I just read an article from Texas Monthly about Galveston and Ike's aftermath. The last line says that in the end, the sea will always win in Galveston. That pisses me off. The author of the piece is BOI and grew up here. However, of course, he now lives elsewhere in Texas. At the same time he relies on his sense of heartfelt abominations hiding behind his hysterical views of a place he used to call home. In his case, maybe the ocean did win. Maybe it rose up from its depth dwelling soul and captured his courage. But I tell you this, Galveston needs not his kind.
Don't get me wrong. His article triumphed in telling the story of the storm and the pitfalls of destruction along with the Island's leaders' abilities to overcome. And he even tells of his own family's tie with the epitome of Galveston's existence - the 1900 Storm. But one can tell he's lost his G-Town swagger.
Instead he attempts every reason why people should not inhabit the Island. The same reasons he cites for not resurrecting Galveston are the very things that make the folks who chose and still choose to do so brave souls. In all of his words about the Island's history and how it shapes the Island's psyche, he fails to realize that those of us committed to the Island do so to preserve and protect this very history. Without the courage, grit, and passion of 1900 Storm survivors, the author would not only have lacked his childhood but this very romanticized drama of a magazine article.
We need solutions, not soapboxes. However brave we may be, the author snatches up the heroism by his final line. Almost an ultimatum against residents. The sea does not win. It has not won. The sea may have taken things from our Island over the years, but it has not and will never take our one and only weapon against it. Choice.
I would love to post a link to the article, but Texas Monthly's website won't let you read the whole thing. So, if you're somewhere selling mags, pick one up and tell me how you feel about his words.
Don't get me wrong. His article triumphed in telling the story of the storm and the pitfalls of destruction along with the Island's leaders' abilities to overcome. And he even tells of his own family's tie with the epitome of Galveston's existence - the 1900 Storm. But one can tell he's lost his G-Town swagger.
Instead he attempts every reason why people should not inhabit the Island. The same reasons he cites for not resurrecting Galveston are the very things that make the folks who chose and still choose to do so brave souls. In all of his words about the Island's history and how it shapes the Island's psyche, he fails to realize that those of us committed to the Island do so to preserve and protect this very history. Without the courage, grit, and passion of 1900 Storm survivors, the author would not only have lacked his childhood but this very romanticized drama of a magazine article.
We need solutions, not soapboxes. However brave we may be, the author snatches up the heroism by his final line. Almost an ultimatum against residents. The sea does not win. It has not won. The sea may have taken things from our Island over the years, but it has not and will never take our one and only weapon against it. Choice.
I would love to post a link to the article, but Texas Monthly's website won't let you read the whole thing. So, if you're somewhere selling mags, pick one up and tell me how you feel about his words.
And here's the thing, commitment, history , and love of home aside, who are we kidding? The Island is prime real estate property. People aren't walking away from money. So I agree with you. We need problem-solving for the future of the Island as both a place to live - ahem middle class - and a tourist destination.