Nicely done Derrick. Well thought out and stated. My own thoughts on the "Wild West" and the telling of stories based on the history of the west is that a fictional account can sometimes be more nonfiction than fiction and the same holds true for a supposed non-fiction piece. It just depends on who's telling it. What is the truth? What is real? Like any time period or region or subject matter in this world it is a mix of real and legend. With the respect to the West and the settling of it. Was it brutal and treacherous? Unquestionably. Were the heroes, many times villains? Of course. Was it fair and righteous? Of course not. Anytime humans are involved, there a host of negatives to take into account. It's who we are, we're imperfect and flawed. I could also ask questions that are positive and some of the answers would be yes, absolutely. Was it wild and free, was there an abundance of bravery displayed, was there a romance to it, was there unbelievable strong will and perseverance, was hardship overcome with sheer tenacity? I like a true accounting as much as the next guy but buried in that truth, is pardon the easy way out here, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Once again, really enjoyed this post. Great job. - Jim
Thank you, Jim. I think when it comes to McMurtry, he had lived some of that life on his father's ranch and heard stories, told with the bark off, from his uncles and other old timers of how difficult life was. They didn't romanticize the west or the cowboy way of life—though one suspects, they would not have wanted to live any other kind of life. By the time he was reading Westerns or watching Western movies the brutality of life in the west during the nineteenth century was papered over. I think McMurtry understood that in a way those romanticized versions of the Western did a disservice to the people who actually lived those lives by painting a picture that life in the rural west was little different than life in the urban east—that westerners had no more difficult a life than easterners, they just did life in the outdoors and on horseback. McMurtry's attempt to demythologize the Western is a way to honor those who chose such a difficult path—to restore their dignity, even if he wouldn't go so far as to say their heroism.
No argument with any of that. Big, big McMurtry admirer here. I've read everything and damn near read as much about him. A generational talent if there ever was one. I've said it many times before but anyone that can write Lonesome Dove, The Last Picture Show and Terms of Endearment has some damn range now, to say the least. Thanks for sharing and the conversation Derrick, always a pleasure. - Jim
I think the fact that despite McMurtry's attempt to deconstruct the Western, one will never truly deconstruct it without reconstructing it. The West and Cowboys are to America, what knights and Fantasy are to Europe.
Fantastic read, thank you.
Thank you, Tom. I glad you enjoyed it.
Nicely done Derrick. Well thought out and stated. My own thoughts on the "Wild West" and the telling of stories based on the history of the west is that a fictional account can sometimes be more nonfiction than fiction and the same holds true for a supposed non-fiction piece. It just depends on who's telling it. What is the truth? What is real? Like any time period or region or subject matter in this world it is a mix of real and legend. With the respect to the West and the settling of it. Was it brutal and treacherous? Unquestionably. Were the heroes, many times villains? Of course. Was it fair and righteous? Of course not. Anytime humans are involved, there a host of negatives to take into account. It's who we are, we're imperfect and flawed. I could also ask questions that are positive and some of the answers would be yes, absolutely. Was it wild and free, was there an abundance of bravery displayed, was there a romance to it, was there unbelievable strong will and perseverance, was hardship overcome with sheer tenacity? I like a true accounting as much as the next guy but buried in that truth, is pardon the easy way out here, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Once again, really enjoyed this post. Great job. - Jim
Thank you, Jim. I think when it comes to McMurtry, he had lived some of that life on his father's ranch and heard stories, told with the bark off, from his uncles and other old timers of how difficult life was. They didn't romanticize the west or the cowboy way of life—though one suspects, they would not have wanted to live any other kind of life. By the time he was reading Westerns or watching Western movies the brutality of life in the west during the nineteenth century was papered over. I think McMurtry understood that in a way those romanticized versions of the Western did a disservice to the people who actually lived those lives by painting a picture that life in the rural west was little different than life in the urban east—that westerners had no more difficult a life than easterners, they just did life in the outdoors and on horseback. McMurtry's attempt to demythologize the Western is a way to honor those who chose such a difficult path—to restore their dignity, even if he wouldn't go so far as to say their heroism.
No argument with any of that. Big, big McMurtry admirer here. I've read everything and damn near read as much about him. A generational talent if there ever was one. I've said it many times before but anyone that can write Lonesome Dove, The Last Picture Show and Terms of Endearment has some damn range now, to say the least. Thanks for sharing and the conversation Derrick, always a pleasure. - Jim
The man could throw a wide literary loop.
Great post! Thank you!
Thank you so much. I'm glad you enjoyed it.
I think the fact that despite McMurtry's attempt to deconstruct the Western, one will never truly deconstruct it without reconstructing it. The West and Cowboys are to America, what knights and Fantasy are to Europe.