B-Western and the Western…


Authentic cowboys. Land. And ranch-life typifies the B-Western formula for ratings, mostly, however, what’s applied stereotypically and romantically, whether the cowboy, land, or ranch. Some consider the valued trilogy juxtaposed mundane; yet, depending contextually the B-Western formula depends on stereotyping what’s not authentic, ethnically realistic. The story line of the cowboy may intend to be realistic, not enough of the land is, however; but ranch life equal to character-romantic lives are simply formulaic–my opinion. Westerns, B-Westerns, have been around since 1937 per Arthur McClure and Ken O. Jones in Western Films Heroes, Heavies and Sagebrush.

 What’s authentic are gun belts, hats, boots, the cowgirl/cowboy, not necessarily the clothes worn on television or in film. Though I think the B-Western, where B-Westerns seem synonymous with pop culture and with genres, both B-Westerns and pop culture, 1937, inclusive of B-Westerns, was ahead of its time. Pop culture, a credible genre itself, doesn’t fit well with B-Westerns simply because I think subject matter. Especially , too, humans and land should be replicated authentically to get the best, realistic presence television and/or film can offer.

For so long, some have complained about the authenticity of the B-Western, its formula of just idealistically romanticizing people, places, and predicaments, which doesn’t capture what the West, Midwest, and land-East is about. I think if the B-Western was replaced, a viewer/viewers would see the obvious. You want an A-Western, one that authenticates what’s already with an originally-angled story line.

Like, B-Westerns, genres compartmentalize, and they did, past-to-land, ranch-to-land, cowboy/cowgirl, cowgirl/cowboy-to-town-land-ranch. B-Westerns needed to be to be more than novelties with unrealistic emotionally romantic pervasiveness, meaning forcing something unconventional for viewer-connection, which equals ratings. A novelty can be a conversation piece. Land isn’t novel. Ranches aren’t novel. Cowgirls/cowboys-cowboys/cowgirls aren’t novel. Some of what they do is novel and how they did it is novel; so we, as audience members, aren’t just looking at “a set in frame of scenic and mimic detail which is true to reality” (12).Idealizing romanticism with or without altruistic race-culture means not  remotely conveying  what  should have been conveyed–realistic compositions of characters. Again scenes that don’t mimic  and don’t engineer what’s coined B-Western or not no matter the authentic composition means with characters, dialogue, scenes not generically romanticized, told and seen, for the sake of audience, ratings–not solely just for money.



Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s