourself in Mexico!
6 comments:
SOL,
Sorry but the Lincoln and Davis analogy, it is not what you are thinking.
Take it from someone who in his formative years grew up a mere twenty yards from Davis Street, in Las Cantaranas neighborhood. That street was actually named for Edmund J. Davis, a Unionist during the Civil War (or as some unreconstructed Rebel might say, the "War of Northern Aggression"), and a governor of Texas during the Reconstruction era. Most of the streets that run east-west are actually named for Union generals during the war (Farragut, Sherman, Burnside, etc.)
Yes, it is ironic, considering that the Battle of Laredo involved a Confederate colonel (Santos Benavides), but you get the idea.
On the flip side, all those other comparisons hold true--Laredo is a unique mixture of U.S. and Mexico.
Sometimes it borders on the ridiculous.
Take for instance, the Confederate flag (the Stars and Bars) flying at the Laredo International Airport and the fifteen foot Rebel banner inscribed onto the floor of said airport.
I wonder what African American visitors say when they arrive to the Gateway City?
A few years ago, the masthead of the Laredo Times featured the flag until they changed for the less offensive image of the First Confederate National Flag.
The dog pile could only grow. Trust me on this one.
Alex--thanks for the clarification. I was just guessing about which Davis the street referred to.
RE the star and bars: I don't know what to think. Some say it's just a part of Laredo's history--especially since the last fighting of the Civil War took place on the Rio Grande. Others are understandably less sanguine.
Also, thanks for clarifying what that other flag is--I had wondered. So it's really just a more obscure symbol of the same thing?
Finally, can you tell me whether the Seven Flags thing is true? Specifically, did the Republic of Texas ever take control of this place? Sure, they claimed all the lands North of the Rio Grande, but there weren't any Anglo-Texans anywhere near here. It seems that Laredo only stopped being Mexican (aside from the Rio Grande Republic period) after the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, once Texas had joined the United States. Also, wasn't it Mexico that came in and re-integrated Laredo into Mexico after the area tried to form the Rio Grande Republic? Please correct me if I'm wrong on this!
Callagy,
Wow. Pretty sharp observations for someone who arrived in Texas recently (please correct me if I am wrong). In fact, there are native Texans who do not know half of what you mentioned.
So, to answer your question(s), briefly, yes, what you wrote is right.
To put it simply, even though Texas was independent after 1836, there was nothing they could do about establishing themselves as a viable nation beyond the few scattered settlements in the eastern part of the state and San Antonio. So, when the Rio Grande Republic came to be--shortlived as it was--it was because the people in Laredo and the neighboring vicinities still considered themselves Mejicanos.
And, yes, American influence did not arrive to the Rio Grande until U.S. annexation was official--almost ten years after the Texas Revolution. The resulting Mexican-American War (1846-1848) gave the U.S. a much richer share than just Texas, obviously.
The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo merely codified the land grab. The irony is that several disgruntled Whigs in Congress that viewed this war through the prism of the slave power conspiracy insisted that U.S. citizenship be extended to the thousands of Mexicans which were living in the Southwest, from Texas to California. So, if you were Mexican you had a choice: stay and live under the U.S. flag, or return to your native land of Mexico. Some stayed, some left obviously. (Nuevo Laredo, anyone?)
Regarding the Confederate flag. That flag you see flying over the airport, at some locales, and at every truckstop along I-35, is not really "historical," to be honest with you. That flag was a battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. The true national flag (or, shall we say, the flag adopted by the Confederate government) is what is on the new masthead of the Times.
Yet in the postwar years, the battle flag came to symbolize something else: white supremacy and Jim Crow. By the late 1900s it was found all over the south to resist desegregation and the Civil Rights movement. It remains despite its true representative nature of "history."
However, as I and others have argued elsewhere, do you really want to support the history of a nation based on slaveholding and slavery, anyhow? For Laredoans to support that flag is still beyond me, especially considering that many supporters of that flag would not be too keen on having a “Mesican” over for dinner, anyhow. But that is another story for another day.
I guess some people do.
Others just think it looks cool on the top of an orange car. :)
Awesome--thanks. Good to hear that my theory is confirmed. Every Texan/Laredo resident I've spoken to about it has given me a blank stare! And when I suggest that Texas was never legally a sovereign nation--since it 'negotiated' its 'treaty' of independence with a knife at Santa Anna's throat--well that's just asking for a fight. Although I suppose that's the nature of a rebellion: the USA also gained independence in a fight, as did most other colonies that later broke away from the colonial ruler.
Yeah, I'm new to Texas, but I read Fehrenbach's "Lone Star" to get up to speed.
Uh-oh. You are cruising for a brusin' if you continue with those dastardly facts that Santa Anna's acquiescence to the Treaty of Velasco was invalid due to his capture and imprisonment. (That was Mexico's point of view, in fact.)
Be sure to bring those ideas (and others) up in a seedy bar. Just be sure to keep an eye for the exit. :)
Fehrenbach's Lone Star is an oldie but a goodie.
Welcome to Laredo.
Post a Comment