Gunsmoke TV series – character archetypes in the Classic Western – Part 1 – The Lawman

Gunsmoke TV series are a solid adult western TV series that were aired in the mid-50s and were running for impressive 20 years.

Preceded by Radio series of the same name, series went from a half-an-hour black and white to one-hour colour episodes.

There are two characters in the series that stayed until the end – both defined by their occupations: the protagonist Marshall Matt Dillon and “Doc” Adams (more about Doc Adams in a separate post – coming soon).

Originally the role of Marshall Matt Dillon was offered to John Wayne, but he turned it down believing that TV is not his thing and recommended his friend James Arness. Wayne also recorded a small opening for the TV series.

It’s interesting how similar Arness is in his acting to Wayne, both in the general image of the characters they create and in small details such as the delivery of lines.

The Lawman – Marshall Dillon

James Arness as Matt Dillon

The Lawman – James Arness as Matt Dillon

Matt Dillon is calm, reliable, strongheaded and tough. And he is a good example of a different mindset that characters had in the classic western comparing to the modern ones.

Upholding the law is his job, the job he loves, as a professional. It’s not about the believe that he helps to bring justice – in Season 11 Episode 03 he clearly states, talking to Thad:

That’s one of the things you have to learn about the law – justice is sometimes pretty hard to come by.

Marshal Matt Dillon (season 11 episode 3)

But in no way that suggests that, like some of the more modern Lawman characters, he takes the justice in his own hands. Quite the opposite, as the Force of Order, he does his job as required, following the law and not breaking his oath under any circumstances. Even when he personally disagrees with it, which tends to happen quite often.

He is prepared to die performing his duties. Because doing his job right is a matter of honor.

The bigest dilemma for him is when performing his duties he has to take in people who became his friends. There is a beautiful dramatic ending in the episode “Perce” (season 7 episode 1) when he is so obviously struggling with an impossible choice. Video fragment of that scene (opens in a new window)

Perce, why didn’t you get out of town? Why didn’t you run!

Marshal Matt Dillon (season 7 episode 1)

He also turns in his badge after killing a man who was his friend long time ago. Killing him, because he mistakenly thought it’s self-defense, that now-a-criminal ex-friend is trying to trick him. After that, when he gets back to Dodge, he is seen for the first time being openly rude to his friend and assistant Festus, losing control in his anger at himself. Although his love for the job proves to be stronger, that killing has a major impact on him.

In and around Dodge his authority is pretty much absolute. The Lawman in a classic western is not a team worker, he is an individualist. Even though he has assistants to look after Dodge when he is gone or help him from time to time, these assistants are his friends, not just workers.

At the same time with being the force of Order in the Chaos of the Wild West, he needs the Chaos to exist. In a reality where Chaos is minimal and Order has prevailed there is no place for this type of lawman. If you imagine a character like that within an organization, with superior officers – he wouldn’t last there long. He acknowledges that himself, in a conversation with Doc Adams, when he says that there probably will come a day when the type of criminals that live in the West now will disappear and with them his type of lawmen will go. To which Doc replies that he hopes this day will never come.

 

P.s.

I was wondering for a long time what exactly is the reason for a big hatred shared by all the main characters towards the bounty hunters. Then I heard this line from Matt in response to an explanation that “They are the necessary evil, they bring in the wanted men that you and I just don’t have the time to hunt down”.

Oh, he brings them in alright, usually with a bullet in the back

Matt Dillon

The voice of the classic westerns – Frankie Laine

A fantastic singer, the voice of so many classic western theme songs – Frankie Laine. Incredible talent, so recognizable. I love the optimistic, heroic mood of his songs.

Here is a selection of my personal favorites.

Gunfight at the OK Corral:

 

Man without a star:

Rawhide:

 

Bowie knife:

 

Gunslinger:

 

Mule train:

 

The Kid’s last fight:

 

That’s my desire:

 

P.s.

A funny version of the “Mule Train“:

John Henry “Doc” Holliday – The Deadly Dentist in the Classic Western Era – part 4: “Maverick” TV series – Peter Breck

Maverick TV series (1957-1962) 

This 50s TV series feature two different takes on Doc Holliday – a darker, fatalistic one by Gerald Mohr and a lively, moody, leaning-towards-comedy by Peter Breck.

Peter Breck as “Doc” Holliday

Peter Breck as Doc Holliday - Maverick TV series - ep.

Peter Breck as Doc Holliday – Maverick TV series – ep. “A technical error”

Peter Breck’s Doc Holliday portrayal combines great humor and a sufficient amount of menace expected from the moody gunfighter. He is absolutely charming, yet dangerous and pretty much steals the screen.

The writers played with the canonical image of Doc Holliday as a hard-drinking gambler and gunfighter, blending it into the Maverick TV series comedy tone with money-as-the-main-agenda routine. They gave Doc great lines of dialogue and Breck done brilliantly with bringing them to life.

Maverick

Maverick “Triple Indemnity”

Bart Maverick:How are you, Doc?
Doc Holliday: Not too drunk to protect my own interests. This is Helen. Keep your hands off her. Helen, this is Bart Maverick. As far as you are concerned he doesn’t exist. I only introduce him to you because I am polite and now just forget it.

Doc here drinks his whiskey, smokes his cigars and switches from a friendly laughter into a menacing heavy gaze in less than a second. He also has delightfully refined ways of humiliating people.

A man: Holliday, better get things fixed - a lot depends on it. Doc: If it'll take a load of your rather insignificant little mind, I should tell you that I've arranged to delay the train for at least 5 hours. A man: There's no need to be rude... Doc: A very bad habbit of mine. But you could help me overcome it. By keeping your revolting person out of my sight.

ep. “One of our trains is missing”

A man: Holliday, better get things fixed – a lot depends on it.
Doc: If it’ll take a load of your rather insignificant little mind, I should tell you that I’ve arranged to delay the train for at least 5 hours.
A man: There’s no need to be rude…
Doc: A very bad habbit of mine. But you could help me overcome it. By keeping your revolting person out of my sight.

Notably, his ability with guns is mostly referenced and he only actually gets to use it a bit in the last episode.

Peter Breck’s interpretation of Doc Holliday’s character became one of the two of my favorite Holliday’s portrayals – the other one being Kirk Douglas’s Doc in “the Gunfight at the OK Corral”.

It is a mystery to me why Warner Brothers didn’t bring in Peter Breck as Doc as a regular character to replace an empty spot left for the second central character. Their playing of each other with Jack Kelly is also very enjoyable.

Peter Breck and Jack Kelly

Peter Breck and Jack Kelly

Or they could have made a spin-off about him after Maverick TV series got canceled in the 5th season. Anyways, it’s a pity that they are so few episodes with Peter Breck as Holliday.


 

John Henry “Doc” Holliday – The Deadly Dentist in the Classic Western Era – links to previous posts:

Part 3

Part 2

Part 1

The Big Valley (1965-1969)

The Big Valley are rather popular 60s TV Series with lots of positive reviews on IMDB, made at the time of the TV westerns craze.

the big valley 60s tv series

the big valley

After watching the first season, they left me wondering why they were so popular… The writing of the show is very poor, dragging it dangerously close to a soap opera (e.g character ending up with an almost broken back in an overly dramatized way for no other reason, but to add drama).

The show has a lot of generic plot devices and miraculous  absolutely predictable happy endings. I don’t mind happy endings as such, just give me a solid plot twist that would turn the things around in a believable way. And believability is something the show definitely lacks.

Peter Breck – an outstanding (and underrated) actor – is limited here by a dreadful script.

Every episode ends up to be a moral tale to teach (preach at) the audience what’s good and what’s bad – one can actually replace the episode titles with something like “generosity tale”, “self-sacrifice tale” etc.

The bad guys usually accept the moral superiority of the Barkleys family (or, rarely, they die).

If you are fan of these TV series – please shed some light in the comments on why they are so great…

P.S.

Considering how big the emphases on the moral of the tale is in this show (and I personally can’t stand preaching), some episodes left me stunned by their ideas of a moral high road. In one of the episodes Nick Barkley ( Peter Breck ) walking with a woman who took care of him while he was sick (with rabbis – don’t even get me started on the believability) gets ambushed from behind by two armed men. All they want is his money which they request him to throw “over your shoulder”.

I never saw in any classic western before a protagonist to be that stupid to engage in a shootout from this position. When you are standing your back to 2 armed guys with their guns already at you (and there is a woman standing right next to him, remember), one thing you don’t do – you don’t turn around to shoot. Because at least one of you will get shot. Yes, he attempts to shoot and at the same time to throw the woman to the side out of the line of fire, but she, predictably, gets shot. And dies hours later.

Now, our highly moral protagonist takes that situation rather well – not much of the remorse of getting her killed there. Not when she dies nor later in the episode, with him being in a pretty jolly mood by the end of the episode.

 

What happened to “Doc” Holliday after 1957 – part 1

Doc (1971)

It’s just remarkable how far away from the actual history can be a move that claims to “finally” tell the true story. That movie is “Doc” (1971) – a typical for it’s time revisionist western and an otherwise mediocre film at best.

“Doc” there is a victim of a very greedy cold-hearted Wyatt. “Doc’s” only desire is to leave with Kate to California, settle down with her and have kids together. Probably, the real historical Kate would love this version of events, but it certainly doesn’t have anything to do with the truth.

The film is trying to win over its audience by putting the legend of the Gunfight at the OK Corral to its head and presenting the Clantons as a herd of innocent lambs, who were surrendering at the OK Corral at the first request from the Earps and despite that slaughtered by the Earp brothers and the reluctantly participating “Doc”.

Doc (1971)

Doc (1971)

Western – genre, not a setting

It is quite a popular point of view to identify western with the movies set in the 19th century US Frontier, which leads to the idea that western is not a genre, but merely a setting.

The narrative

In film theory, genre refers to the method based on similarities in the narrative elements from which films are constructed.

Wikipedia

Are there purely structural narrative characteristics that distinguish the western as the genre?

In the majority of Classic Westerns the pace of the story is quite slow in the first and second acts, with a lot of dialogues and little action. The third act on the contrary gets almost all the action. It usually has a major gunfight towards the end.

The scale of events

The story of the westerns can have many different themes – friendship, love, family etc. But it is always on a “small scale” – it’s a story of an individual with the historical events in the background at best.

The myth

While period drama is expected to accurately represent a certain age, western is a myth with particular set of ideas and attitudes. It often deals with the topics of individual freedom (lawless Frontier vs civilized East). And has it’s own particular type of protagonist.

It usually doesn’t have one clear antagonist, but instead has a faceless group that opposes an individual, which is symbolic in itself.

Western Genre

In the end, Western genre has it’s own narrative structure, specific type of a protagonist and deals with the American Myth, the archetypes and a way of life particular to the genre. These characteristic can be used to construct a Western genre film in any setting/period.

The Classic Western protagonist archetype.

In a classic western the protagonist is an embodiment of the Frontier – he is strong-willed, individualistic with a temper that can’t be tamed, keen to defend himself and his interests in a fair fight and with a real big hate for any attempts to restrict his personal freedom.

Classic Western protagonist - strong-willed, individualistic with a temper that can't be tamed, keen to defend himself and his interests in a fair fight...

Classic Western protagonist – strong-willed, individualistic with a temper that can’t be tamed, keen to defend himself and his interests in a fair fight…

Personal Code

 This kind of protagonist is not society-oriented, he has his own code to follow and usually claims to “mind his business” unless crossed. That comes from the individualism and respect for other people freedom ( “minding one’s business” has it’s limits though – as the protagonist code of honor usually (if not always) gets him involved in defending women ( never against their will ‘though) or fighting those who “shoot in the back” (fight unfairly).

“Lonely are the Brave” – fair fight against one armed man – “I’ll fight with one arm behind my back”

Loner

Quite often the protagonist is a drifter as his desire for freedom forces him to be constantly on the move. More rarely – a town marshal/sheriff.

Usually they don’t have a family as their way of life contradicts the very idea of settling down. And often the absence of a family is a big hole inside of them – with a friend/relative shown as a settled down person for the contrast. Sometimes with the wife of the friend/relative being a long-lost love interest of the protagonist ( “the Searchers”, “Lonely are the Brave”).

Or in the course of action their friend settles down, while the protagonist continues his ride.

In more rare cases, the protagonist abandons his way of life – Wyatt Earp in “the Gunfight at the OK Corral” to settle down – though that’s a case of two protagonists in the movie with the second one – Doc – being the one who “continuous his ride”.

In “the Angel and the Badman” John Wayne’s character sacrifices his way of life to stay with the girl he loves.

Destined to be destroyed

Not always, but quite often the protagonists are destined to be destroyed in the Classic Western, even ‘though they don’t get killed by the end of the movie – there is a certain sense that as the Old West itself, they will seize to exist, either by changing their ways or by getting killed (outside of the scope of the movie). That adds particular sad tones to the generally upbeat tone of the western films.