Requesting a Western

[Steven Maas (CUTR)]

On Tue, 28 May 1996, John Boylan wrote:

>   Steven Maas nominates the 1974 Clint Eastwood film, THE OUTLAW JOSEY
> WALES, as the "very best western ever" and further goes on to opine,
> "I haven't read the book, if there is one, but I would imagine it's good."
>   Well, there is indeed a book, and, not having read it, I can't comment
> on its quality. I do know a bit about the author, however -- Asa Carter,
> the notorious Klan terrorist of the 1950's.
>   The organization he ran in Alabama was involved in the beating of Nat
> King Cole, castrating a black man, bombings, etc. He had shot two of his
> followers who questioned the way he disposed of funds.
>   In the 60's he went on to a new career as George Wallace's speechwriter.
>   The movie, though exciting and well-made, is also a dicey piece of work,
> with its noble Conferedate guerrillas and visciously treacherous Union sol-
> diers, and it's gunman hero based on the racist, anti-Reconstuction Texas
> killers John Wesley Hardin and Wild Bill Longley.
> 
> 
>                                                  --John Boylan
> 

Well, neither of us has read the book and therefore, as Mr. Boylan says,
we are unqualified to comment on it.  The information about the book's
author is news to me, but I certainly would think that attempts to damn
the book solely because its author was a scumbag would be quickly rejected
(please note that I am not saying Mr. Boylan is making such an attempt).
As we all surely realize, many great works of art would be verboten if the
character of the creator were the criterion of acceptability.

As for the merits of the movie, I stand by my opinion.  As Mr. Boylan
says, the movie is exciting and well-made.  Additionally, as I said in my
previous post, I think it does an excellent job of telling an old story
and has some great dialogue.   Mr. Boylan calls the movie "dicey," a very
indefinite word but obviously not a thumbs-up.  One of Mr. Boylan's
complaints about the movie is its portrayal of "noble Confederate
guerrillas" and "viciously treacherous Union soldiers."  While I don't
remember much about the portrayal of the Confederate guerrillas (except
the scene where all but the leader and Wales and one other were killed) it
seems that they were portrayed as burning towns and so on, typical wartime
activities of guerilla forces (and, often, of regular army forces as
well).  The Union "redlegs" in the movie were also guerillas, not
soldiers, and as I remember it, were portrayed as committing much the same
acts as the Confederate guerrillas.  I did not get the feeling that the
Confederates guerillas as a whole were portrayed as noble.  In fact, their
leader changed sides and spent much of the movie attempting to help the
"redlegs" kill Wales, hardly a noble action.  While Wales and
the-kid-that-was-wounded-but-survived-for-a-while may have been portrayed
as noble, they could easily be considered as exceptions to the character
of most members of the band of Confederate guerillas.  Mr. Boylan's other
complaint is that the movie's "gunman hero [is] based on the racist,
anti-Reconstruction Texas killers John Wesley Hardin and Wild Bill
Longley."  I don't know who the author based Wales on (for all I know Mr.
Boylan may be right), but it seems immaterial to the movie.  I don't
recall any racist sentiments expressed by Wales in the movie.  As for
being "anti-Reconstruction," it seems more accurate to call Wales as
portrayed in the movie anti-Union.  Understandably so, given that the
Union (albeit guerilla forces, not regular army) killed his wife and
child, and tried its best to kill him.

Sorry for taking up band space, but I felt obligated.

					--Steve Maas