Talk:Lonesome Dove

Origins - (Feb. 2006)

The real origins of Lonesome Dove can be found in the movies Bandolero and Cheyenne Social Club.

Bandolero in particular is easily seen to be the basis of LD. Just read LD and watch Bandolero. Just listen and read for the names of the characters and what they do in the movie and the book. Several characters have the exact same name (e.g., July Johnson, Dee Boot, etc), and do the same thing in the book and movie.

Check it out if you do not believe me.

4.231.104.131 (talk · contribs) at 23:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

McMurtry's original screenplay dates from the same period as Bandolero! (1968) and Cheyenne Social Club (1970), both written by the same screenwriter, James Lee Barrett. However, on the basis of plot descriptions, the central theme of McMurtry's novel, a cattle drive, does not seem to be a feature of either of these films written by Barrett.

The likelier source is a cattle-drive novel Log of a Cowboy (1903) written by Andy Adams. McMurtry's novel follows the events of this novel almost scene for scene, and there are also similar character names and incidents.

66.74.12.59 (talk) 16:45, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

=======

Um, the similarities of Bandolero and Lonesome Dove are not really open to debate. Your statement that "the central theme of McMurtry's novel, a cattle drive, does not seem to be a feature of either of these films written by Barrett" avoids the issue.

I guess I have to expand this out for you (well, you are not really interested in whether there are any similarities. That is clear. But I do so for those who might actually BE interested.

1) there is a sheriff named July Johnson in both Bandolero and Lonesome Dove. Both of them are looking for their wives, who have run away. Any objective observer will note that July is an extremely rare name. In fact, outside of Bandolero and LD, I would bet that you would not find one person in all of moviedom and literature named July.

Kind of a coincidence, huh?

2) Both LD and Bandolero have an outlaw named Dee Boots. Kind of an unusual name, Dee Boots. Boots as a last name? Basically unique. (Edit mine:In Bandolero, it's Dee Bishop, not Dee Boot.) And both have a deputy named Rosco. Only one sheriff is married. Bandolero sheriff is interested in the woman, but not married to her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100C:B02A:FFEC:1AFC:EA2B:B730:FBD4 (talk) 01:53, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

There are at least 5 other similarities, which I will not go into. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.240.69 (talk) 21:42, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

References

Deets & Blue Duck - (Aug. 2006)

I've read Lonesome Dove and watched the mini-series repeatedly, and I don't remember any reference to Deets being an escaped slave. Further, I don't recall any reference to Blue Duck's ancestry. I may have missed these details, though, or were they stated somewhere other than Lonesome Dove? 216.39.180.60 cneron 22:37, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Blue Duck is the half Mexican son of the Comanche war chief, Buffalo Hump, whose other son Call shoots in the Brazos River in "Dead Man's Walk". In "Comanche Moon" Buffalo Hump banishes Blue Duck because of his disobedient ways. As far as Deets goes, he says in "Lonesome Dove" that he came to Texas from Louisanna. In "Comanche Moon", McMurtry's narrative tells us that Deets was a slave stolen by a chief named Wildcat and that Deets escaped in transit to Mexico. After taking shelter in the Ranger's stable, he is accepted by Captain Innish Scull into the Texas Rangers. Read "Comanche Moon" it's even better than "Lonesome Dove" believe it or not. 68.66.232.46 (talk · contribs) - 21:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC) & 76.178.61.130 (talk · contribs) - 09:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Latin Motto - (Sep. 2006)

Does anyone know what the latin motto that was on the ranch sign meant? I have wanted to know for years.--The Emperor of Wikipedia & Protector of Wiktionary 05:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Uva uvam videndo varia fit: "A grape changes color in seeing another grape". 68.66.232.46 (talk · contribs) - 21:11, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I did not read the book, but in the miniseries, it does NOT say the above motto, it says "...viVendo...", which means "living." A grape is changed (made into a different grape) by living. http://alkek.library.txstate.edu/swwc/ld/ldex081a1.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.106.195.150 (talk) 17:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The best translation I've been able to come up with is "Grapes which ripen together, ripen well". There is actually some grammar issues with this saying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.172.36 (talk) 11:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Maggie - (Dec. 2006)

Lonesome Dove never gives Maggie's last name as Dobbs. In fact, Newt was told growing up that his father was a travelling salesman named Dobbs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.71.28.137 (talk) 14:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

In Comanche Moon Maggie's name is given as Maggie Tilton. However, it's revealed that she gave Newt the last name Dobbs as a way to protect him from gossip. White Arabian mare (talk) 02:04, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Mangled Latin - (Aug. 2007)

This article needs a discussion of the meaning of the Latin phrase -- how it relates to the plot and characters -- it's not there simply because Gus is a pretentious phony intellectual.

If you take the incorrect version (vivendo instead of videndo) as Larry McMurtry's conscious intent (Gus knows no Latin), it can be interpreted as something like "a grape changes in the process of living". This, of course, is exactly what does not happen -- none of the characters change.

This is a disconnect with the article's statement that "Along the way, the Hat Creek boys revisit old regrets and losses and come to terms with their past." This is not true. Other than Newt, who begins to mature, the characters are no different at the end of the novel than they are at the beginning. This seems to be a recurring theme in McMurtry's stories -- people "respond" to stressful situations by not changing.

In reviewing the plot summary, I'm tempted to add at the end, "And lots of people die gruesome, pointless deaths, typical for a Larry McMurtry western novel." But I refrain. (15:44, 15 November 2007)

WilliamSommerwerck 19:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

It's typical for Larry McMurtry NOW. "Lonesome Dove" pretty much set the template for that sort of thing. Claude 21:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Gus uses mangled Latin because he likes to pretend to be smarter than he already is. However, Jake's coming changed everybody's lives one way or another. It killed Gus, Deets, Xavier and Jake himself, took Lorena out of her miserable life, and let Clara have one last fling with Gus. White Arabian mare (talk) 19:22, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Article Condition - December 2007

This article is a certified mess. It's purportedly about the book, then begins listing actors when it discusses the plot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.124.112.210 (talk) 04:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

In this particular case, I think it's because the two are so intertwined. The novel started as a TV movie script, which nobody picked up, so McMurtry turned it into a novel. When that took off, suddenly there was interest in the movie again. This also explains why the movie is so faithful to the book. Claude (talk) 05:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Whatever the cause, it is still a mess. The inclusion of "played by"s is jarring and amateurish. To give this a B rating makes a joke of the assessment system.--Reedmalloy (talk) 21:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

References - June 2008

This article is in dire need of references.

See: Wikipedia:Citing sources - and - Wikipedia:Verifiability

There has to be some Lonesome Dove lovers who will step in and refify this article.

Thanks, saddle up! ~ WikiDon (talk) 21:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

True, it was in "dire" need, but there's no need to go listing a citation template in every section. Just list one at the top of the page. Banaticus (talk) 18:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

If the entire section does not have references it is supposed to have a blanket tag over the entire section. Otherwise you would see after every sentence. Also if you add one per section it is easier removed as the section gets cited. Also if you blanket and entire page, and one reference is added in any section then you have to remove the one over the whole page and place individual ones. Swampfire (talk) 18:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

My apologies to whoever wrote it, but I edited out the reference to "Robert Urich playing the part of the cowboy who was hanged by his friends" in the Origins section. It seemed an unnecessary plot spoiler. I myself read it when I was halfway through the book. If it's necessary to mention the hanging (and I'm not sure it is) it seems like it might be more appropriate in the Plot section where it's less likely someone will stumble across it before they're ready to know. Otherwise, an interesting and informative article.

Llamapix (talk) 18:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

An image is up for deletion

File:Robert Duvall in Lonesome Dove.jpg Thanks. Just tips me hat but then 〜on thought bows deeply … 06:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeesh!

I have gone through and removed as much about the film and TV series as I feel comfortable with, and moved it to Lonesome Dove (film). The feeling I am getting from reading discussion pages is that the TV series and the film articles started long after this one, and they were never cleaned up. I am editing other articles and arrived here tangentially, but thought I would do at least that much. If I am in err, please restore and note as such on this page why all of the TV stuff belongs here so no one will move it again. LonelyBeacon (talk) 06:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

There should be a section about why some changes were made in the tv series that were not in the books. White Arabian mare (talk) 19:18, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

interpreting the interpretation

The following remarks need to be reconsidered:

"He [Call] is cold and driven by pride and honor, not love."

It's difficult to say what Call is driven by, other than the need to constantly work (which, as the writer points out, substitutes for his lack of human relationships). Call attacks Gus for his pride (in the death scene). Call's obvious honesty and willingness to keep his word suggests he's a man of honor -- but he lacks the honor to admit to Newt that he's his father.

"Even when he [Call] drags the body of the only human who ever understood him and loved him anyway..."

Though Gus certainly understands Call, whether he actually loves him -- on any level -- is debatable. Their relationship is disfunctional and abusive, with Call having to do most of the work, while putting up with Gus's criticism and shallow intellectualism. They are an implicitly "married" old/odd couple, without any reason (other than the dramatic one of friction between opposites) for being together. They complement each other, but not in any productive or synergistic way. (In my Amazon review of the novel, I've added to the death scene what McMurtry probably deliberately left out -- Gus's curiosity about what their lives might have been like had there been a sexual relationship between them. Gus only thinks it, knowing that speaking it would be disastrous.) In Dead Man's Walk, McMurtry is either too lazy or too uninspired to come up with any reason for their being friends, so they meet and "bang!" -- they're friends for life. Really. He sums up their friendship in a single empty sentence.

Regardless of how you interpret Gus and Call's relationship, Lonesome Dove is a story of many deeply flawed human beings, most of whom we like anyway.

"He [Call] is the Western version of Captain Ahab whose reckless stubbornness ends in tragedy."

What tragedy? Call makes it home safely. To see a parallel with Moby-Dick, just because Gus's coffin falls out of the wagon into the river, is stretching things. Call is not a pathologically stubborn person -- he simply believes in keeping his word, even if it was to a friend who coerced a promise from him.

The schlepping of Gus's body is not fiction -- it actually happened. Charles Goodnight carted the body of his best friend, Oliver Loving, to Texas, which was quite a long journey and attracted public attention.

It would be more correct to say that the story is a tragedy of people going after something they can't have or don't need, and being destroyed in the process. Larry McMurtry said something to the effect that he didn't understand why people loved a novel about unhappy people running around the West doing foolish things. Someone needs to find this quote and add it to the article. I'm still looking, and can't find it.

I would agree that such a critically successful and well-loved novel as this one needs a much more thorough analysis -- and appreciation -- than given in this article. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 14:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Parts of article contradict or are in tension with other parts

One section says:

The basic story is a slightly fictionalized account of Charles Goodnight's and Oliver Loving's cattle drive.

Another section says:

According to McMurtry, Gus and Call were not modeled after historical characters, but there are similarities with real-life cattle drivers Oliver Loving and Charles Goodnight.

These two quotations seem to be in tension. — goethean ॐ 23:40, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

The book bears MUCH in common with the true story, but in real life it took Loving 2 weeks to die of blood poisoning. In the book it took Gus 2 days once he got to Miles City. White Arabian mare (talk) 19:28, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Is the demise of Blue Duck a metaphor?

Yes, I know, the Talk Page is not a place for general discussion of the subject - you can remove this if you feel so inclined, but I'm going to ask the question anyway!

I assume anyone who gets to this has read the book, but SPOILER ALERT just in case.

Once Gus dies, the only major plot issue that is unresolved is whether Blue Duck, the major villian in the book, who has kidnaped Lorena and killed all of July Johnson's companions, will meet a well-deserved end or not.

It seems to me that McMurty has deliberately "planted" several hints in the book that Call will pursue and kill Blue Duck in a traditional "Western style" thrilling finish. Call is a man of duty who will not let a renegade like Blue Duck survive to pursue his murderous spree of crime, and when Po Campo mentions at one point that Blue Duck always has the fastest horse available, Call remarks ominously "He don't have the fastest horse, I do" (i.e., the Hell Bitch). In short, we are led to believe that Gus's death will somehow be balanced out by a climactic chase and duel to the death between the remaining hero, Call, and the villain, Blue Duck.

Yet McMurty then deprives us of this climax. Blue Duck is captured after the luckiest of shots by an inept sheriff, manages to take his own life (and the sheriff's) by jumping out a window, and all that Call can do is witness this passively after visting Blue Duck in his cell and being taunted by Blue Duck's claim of having been able to kill, steal and rape whenever and wherever he pleased throughout Call's entire tenure as a lawman.

My question is whether this "disappointing" ending, depriving us of the heroic Western climax we were led to expect, is deliberate on McMurty's part - a symbol of the fact that the "romantic legend of the West" was declining at just the time referred to in the book.

It seems to me that the book was so well and tightly plotted that this cannot have been a mere coincidence. What do others think?

Thanks in advance. Partnerfrance (talk) 14:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

I think you may be on to something, but a lot of the book seems to be devoted to the notion that fights and life generally were kind of random. Jake, for instance, made his own reputation with a lucky shot that brought down a famous bandit.Arnold Rothstein1921 (talk) 23:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Webster Witter

I don't know if lists of inconsistent writing (bloopers) are ever included in articles concerning novels, but at one point in the book Gus thinks back to hanging an outlaw named Webster Witter. 100 pages later, July Johnson is introduced to the living Webster Witter in a saloon in, I think, Dodge City. Most likely explanation is that it just slipped McMurtry's mind that he had used the name already.Arnold Rothstein1921 (talk) 23:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Gus may not have actually hung the man. He liked to brag and pretend he was the best Texas Ranger who ever lived. Or it could be an error thay didn't get caught by the editor. White Arabian mare (talk) 19:25, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Latin motto

The section on the Latin motto makes no sense, and some portions seem to be copied and pasted from answers.com. [1] Also, there is nothing in the book that suggests Gus actually knows what the motto means; he chooses it for the simple fact that it looks impressive. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 20:41, 20 September 2015 (UTC)