Dac Crossley's Western Blog

Invading Texas

The border between the U.S. and Spain was settled by the Adams-Onis Treaty of 1819 – the Louisiana-Texas border. An independent Mexico inherited the agreement although neither government ratified it.

Mexico, worried about the influx of North American colonists, established a Border Commission and sent General Manuel de Mier y Terán on an inspection trip through Texas. American immigrants, legal and illegal, had grown so numerous that they outnumbered the Tejano population. Terán was ordered to investigate the status of the immigrants.

(Note, please, that the first illegal immigrants into Texas came from the United States.)

How bad was the situation? Worse than Mexico realized, Terán reported. The University of Texas Press has re-published his diary. In his inspection trip, the general gives us a picture of Texas in the year 1828.

Yes, the Americanos were taking land along the coast and making it their own. The Tejanos in San Antonio were a sorry lot, barely able to support themselves. The ambitious Americanos were actually selling foodstuffs to San Antonio. Terán was indignant. Why don’t the Sanantonistas grow their own?

It’s complicated. San Antonio had become a military post, overwhelming the little village. The soldiers fought Apaches and Comanches without much success. No military payroll had reached San Antonio in several years. The soldiers hunted game to feed themselves. And there were always the marauding Indians.

In contrast to Terán’s report, Americans who visited San Antonio in 1828 found a delightful little village of a few thousand souls, living in an idyllic setting along the river. Amid the clamor of a mixture of unknown languages, the American visitor finds San Antonio a welcome relief from the toil he left on the coastal plain.

It's all there in the Terán diary. A trove of early Texas culture. Well worth reading, especially if you enjoy San Antonio. (Texas by Terán. Jack Jackson, editor. University of Texas Press, Austin. 2000.).

Dac Crossley
June 17, 2014

“Without courage, we cannot practice any other virtue with consistency. We can’t be kind, true, merciful, generous or honest.” – Maya Angelou.

Explaining Science

Mary F. came back from Portland where she heard Randy Olson lecture on science and literature. He says literature and science both have a narrative that runs “And – and – and - but – therefore.” Scientists do a pitiful job of explaining their findings to non-scientists. Scientific papers leave out the “but – therefore” parts.

(Randy Olson is impressive. Google him. Open “Randy Olson Productions.” I enjoyed his video.).

I’ve had a foot in both camps, as you know. I've been writing fiction (or trying to) for a decade. Now, I can look back at the scientific papers I’ve published – tables, graphs, conclusions aplenty. But there's no “here’s what this means” in non-scientific terminology.

You can find excellent narratives of science in popular journals like Scientific American, for example. Why isn’t all science presented as narrative? Why didn’t I do that?

Most of us aren’t good enough at it. Think of the few who are – Einstein, Sagan, Ehrlich. They opened themselves to ridicule in their time. The narrative of science is not popular. And it’s difficult to explain in a common jargon.

I think part of the problem is that there are competing narratives. The narrative of politics starts with opinions and twists facts to fit the narrative. Turn on your radio. There’s the narrative of politics, and often it denies the narrative of science.

And the narrative of biology? Theodosius Dobzhansky said it best: “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” Thus, the narrative of biology runs head-on into the narrative of religion, which is faith-based.

The narrative of science changes, too. Science is self-correcting. New explanations leap at you, theories that offer a better interpretation of the facts. Think plate tectonics, for example.

Maybe Randy Olson is right. Maybe we need to do a bette job of explaining science. But I think there’s a human tendency to ignore unpleasant news. To enjoy the benefits of biological science – advances in agriculture and medicine – while disputing the narrative. That’s what we do. And mourn for the good old days.

Dac Crossley
June 8, 2014

“Let me write the songs of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.” – Daniel O’Connell.

The Second Battle for the Alamo

The Texas Tejano newsletter reports that a portrait of Adena De Zavala will be installed in the lobby of the Menger Hotel on June 11. That’s very appropriate; I wish I could be there to witness the event. The Menger is just across the alley from the Alamo chapel and barracks, where Sra De Zavala made her famous stand.

Adena De Zavala had deep roots in Texas. Her grandfather was the first Vice president of the Republic of Texas. She became concerned over the decaying state of San Antonio’s Spanish Missions, especially the Alamo. She sprang into action when a grocery company decided to raze the Long Barracks.

The witty and wealthy Clara Driscoll joined the fight and purchased the grocery company, thus helping to preserve Alamo Plaza and its buildings. But the war went on. Driscoll became convinced that the Long Barracks was constructed after the Alamo fight, and thought it should be torn down. De Zavala insisted, correctly, that the building was historic. She attracted national attention when she barricaded herself in the Long Barracks for several days.

Legal battles followed, and eventually Adena De Zavala was proved correct in most of her historical opinions about the Alamo.

Read more in the Handbook of Texas Online. And I’m grateful to the Texas Tejano newsletter for permission to use the portrait of Adena De Zavala.

When you’re visiting the Alamo chapel, don’t neglect to walk across the alley to the Menger, for a beer in the Teddy Roosevelt bar or the breakfast buffet in the dining room. And take in the history of San Antonio in the Menger's showcases and on its walls.

Dac Crossley
June 4, 2014

“The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense.” – Tom Clancy