Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 329:question:329--week_9_questions_comments-2020 [2020/10/22 13:04] – lyndsey_clark
+++ 329:question:329--week_9_questions_comments-2020 [2020/10/28 01:41] (current) – [I.How does this movie work as a secondary source? What does the movie get right about history?] 73.148.123.181
@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 My Darling Clementine was not a very good secondary source. The characters, although based on real people, hardly followed the stories of the real people or their position within the town. However, **the actual story of the main characters aside, the film captured that many men worked different jobs, gambled. The film also captured the violence and the “lawless of life in the wilderness” that existed in the old west.** —Helen Dhue
+So far throughout this semester, this has been my favorite assigned movie. I really enjoyed this movie and feel like it was filmed in such a beautiful way. Of course, there are some mistakes within this movie, just like a lot of other historically based films or movies. In the beginning, the movie portrays a Native American as being violent and drunkenly attacking people. As we know, Hollywood has portrayed the Native Americans in a very incorrect way. In addition to this, there does seem to be some added characters and storylines that are not the most truthful rendition of the real story, but that was added to capture the attention of the audience. -Kaylee Williams
 ====== II.	Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ======
 As far as historical films go, this has got to be the most historically inaccurate one that we've seen so far. For a film that is regarded as being one of the best Westerns of all time, that's kind of sad. I have multiple reasons why this film is not a good secondary source, and most of them deal with the characters. The only thing accurate about this film is the names of some of the characters (Wyatt Earp, Virgil Earp, Doc Holliday, etc.) and the ending shootout, which is famously known as the Gunfight at O.K. Corral. The first thing I noticed was that the year in which these events took place was wrong. Yes, this film is set in the vague time period when cowboys and bandits roamed the American West, but it seems like it is based on an actual event that screenwriters had heard of and just decided to go with as the plot of the story. I'm talking about the fact that the Gunfight at O.K. Corral happened in 1881, a solid year before the movie takes place. Then there are the issues with the characters. Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday were real historical figures and are each regarded as legends in the American West. I cannot stress how much it annoyed me that Wyatt Earp was the Marshal of Tombstone in the movie, because historically it was his brother, Virgil, who held that role. Then there are issues with Doc Holliday. In the movie, Doc is portrayed to be a surgeon who ventured out west after being diagnosed with tuberculosis. In reality, Doc was a dentist, not a surgeon, but at least they got the tuberculosis issue correct. Then there is the fact that the movie implies Tombstone is the place where him and Wyatt Earp met. The truth is that Doc Holliday had known the Earp brothers and ended up in Tombstone with them. At the very end we see the Gunfight at O.K. Corral, where Doc is supposedly killed. The shootout was not as dramatic as the film makes it out to be, and Doc did not die leaving Wyatt to ride valiantly into the sunset. The entire film is one giant exaggeration that is a fictional version of historical events, making it an abysmal choice for a secondary source of the time period. -- Lyndsey Clark
-There are quite a few historical inaccuracies that are portrayed throughout the plot of //My Darling Clementine//. Wyatt Earp and his brothers were not cattle drivers, they were lawmen and marshals. Wyatt owned a brothel, Virgil and James owned a saloon, and their brother Morgan was a sheriff. All four of the Earp brothers had many different occupations while they lived in different towns. Before he had a reputation with gunslinging, Doc Holliday had been a dentist, not a surgeon. He had dealt with tuberculosis throughout his life, and died of tuberculosis years later after the gunfight at the O.K. Corral, not from a gunshot wound. James Earp at the beginning of the film was murdered while in his teens when in actuality he lived to be 84 years old. The gunfight at the O.K. Corral had actually happened in 1881, not 1882 as the movie suggests. -Lauren Simpson
+There are quite a few historical inaccuracies that are portrayed throughout the plot of //My Darling Clementine//. Wyatt Earp and his brothers were not cattle drivers, they were lawmen and marshals. Wyatt owned a brothel, **Virgil and James owned a saloon, and their brother Morgan was a sheriff.** All four of the Earp brothers had many different occupations while they lived in different towns. Before he had a reputation with gunslinging, **Doc Holliday had been a dentist, not a surgeon**. He had dealt with tuberculosis throughout his life, and died of tuberculosis years later after the gunfight at the O.K. Corral, not from a gunshot wound. **James Earp at the beginning of the film was murdered while in his teens when in actuality he lived to be 84 years old.** The gunfight at the O.K. Corral had actually happened in 1881, not 1882 as the movie suggests. -Lauren Simpson
-My Darling Clementine features the conflict of the OK Corral and those involved. There are many problems with the film, however. The most important of these is the people that died. For one, the eldest brother, James, is claimed to have died at “only eighteen”, though we know that he actually lived to be 62, never in Tombstone for the gunfight. Also, Doc was also not killed in the gunfight, rather he would die at the age of 36 in Colorado. --Tara Scroggins
+My Darling Clementine features the conflict of the OK Corral and those involved. There are many problems with the film, however. The most important of these is the people that died. For one, the eldest brother, James, is claimed to have died at “only eighteen”, though we know that he actually lived to be 62, never in Tombstone for the gunfight. Also, **Doc was also not killed in the gunfight, rather he would die at the age of 36 in Colorado**. --Tara Scroggins
-Although the film was not as romanticized as //Frontier Marshall//, it still glorifies and warps the story. The most glaring inaccuracies deal with the timeline being depicted, in that the fight at the O.K. Corral actually took place a year before what was shown in the movie. James dies at the age of 18 in the movie, but actually lived from 1841 to 1926. This was probably done to dramatize the story. The introduction of fictional love interests was also unnecessary in telling the story, but was most likely done to draw more people in, adding that romantic element. IN terms of accuracy, there is a lot wrong with the film, and I think it works in the same way that movies like //Pocahontas// do. -- Jordan Petty
+Although the film was not as romanticized as //Frontier Marshall//, it still glorifies and warps the story. The most glaring inaccuracies deal with the timeline being depicted, in that **the fight at the O.K. Corral actually took place a year before what was shown in the movie.** James dies at the age of 18 in the movie, but actually lived from 1841 to 1926. This was probably done to dramatize the story. **The introduction of fictional love interests was also unnecessary in telling the story**, but was most likely done to draw more people in, adding that romantic element. IN terms of accuracy, there is a lot wrong with the film, and I think it works in the same way that movies like //Pocahontas// do. -- Jordan Petty
-The film, My Darling Clementine, seems to have drawn most of its plot and details from the idea of the gunfight near the O.K. Corral rather than any historical record concerning the event. There are four Earp brothers in the film as they have added James Earp and his death as incentive for the other brothers to remain as marshals in Tombstone. Furthermore, the details of the Earps is incorrect as Virgil is killed in the film before the gunfight while historically it is Morgan who died, and Virgil was wounded both of which happened after the gunfight. Other characters are also changed for the sake of the film as Doc Holiday is a surgeon in the film while he was historically a dentist, was gunned down in the fight while he historically lived on until finally being claimed by his Consumption, and met Wyatt in Tombstone when they had known each other in Dodge city. Doc’s Woman Kate was split into two existences with the prostitute Chihuahua and the ex-love interest Clementine Carter who at the end of the film declared she would stay and become a schoolteacher similar to the historical Kate who ended up becoming a schoolteacher. The gunfight in the film was fully devised from popular imagination as the gunfight took place at the corral and involved numerous deaths over what felt like an hour when it historically took place at a vacant lot with 3 deaths in less than 1 minute. The film prefers to appeal to popular imagination with a long drawn out shootout that ends with one side victorious and the other group dead while the actual shootout was but one event amongst a long conflict between the Republican merchants and Democratic ranchers that did not end with the gunfight as the film suggests with the notion of justice served. The film presents a romantic notion of a western story with vigilante justice and love being behind the ‘good’ guys against the hostile and violent ‘bad’ guys. The details and events surrounding the gunfight are cut away and replaced with a love triangle that guides a big chunk of the runtime instead of an exploration of the historical gunfight and its greater implications. The ending of the film is the clearest example of the romanticism that was favored with the happy ending of the remaining two Earp brothers riding off after serving justice while Clementine has grown from her selfish quest over Holiday to stay in town and become a schoolteacher for some unknown reason. All fluff and love rather than any presentation of a historical film rather it is a film that draws names from history while ignoring just about ever other detail of the historical record. -Robert Keitz
+The film, My Darling Clementine, seems to have **drawn most of its plot and details from the idea of the gunfight near the O.K. Corral rather than any historical record concerning the event.** There are four Earp brothers in the film as they have added James Earp and his death as incentive for the other brothers to remain as marshals in Tombstone. Furthermore, the details of the Earps is incorrect as **Virgil is killed in the film before the gunfight while historically it is Morgan who died**, and Virgil was wounded both of which happened after the gunfight. Other characters are also changed for the sake of the film as Doc Holiday is a surgeon in the film while he was historically a dentist, was gunned down in the fight while he historically lived on until finally being claimed by his Consumption, and **met Wyatt in Tombstone when they had known each other in Dodge city.** **Doc’s Woman Kate was split into two existences with the prostitute Chihuahua and the ex-love interest Clementine Carter who at the end of the film declared she would stay and become a schoolteacher similar to the historical Kate who ended up becoming a schoolteacher.** The gunfight in the film was fully devised from popular imagination as the gunfight took place at the corral and involved numerous deaths over what felt like an hour when it historically took place at a vacant lot with 3 deaths in less than 1 minute. The film prefers to appeal to popular imagination with a long drawn out shootout that ends with one side victorious and the other group dead while the actual shootout was but one event amongst a long conflict between the Republican merchants and Democratic ranchers that did not end with the gunfight as the film suggests with the notion of justice served. The film presents a romantic notion of a western story with vigilante justice and love being behind the **‘good’ guys against the hostile and violent ‘bad’ guys**. The details and events surrounding the gunfight are cut away and replaced with a love triangle that guides a big chunk of the runtime instead of an exploration of the historical gunfight and its greater implications. The ending of the film is the clearest example of the romanticism that was favored with the happy ending of the remaining two Earp brothers riding off after serving justice while Clementine has grown from her selfish quest over Holiday to stay in town and become a schoolteacher for some unknown reason. **All fluff and love rather than any presentation of a historical film** rather it is a film that draws names from history while ignoring just about ever other detail of the historical record. -Robert Keitz
-Let's set aside the blatant racial stereotypes for a second, and discuss the fact that the movie doesn't even get Wyatt Earp's own life correct. To be completely honest, before class on Tuesday I assumed Wyatt Earp was an entirely fictional character- a perfect idea of what a cowboy should be, but nothing more than fantasty. //My Darling Clementine// completely romanticizes Wyatt Earp's life, turning him into a classic American moving out west with his brothers to start a new life, rather than the fairly sketchy individual he actually was. His run for law enforcement is shockingly true in both instances, his reason for doing so is nowhere near as noble as it appears to be in the film. Doc Holliday and Earp were actually very close friends in real life rather than semi-antagonist he appears to be, although I suppose they couldn't be seen as too close since Holliday was such a shady character--can't besmirch the Earp name! Essentially, it feels like the directors and writers took the bare bones of who Wyatt Earp was--mainly, a western cowboy-- and then dressed him and the other people involved however they wanted to in order to tell a classic, idealized version of life in the American West.  -- Cat Kinde
+Let's set aside the blatant racial stereotypes for a second, and discuss the fact that the movie doesn't even get Wyatt Earp's own life correct. To be completely honest, before class on Tuesday I assumed Wyatt Earp was an entirely fictional character- a perfect idea of what a cowboy should be, but nothing more than fantasty. //My Darling Clementine// completely **romanticizes Wyatt Earp's life, turning him into a classic American moving out west with his brothers to start a new life, rather than the fairly sketchy individual he actually was**. His run for law enforcement is shockingly true in both instances, his reason for doing so is nowhere near as noble as it appears to be in the film. Doc Holliday and Earp were actually very close friends in real life rather than semi-antagonist he appears to be, although I suppose they couldn't be seen as too close since Holliday was such a shady character--can't besmirch the Earp name! Essentially, it feels like the **directors and writers took the bare bones of who Wyatt Earp was--mainly, a western cowboy-- and then dressed him and the other people involved however they wanted to in order to tell a classic, idealized version of life in the American West.**  -- Cat Kinde
-There are definitely problems with historical accuracy in this film. The major error was the fact that the gunfight did not even occur at the OK Corral. The gunfight took place near CS Flys Photographic Studio and Boarding House, six doors down from the Corral. Another thing that I feel as if this film downplays is how developed Tombstone, Arizona was for the time. The town had two dance halls, dozen gambling parlors, and twenty saloons. I feel as if they downplay this because the film only shows the one saloon.
+There are definitely problems with historical accuracy in this film. The major error was the fact that **the gunfight did not even occur at the OK Corral**. The gunfight took place near CS Flys Photographic Studio and Boarding House, six doors down from the Corral. Another thing that I feel as if this **film downplays is how developed Tombstone, Arizona was for the time**. The town had two dance halls, dozen gambling parlors, and twenty saloons. I feel as if they downplay this because the film only shows the one saloon.
 This film also does not portray Wyatt Earp accurately. He was never a cowboy and never owned cattle. In fact instead of being a “revered” marshal he was a fugitive of the law when he arrived at Tombstone. In reality, when he arrived in this town he was not just passing through instead he came there hoping to make a fortune in silver. Many believe that Earp was not better than the Clanton's, the difference was he had a badge.
-Another thing this film doesn't show is the fact that Virgil Earp was the person who carried the gunfight. Virgil Earp was the brother responsible for trying to restrict guns in Tombstone. It reported that he tried to convince the Clanton’s to drop their weapons (
+Another thing this film doesn't show is the fact that **Virgil Earp was the person who carried the gunfight**. Virgil Earp was the brother responsible for trying to restrict guns in Tombstone. It reported that he tried to convince the Clanton’s to drop their weapons (
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crrag6Yw_xs). -Megan Williams
 I think one of the more interesting inaccuracies in this movie was the depiction of Doc Holliday. There was a strong emphasis on him being a great surgeon. He even does surgery on Chihuahua after she is shot, unfortunately she still ends up dying. In reality, Doc Holliday was actually a dentist. Furthermore, he didn't die during the shootout. He died about six years later as a result of tuberculosis. The character of Chihuahua should also be mentioned again. She was obviously supposed to be a prostitute that was Doc Holliday's girl out west while Clementine was Doc Holliday's girl back home. In reality, the prostitutes name was "Big Nose Kate". She was from Hungary and had been with Doc Holliday for years. - Dan Dilks
-Among many inaccuracies in the story, one thing I noticed was the lack of Chinese characters in the film. The only characters that were not white were the Mexican characters and one Native American man that Wyatt Earp drags out of the saloon. Chinese immigrants were a large part of the west, many men came as a part of the gold rush, and others set up laundries, worked on the railroad, etc. this part of the west was not represented at all. —Helen Dhue
+Among many inaccuracies in the story, one thing I noticed was the lack of Chinese characters in the film. **The only characters that were not white were the Mexican characters and one Native American man that Wyatt Earp drags out of the saloon.** Chinese immigrants were a large part of the west, many men came as a part of the gold rush, and others set up laundries, worked on the railroad, etc. this part of the west was not represented at all. —Helen Dhue
@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 ====== III.	How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ======
-Despite the film being a classic western filled with many shootouts and gunslingers walking around, I would argue that //My Darling Clemintine// is actually pretty tame compared to the historical reality. Edward Buffum describes how a man was almost robbed and killed by 5 men before they were stopped by the town. In the trial, the judge asked the crowd what they thought the men's' punishment should be, the response was that they should be hung- //and they were//. Honestly, it felt more like I was reading something from the French Revolution than from 1800s America. Furthermore, women in the west are brushed aside entirely in the film. Chihuahua's character is fitting every stereotype of both Latina women and the saloon girl. Besides being a love interest Clemintine doesn't really have much substance to me, which is a shame because as a woman who came all the way out west on her own, I would have hoped she would have had more character. Letters written by Mary Abell show how difficult life was, having to deal with prairie fires, build a house from scratch, and when she gave birth, having no doctor nearby and no one to really help afterward. By comparison, Clementine really is living a "darling" life. --Cat Kinde
+Despite the film being a classic western filled with many shootouts and gunslingers walking around, I would argue that //My Darling Clemintine// is actually pretty tame compared to the historical reality. **Edward Buffum describes how a man was almost robbed and killed by 5 men before they were stopped by the town.** In the trial, the judge asked the crowd what they thought the men's' punishment should be, the response was that they should be hung- //and they were//. Honestly, it felt more like I was reading something from the French Revolution than from 1800s America. Furthermore, women in the west are brushed aside entirely in the film. **Chihuahua's character is fitting every stereotype of both Latina women and the saloon girl.** Besides being a love interest Clemintine doesn't really have much substance to me, which is a shame because as a woman who came all the way out west on her own, I would have hoped she would have had more character. Letters written by Mary Abell show how difficult life was, having to deal with prairie fires, build a house from scratch, and when she gave birth, having no doctor nearby and no one to really help afterward. By comparison, Clementine really is living a "darling" life. --Cat Kinde
-In this article (http://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/Film/Week9--MP--196-205.pdf), there is a section entitled “Theodore Roosevelt Describes Cowboy-Land, 1893.” Within this section, Roosevelt discusses how as cities start to grow the “instinct for the law asserts itself,” however until then “individual is obligated to be a law for himself.” He then goes onto discussing how reckless men, road agents, and murders have a good side to their characters. However, it is often hidden by bad choices because they are in an environment that forces them to make bad decisions. Roosevelt then says that men would do deeds that   “would be starting to dwellers in cities and in old settled places.”
+In this article (http://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/Film/Week9--MP--196-205.pdf), there is a section entitled “Theodore Roosevelt Describes Cowboy-Land, 1893.” Within this section, Roosevelt discusses how as cities start to grow the “instinct for the law asserts itself,” however until then “individual is obligated to be a law for himself.” **He then goes onto discussing how reckless men, road agents, and murders have a good side to their characters.** However, it is often hidden by bad choices because they are in an environment that forces them to make bad decisions. Roosevelt then says that men would do deeds that   “would be starting to dwellers in cities and in old settled places.”
-Based on this section the film’s overall interpretation deviates from this historical source. A big reason why it deviates is the fact that the Clanton family were constantly portrayed as these bad people when in reality they weren’t always bad. In fact, as this article suggests the behavior of men in the west moved on a spectrum from good to bad. For instance, Wyatt Earp was a wanted criminal but did good things as a Marshall. Another example was when one of the Clanton family members ran a lunch counter to help others. This film ignores this aspect because like most films they needed to have good guys and bad guys.-Megan Williams
+Based on this section the film’s overall interpretation deviates from this historical source. A big reason why it deviates is the fact that **the Clanton family were constantly portrayed as these bad people when in reality they weren’t always bad.** In fact, as this article suggests the behavior of men in the west moved on a spectrum from good to bad. For instance, Wyatt Earp was a wanted criminal but did good things as a Marshall. Another example was when one of the Clanton family members ran a lunch counter to help others. **This film ignores this aspect because like most films they needed to have good guys and bad guys.**-Megan Williams
-This movie makes living in the west, ignoring the lawlessness, seem easy which wasn't actually the case. Women couldn't afford to sit around and be taken care of. Based on the reading about female settlers in the west, women back then were very self sufficient and worked hard to take care of themselves and their family. Sister Monica's and Mary Abell's letters show how they shared the workload with the men and didn't try to be waited on. In comparison, Clementine seem to be a very tame character. She doesn't seem as independent or self-reliant, she takes on this damsel in distress persona. -Purnaja Podduturi
+This movie makes living in the west, ignoring the lawlessness, seem easy which wasn't actually the case. **Women couldn't afford to sit around and be taken care of.** Based on the reading about female settlers in the west, women back then were very self sufficient and worked hard to take care of themselves and their family. Sister Monica's and **Mary Abell's letters show how they shared the workload with the men and didn't try to be waited on.** In comparison, Clementine seem to be a very tame character. She doesn't seem as independent or self-reliant, she takes on this damsel in distress persona. -Purnaja Podduturi
-An important scene in the film, which sets Wyatt Earp up as the tough "do it yourself" good guy, was the scene when Wyatt reluctantly leaves the barber shop to deal with the drunk Indian who is shooting up the saloon. This scene represents not only a blatantly racist stereotype, but also a misinterpretation of historical evidence. From this article http://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/Film/Week9NewSouthExpandingWest.pdf we see that violent interactions with Native people in the West was most often started by whites, not the other way around. Also, when there were instances of violent incidents started by Natives, it was often in retaliation or something that was completely exaggerated by white newspapers. According to sources, it probably would have been rare to see instances of lone Natives shooting up small-town saloons completely unprovoked, and is just an example of racist stereotypes used to create a "good" and "bad" narrative. - Wilson LeCount
+An important scene in the film, which sets Wyatt Earp up as the tough "do it yourself" good guy, was the scene when Wyatt reluctantly leaves the barber shop to deal with the drunk Indian who is shooting up the saloon. **This scene represents not only a blatantly racist stereotype, but also a misinterpretation of historical evidence.** From this article http://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/Film/Week9NewSouthExpandingWest.pdf we see that violent interactions with Native people in the West was most often started by whites, not the other way around. Also, when there were instances of violent incidents started by Natives, it was often in retaliation or something that was completely exaggerated by white newspapers. According to sources, **it probably would have been rare to see instances of lone Natives shooting up small-town saloons completely unprovoked**, and is just an example of racist stereotypes used to create a "good" and "bad" narrative. - Wilson LeCount
 ====== IV.	How does this movie work as a primary source about the time period in which it was made or the filmmakers? ======