The Western and the Irrational

[turoldus]

James,

I don't get the point of your last post. "Stagecoach" is a fictional work whereas The Greeks and the Irrational is an academic lecture supposedly grounded in historical fact. Ford's prejudices do not invalidate the value of his work, while Dodds' may diminish his if they conflict with facts. To compare them doesn't make any sense, at least to me.

Also, I'd like to take issue with this:

When we watch Stagecoach today, the simply dichotomy between good whites and bad Indians is shockingly racist.

I don't think all of the whites in Stagecoach can be said to be "good" (Carradine comes to mind) and the Indians in the film have always seemed to me more of a plot device than actual characters, let alone a political statement.

[James Hannam]

I've got to admit that the post didn't quite work. I was making two points - that what once seemed radical can become obvious or even cliched, while what was once commonplace can cease to be acceptable or even be shocking. And both these things can be found in the same work, whether it is fiction or non-fiction.

I think Stagecoach is a great film and The Greeks and the Irrational a pretty good book. But what is distinctive about them has changed in the fifty years since they first appeared.

On the racism of Stagecoach, I think the fact it is so implicit is more revealing than if Ford had been out to make a point that Indians are bad.

Best wishes

James