MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Title: 'Until the Iron Horse came, the Stagecoach was the only means of travel on the untamed American frontier. Braving all dangers, these Concord coaches -- the "streamliners" of their day -- spanned on schedule wild, desolate stretches of desert and mountainland in the Southwest, where in 1875 the savage struggle of the Indians to oust the white invader was drawing to a close. At the time no name struck more terror into the hearts of travellers than that of GERONIMO -- leader of those Apaches who preferred death rather than submit to the white man's will.'... Opening to Stagecoach (1939) I caught a big part of Stagecoach (1939)the other night and some dialogue within a certain context caught me by surprise. I was so struck by some of the dialogue that I just had to locate a copy of the original Script for that film on the internet. I thought about the fact that this film was 72 years old (You can add another sixty-five years to that if you wish to go back to the temporal context of the plot in that film) and it occurred to me as to how the more things change, the more they remain the same. The plot of this film is really Chaucerian when you think about it. After the plot is set up properly a number of folks with diverse backgrounds and diverse purposes attempt to reach the sacred city of Lordsburg. There is a minister and a drunken doctor and a pretty lady and a hooker and a liquor salesman... and they pick up other folks along the way including a criminal (Ringo) who just escaped from prison but had the same misfortune as Richard III in that his horse failed him at the wrong time and in the wrong place. We all know that the Transcontinental Railroad had been completed by the end of the Civil War. But even ten years later the infrastructure for our railroads was not exactly pristine so that in your wilderness travels you might find yourself riding in some dusty, rocky and undependable stage coach. The coach might stop at some watering hole and drop somebody off and pick up someone else along the way. And to complicate matters, as the set up demonstrates, a fellow named Geronimo had had enough; the Indian Wars were not yet over and animosity reigned supreme over the untamed West. So the private corporation running the stagecoaches had to depend upon the Army/Cavalry as its escort service. Now sometimes the Cavalry would be dependable and cooperative. Other times the Cavalry might have to leave you in the lurch so that the occupants and the drivers were forced to cross their fingers and hope for the best whilst the Army took off in another direction to stave off some Injun Attacks made upon other 'innocent' Americans! Toward the beginning of the film, some Wells Fargo outfit delivers the cash payroll to the Tonto Bank operated by a delightful fellow who goes by the name of Henry Gatewood: "Outside the Tonto Bank, we focus on the glass panels of the bank door. White letters on one side read: MINERS' AND CATTLEMEN'S BANK and on the other: CAPITAL $50,000 -- ASSETS $250,000. The bank is situated across from the Oriental Saloon and we can see the stagecoach reflected in the glass, with a crowd of people around it watching as fresh horses are hitched up."
Dissolve to the interior of the bank. The two Wells Fargo agents appear, heaving the large iron treasure box onto the counter in front of Henry Gatewood, a prosperous-looking gentleman, who stands behind the counter. He seems to be an important man who commands respect in this Arizona frontier town. A big, old-fashioned iron safe is in a corner behind the counter. At the front of the office there is a wicket, and an old cashier is doing some business with a couple of ranchers. WELLS FARGO AGENT Payroll, Mister Gatewood. GATEWOOD You know, ever since I opened this bank, I've been trying to tell those people to deposit their payrolls here six months in advance. It's good, sound business. Gatewood begins to write a receipt as the Agent takes a package of money from the box and puts it on the counter. WELLS FARGO AGENT (pleasantly) It's good business for you, Mr. Gatewood. GATEWOOD Here's your receipt. Fifty thousand dollars. He smiles affably. GATEWOOD And remember this -- what's good business for the banks is good for the country.
So we learn that banks wanted their monies (that were really not their monies at all) as quick as possible so that more monies could be made off of the monies that were not theirs to begin with prior to the time that payroll would be made by the mining and lumber interests sustaining the area.
That would be kind of nice would it not? I mean to be able to use someone else's monies for six frickin months for free?
And risk those payroll funds that do not belong to you without giving proper notice to the slaves working in the mines and the forests?
What's good for business is good for the country!
Now even back in 1875 (and certainly 1939) the corporate interests as well as the governmental interests were most precarious. So disclaimers were always to be had:
LT. BLANCHARD We're going with you as far as the noon station at Dry Fork. There's a troop of cavalry there. They'll take you on to Apache Wells. From Apache Wells you'll have another escort of soldiers into Lordsburg. You must warn your passengers that they travel at their own risk.
WE TOLD YOU THERE WOULD BE RISKS!
Human nature at work! Always always always pass the buck! This is the American Way. And these corporate interests and these banking interests were not worth shite without the Army (read government). But Gatewood wants no part of having to pay taxes in order to be shielded from the dangers of his locality. ha
Now we come to the most relevant prose of the movie. Gatewood is proselytizing like McConnell at a Kentucky town meeting and the only person who has only half an interest in the banker's pronouncements is the drunken doc:
GATEWOOD (off) I'll report him to Washington! We pay taxes to the government and what do we get? Not even protection from the Army! Peacock is now seen in close-up with Doc Boone just in shot, his hand rearranging the scarf so that it practically covers Peacock's face. While Gatewood continues to hold forth, Doc Boone cleans the dust from Peacock's face. GATEWOOD (off) I don't know what the government's coming to! Instead of protecting businessmen, it's poking its nose into business. Cut back to the same shot of Dallas and Gatewood. GATEWOOD Why, they're talking now about having bank examiners... (he snorts) ...as if we didn't know how to run our own banks. The stagecoach is going really fast and a stiff breeze is coming through the windows. Dallas desperately tries to rearrange her hat, which is being blown about. Cut back to Peacock and Doc Boone, who pulls a bottle from the sample-case and holds it up to Peacock ingratiatingly. Peacock does not protest. So Doc Boone takes a large swallow... GATEWOOD (off) I actually had a letter, from some popinjay official, saying they were going to inspect my books! I have a programme, gentlemen, that should be blazoned on every newspaper in the country. Gatewood now addresses his remarks to Lucy, as the most worthy of attention. GATEWOOD America for Americans! Don't let the government meddle with business! Reduce taxes! Our national debt is shocking... GATEWOOD (off) ...over a billion dollars! What the country needs is a businessman for President! DOC (amiably, holding up a bottle) What the country needs is more bottle. He points to the bottle. PEACOCK What? DOC (affably) Bottle! Dallas, sitting next to Gatewood, has her eyes closed and her head leaning against the back of the seat. GATEWOOD You're drunk, sir. Doc Boone's smile fades as he turns indignantly to Gatewood. DOC I'm happy, Gatewood. Woof!
I am beginning to think that the RNC and the repub Congress and the silly clowns running for President have speechwriters who simply search the net for their inspirational prayers and speeches.
HA!
72 years later (or 136 years later depending upon the believability of the script) bankers still wish to make money off of other people's labors, bankers still do not wish to be audited by independent agents and bankers in the end do not wish be held accountable for anything except for false patriotism. HA!
State and federal prosecutors are pressing to complete a proposed settlement with the nation’s five largest home loan companies over alleged mortgage abuses, even though they’ve only initiated a limited investigation that hasn't examined the full extent of the alleged wrongdoing, according to interviews with more than two dozen officials and others familiar with the state and federal probes.
The deal with the mortgage companies would broadly absolve the firms of wrongdoing in exchange for penalties reaching $30 billion and assurances that the firms will adhere to better practices going forward, these sources told The Huffington Post. Negotiators met in Washington last week to hash out the settlement. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/11/foreclosure-fraud-investigation-questions_n_892661.html
Here is what pisses me off—I mean besides the fact that the felons wish to only pay a five billion dollar fine.
First, I am taken back to the Civil War when young boys were conscripted into service (read enslaved) whilst pigs like Grover Cleveland could purchase their way out of any real danger.
If you were conscripted and were without adequate funds, you went to war or you went to prison! I actually knew kids who went to prison rather than go to war.
These pricks are given the opportunity per a partnership of the State and Federal Governments to pay up and avoid prison.
That just pisses me off. Negotiations?
Where is Sam Waterston in all of this?
Second, these mortgage companies did far more damage than $30 billion dollars—hell that investment prick Madoff did more damage than that all by himself.
Third, the felonies took place from 2005 to the present date. These bastards paid themselves and the top tier management ten times this amount in bonuses and salaries and parachutes and dancing girls and wine!
If we have the goods on some top drug dealers in this country we simply go in and confiscate every motherfricking thing those drug dealers own BEFORE THEY ARE EVEN ARRAIGNED OR INDICTED!
The drug dealers are not allowed to have their own attorneys BECAUSE ATTORNEYS CANNOT BE PAID FRUIT COMING FROM THE POISONOUS TREE!
Okay, that's enough.
I just know that as I see and hear Gatewood I know...I mean I already know he is a no good hypocritical felon! ha
I cannot wrap this up without relaying the single greatest line of the entire movie:
RINGO Well, I guess you can't break out of prison and into society in the same week.
Comments
Brilliant post, Richard.
Gatewood is a perfect character, a perennial type. Like rats, cockroaches and fleas, I suppose we will never be rid of bankers.
An interesting note about the script for Stagecoach. It was written by Dudley Nichols, with contributions from Ben Hecht. Nichols was the first person ever to decline an Oscar, which the Academy awarded for his earlier film, The Informer. Why did he turn down the Oscar? Because his union, the Screen Writers Guild, was on strike at the time. He supported his fellow screen writers even at great sacrifice to himself. That's something we don't see too much of these days.
At the opposite end of the spectrum is John Wayne, who played the criminal, Ringo, and it was the role that made his career. Too bad. Wayne became the quintessential Tea Party role model, ostentatiously flaunting his public patriotism but seeking draft deferment to avoid personal involvement in WWII, even while many of Hollywood's leading men voluntarily enlisted; standing up for all-American virtues while chasing skirts around the set and exploding into mean, drunken rages; promoting white supremacy and all-out war in Vietnam. A prince of a fellow, really.
I guess we'll never be rid of the John Waynes in our society, either.
But why did we let them take us over?
by Red Planet on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 11:54am
Well thank you Red!
Like cockroaches, rats and fleas...hahahah
I was just so struck by the dialog in this film!
And this is one of those few films I will watch with Wayne in the starring role!
by Richard Day on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 12:12pm
One of my favorite Westerns, (along with My Darling Clementine, and The Unforgiven and ... well, the list goes on from there.) Stagecoach has so many wonderful scenes. As someone pointed out on TCM the other day, the John Wayne character is so naive that even towards the end, he doesn't realize the woman he's in love with is a prostitute. But that's also part of the mythos of the West; it's a place where you can start over and remake yourself. The characters are all wonderful archetypes and they play well off each other.
Your take on the similarities between then and now is spot on, of course, but, to me, the real difference between 1875, 1939 and 2011 is that in 2011 there are masses of ordinary folks that have been convinced to not only root for Gatewood, but send the little money they have to politicians to help Gatewood succeed. The extras in the bar are now tea-baggers with torches. hahaha
Reagan's speechwriters used to spit out regurgited Frank Capra scenarios with a far right spin put on them. It was crap but was a little easier to do in the 80's when far right spin wasn't so radically insane. The current crop of Conservative speechwriters are finding it difficult to graft their utter nonsense onto nostalgic scenarios. And unfortunately for them, there are no right-wing heartwarmingly nostalgic scenarios for them to purloin, unless they want to write about Gordon Gekko or John Galt... oh wait, they've tried that.
.
by MrSmith1 on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 2:43pm
A little more 'reality' in the 30's take on things than the 50's take on things. ha
Eastwood throws all that 50's bull crap right out into the frickin street!
I had forgotten the magic of Stagecoach and it really just hit me that there would be parallels to Canterbury Tales!
Although there is only one from each class and Chaucer gives us five or more characters alone who are associated with the Church...but there are fewer characters that can travel in a stagecoach.
I do believe that no one in the Army or the local towns or the coach would have contributed ten cents to the banker or for the benefit of his partisan views. hahahahahah
by Richard Day on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 3:33pm
I was just thinking that the situation reminded me of Guy de Maupassant's Boule de Suif (Ball of Fat), and it looks like someone at Wikipedia had the same idea:
Boule de Suif is a very appropriate short story for today's politics.
by Donal on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 3:46pm
I did not see this!
This is terrific!
Maupassant would have certainly read Chaucer. hahahaha
I missed this; thank you Donal!
I gotta find this play on the net!
It was LORDSBURG that really got to me. I mean Lordsburg or Mecca or Canterbury...the journey to God's place!
by Richard Day on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:18pm
I saw Stage Coach again for the first time since Lehman went down two months ago (showed it to the son of a Spanish friend) and I really enjoyed the way the banker was treated in FDR's America. The best western ever made and John Wayne's best performance ever IMHO.
by David Seaton on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:25pm
David they--the critics who have some historical background--have been saying that for decades and I really never swallowed that take until last week!
And as Red points out, one of the writers would be classified as a commie in the fifties!
Yeah. What a film.
And yet it stars my most unfavorite actor; John the frickin Wayne!
And yet there is America on the screen
There is Andy Divine!
There is Claire Trevor!
There is John Carradine for chrissakes!
And then there is the fact that as much as we are sickened by the portrayal of Amerindians by Jews and Italians with large noses; Europe went nuts over our Cowboys and Indians. hahahahahaha
The next time TCM plays this flick, I will stay awake till the end.
I mean the first time i was presented with this cinematic wonder I was probably five watching a BW. hahahahah
by Richard Day on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:41pm
by Red Planet on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 1:39pm
by smithers_T on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 7:35pm
Well....
People being people and not always the luckiest people tend to err.
First of all, if there is some regulatory agency with laws protecting the public already in place the first problem revolves around the revolving door. If you are not a member of the elite and if you are 'just starting out', why would you want to piss off some big institution?
So we have a situation where an accountant or accountant/attorney specializing in mortgage banking is supposed to be monitoring BOA and its activities. MAGICALLY, that individual puts in five years in government service and finds a job with BOA.
Second, Bush and Obama nominate 'winners' to head their departments. The reasoning is that the best of the best should be in charge of regulating the biggest corporations. But if you once ran Goldman/Sachs, are you really going to be able to monitor the activities of your old friends?
I do not care what industry you are talking about. Cheney ran a company that survived on government contracts--from several different countries. And after he was made Vice President, that company ended up with a record number of defense contracts. Hundreds of billions of dollars in defense contracts--many of those contracts were had without competition.
Third, certain regulatory agencies do not have enough staff to hand their duties as prescribed by law. The SEC could be making our government a lot more money if it had enough folks working on each project. Madoff would never have gotten away with what he had been doing if the laws already put in place had been adequately enforced.
Fourth, we set up an FDIC so that the 'average Joe' does not have to worry about losing his small stash because insurance was put in place. If the bank fails, you can get all your monies back assuming you have less than $250 gs stored in that bank.
Greed and conflicts of interests and nepotism and....so many variables screw up governmental functions.
What banking institutions wish to do is to make as much money as fast as possible and take absolutely no personal risks as far as results. If they win a lot of money for their corporations, they expect to receive a percentage of the winnings. If they lose a lot of money for their corporations--if the bets go bad, they still feel out of a sense of class elitism that they are entitled to a lot of money.
Maybe some folks on the left are dreamers caught up in the myth of Eliot Ness.
But this country needs more people dedicated to real public service.
We need more Untouchables! ha
by Richard Day on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 11:18pm
Or in the case of many good Progressive candidates for public service, The Un-nominate-ables!
by MrSmith1 on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 12:49am
hahahahahah
Reminds me of the time I wrote about doppelgangers and somebody talked about Ted Koppelganger. hahahah
by Richard Day on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 1:17am
Agreed.
But since the executive branch and its financial regulatory elite are owned by the "banksters", the dedicated public service will have to come from somewhere else.
Where?
By the way, Ron Paul has some Eliot Ness-esque ideas in him regarding this. He may oppose raising the debt, but he's unafraid to come at the banks from other directions.
I have worked in public service all my life and I started out loving it and dedicated to it. But I can tell you there is no room for that attitude. It's driven out like the plague.
It seems to me the tax structure is the biggest obstacle of all. It shelters criminals who don't report income. The Fair tax would do those guys in in one fell swoop.
So you have other ideas? I don't believe there's room for pessimism in something like this. But it also must (somehow, how I don't know) be bipartisan, or it won't work.
Curiously,
T. Smithers
by smithers_T on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 1:09am
Arthur!!!! You're in Minnesota aren't you? No beer?????? No cigs?????? Are you going to be okay????????
by stillidealistic on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 1:55am
Hey Dick. Looks like a buncha people had the same Stagecoach idea as you - Krugman, who got it from Digby, who got it from some movie reviewer.
Still. I think you got it first. Intelleckshuall thieves, I tells ya, theyr evrywhars.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/06/stagecoach-economics/
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/popinjays-and-shaketails.html
by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 08/07/2011 - 11:31am
Damn straight I got it first! ha
Thanks. Makes my day!
by Richard Day on Sun, 08/07/2011 - 11:47am
That movie reviewer you refer to published his post almost a year before yours:
http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/blog/2010/08/the-real-villain-of-john-fords-stagecoach-1939.html
Boule de Suif was also the inspiration for "Mademoiselle Fifi" directed by Robert Wise.
by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 4:22am
Anonymous, you got to tell me who you are for christ's sake. ahhahaahah
I had two too many and hit three links, your two and another one that was linked in the links so to speak. hahahaha
I am so boring but I tell ya if a conversation can turn from the present to Chaucer and then a Frenchman and then a....
I love that!
Anyway I hit your links past, and simply published this link. hahahahahah
Nobody will respond of course!
Although i was only the 22nd commenter on Krugman's link, but Krugman is my hero next to Reich. hahahahah
by Richard Day on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 4:52am