Hold Over-Essays #6

The Essays: the English Language:

I had to take a class in the origin and evolution of the English Language. I do love learning about word origins and such. OK, so I was having trouble thinking of a suitable blog for this week after last weeks Cannibalism post. So, you get an Essay this week while I work on fixing some things behind the scenes.

This Essay is about Westerns and I compare a Dime Novel from the 1880s to the script for the first episode of Deadwood. Which also makes this post my mostly timely as the Deadwood Movie just came on HBO this week.

My Wednesday writing posts might go to bi-weekly, but that would be a shame as most of my readers seem to love them the best.

Western Tropes; Keeping the Myths Alive through Language.

The “Wild Wild West” as a time period barely lasted thirty years and yet the legend and myths of the era have lasted for over a hundred years after. There are a number of expectations that people hold for media portraying the stories of the West, and one of the crucial ones is the language used. By analyzing a Dime Novel written in the era, by a man who lived it, and comparing it to modern script that portrays the same era, setting and characters; we can see the accepted tropes and expected language of the Wild West.

This analysis will compare a Dime Novel written by Ned Buntline, “Wild Bill’s Last Trail”, which was written and published only a handful of years after Wild Bill’s death, and the 2004 Pilot script for Deadwood, a series produced for HBO. Both of these stories feature Wild Bill and the illegal settlement called Deadwood. Interestingly enough, the script portrays the life and death of Wild Bill with more historical accuracy than the Dime Novel, written by a man who lived and interacted with Wild Bill. However, it has been revealed that his final story about Wild Bill was intended as a “hatchet job”, as the two had had a falling out, and since Bill was dead, Ned decided to kick the legend’s reputation and character. So while the Dime Novel ignores history and delivers a fictional work is still has a basis in the language and expression of the era. Interestingly both pieces seem to be written in a style that is meant to be read aloud, or as a story told. This is expected from the script which is almost entirely just dialogue with a minimum of stage direction. Modern story-telling stresses “showing” versus “telling”, but the Dime Novel is firmly in the school of the latter. It is written as a told piece, with characters often talking their inner thoughts despite being in public places, and stating their emotional states as well. Surprisingly this makes both pieces feel extremely compatible and sometimes it’s hard to remember that over a hundred years separate them. This analysis will be broken into four parts, each handling different aspects of language. The first will be on structure and semantics of the language, the second will delve into stylistic elements, the third will be the overall use and changes that could be made to the language, and the final part focuses on the historical and cultural influences.

The structure of language can be broken down into three perspectives; the Morphological, Phonological, and Semantics. To clarify, morphology looks at the form of the words and how they relate to one another, phonological looks at the sounds that create the words, and semantics is what those words actually mean. As both of these sources, Dime Novel and Script, are written to be spoken aloud the Phonological look proves the more relevant. Some of these parts of analysis do overlap, but the finer details are where distinction can be made. For example, as a script you know that the actor delivering the lines has as much affect on a character as top the writing. With the script each character is written with certain signatures that differentiate them. Take Seth Bullock, he drops entire morphemes from his words, “because” is just “’cause”, “opened” is “open”, and he always drops the “g” in “ing”. Now with “because” this is called aphaeresis, the dropping of a sound or sounds at the beginning of a word, and the dropping of the “g” in “ing” is just a throwback to how the word was originally pronounced. While Seth has the most obvious changes to his speech, the rest of the cast is also differentiated by almost every part of their speech, but most of that comes down to stylistic choices that will be addressed shortly. Looking at the Dime Novel it is interesting to note that it has extremely little cuts to the morphology of the speech used. While you might find the occasional “Some of ‘em, by sight.” (Buntline 368) “’em” for “them” and the dropped “g” there isn’t a lot of “dialect” speech in the story. But there are some interesting semantic choices; one has to ask if the following sentence is a case of dialect written wrong or a very intelligent play on words. “Poor fellow! He had better have staid East when he was there, away from this wild and lawless section.” (Buntline 369) The keyword is “staid” which means “sedate, respectable, unadventurous,” so was this word chosen for its meaning or is it meant to be dialect/ accent speech? Considering the awkward grammar of “he had better have” it would seem that this is meant to be a bad use of accent. Which takes us to part two.

Register, Dialect, and Stylistic choices in these two works. As both works are written in such a way as to be told, or acted out; everything comes down to the delivery of the language and as such dialect and accent are at the forefront of both pieces. In the Dime Novel there are many instances where the origin of a character is stated, or stressed. For instance we have characters named after states, such as California Joe and the Redhead from Texas. While the writing doesn’t structurally show these accents in their written form, one infers that constantly calling out a character’s origin is meant to convey an accent to the reader/ listener. This is interesting as current writing advice states that one should not write out dialect or accent but should merely show it once and let the reader ‘hear’ it in their own mind. Now, this lack of accent in this Dime Novel is actually an outlier, having read others there is tremendous use of dialect and accent in them and even in other, earlier works by Buntline himself. Going to the Script, we’ve already talked about Bullock’s aphaeresis and dropped “g”, but all of the characters have tics that make them stand out. These include Al Swearengen who despite being a pimp and thug, often affects a cultured and educated response; Sol Star, Austrian born Jew who is Seth’s partner often speaks in a more cultured manner and usually is the voice of reason when Seth is about to become violent, and Brom Garret, who is the quintessential tinhorn easterner, a New Yorker who is wealthy and of course speaks formally most of the time. This also brings us to one of the other points of interest, swearing. The script is super heavy in the use of harsh language, and the creators of the show said that they wanted to convey a level of truth, that historically swearing was more rampant than we currently believe. Interestingly, the swearing in the script can actually be used as a measure of register. Register is a measure of the level of formality in speech. While cataloging the use of the F-word in the script it became apparent that certain characters swore more than others. The low class Calamity Jane and the world weary prospector Ellsworth swear the most; they are the ‘commoners’. Seth and Al swear as the occasion warrants, with Seth using swears more as he grows angry and Al using his language to fit in between low and high class people. Brom Garret only swears ironically when he’s imitating one of the other characters; he’s our high born character. In the Dime Novel, we have Hickok portrayed as a rough drunkard who gets what he wants when he wants it. His speech is snarled, sometimes impaired by drunken dialect, and he’s plagued by dreams of his own death. While his register doesn’t change, or at least the formality of the language doesn’t seem to change, difference is shown to female characters and there is much romanticizing about the code of “chivalry of the west.”

Stylistically the two pieces make interesting choices in their language. Both pieces give very interesting uses of words and language, some of which is hard to credit to whether it was a writer’s whimsy or if that phrase was actually in popular use. Examples from the dime novel: “we buckled” used to signify marriage (365); East is always a capital E and it collective for anywhere in the entire east coast; Benzene = whiskey; the use of “fell” as in dire, dark “fell desire” (366); all German accents are written out with p for b, so peer for beer; eatables not edibles; ruffianly; staid used for stayed; mayn’t used for may not (an spell check says mayn’t is a word!); and one example of interest all “to-“ words are hyphened, so to-day, to-night, to-morrow. These are all very interesting ‘rules’ of language. There are some interesting sentence structural choices in the dime novel as well, they seem grammatically incorrect but the more you mull them over the more they make sense. Examples: “for you was there.” (365), “or if they had not that” (366), and “I’ve felt it in my bones this six months…” (374) I want to type these six months. Finally the one that paused me instantly upon reading it in the text; “… the rumor of a fight in embryo.”(378). I had to stop and look it up to see if the word was ever used for anything other than a fetus. And found definition “#2. a thing at a rudimentary stage that shows potential for development” (Google). So the question again is whether any of these were acceptable then or if they were creative license on the part of the writer. Now the Deadwood script is filled with its own oddities of phrasing and grammar. One of the first is different period slang for weapons; “Star: They got their loads on and Sampson’s got their dicks up.” (2) We start off with tensions over a hanging, the condemned is due to die in the morning but a mob has decided to kill him during the night. This phrase just sort of trips grammatically from the tongue, at least to my ear; “Sampson: Assholes like Jerry Watson that rob and carry on got to know who to be afraid of.” (3).Odd phrasing; “Al: Two here Dan. (indicating drinks) You see a finish to that? (gesturing to glass).”(30) We also have the proper use of a double negative, used here to convey knowledge from a previous scene but also used to work a con on the character of Brom. In other words Al was actually being honest for a minute before he switched back on track; “Brom: You mad about something Al? Al: I’m not mad about nothing. All’s I can tell you, things sort out pretty fast around here Brom.” (31) Of course this script is written in the modern era as such it uses modern grammar to convey the story, with the actors putting emphasis on words, so the reader knows that Al is mad about lots of things. If this were written in the Dime Novel, the reader would have to consider that the writer might either have not known the rule about the double negative or was merely putting it in as colorful speech for the character of Al. It’s also interesting that in this example Brom is an educated rich man from New York, and Al is a thug from Iowa, and he is still conning the living daylights out of Brom, who should know better but he’s overwhelmed with the situation. Here is another example of Brom being educated but still not too smart; “Brom: I was indisposed last night. [high register formal wording, big word]. Tim: What were you? Al: He wasn’t feeling well Tim. But here we are today.”(37). Al can be a cursing thug beating one of his whores for killing a john, and then minutes later he’s drinking whiskey with Brom and explaining his ‘fancy words’ to an Irish drunk named Tim. Al’s shrewdness, and obvious education is at odds with his rough and violent temperament. Al has some speeches during the series where his language is convoluted enough to make one stop, rewind, and watch it again. He has the expressive floweriness one sees in Civil War letters, in characters who are written to be evasive using language that has double or triple meaning, and dare I say also found in purple prose of the pulp writers of the 20’s and 30s. Unfortunately Al’s greatest quotes are from later in the series and his speech is less twisty in the Pilot.

Which brings in the third part, the use of language, how these sources convey their message, and how we could change them to make them work better. Our main problem has been mentioned several times, but bears repeating. The Dime Novel often has us asking if the writer doesn’t know the grammar rules, if the word choice was intentional or just misspelled for the purpose of accent/ dialect. Is this modern conceit or a legitimate critique? It’s hard to tell. It can be read in either manner and each reader can make up their own mind. Putting that issue aside though, both media use dialogue to convey most of the characters traits; such as education, background, culture, and etcetera. Reading the script versus watching the Pilot puts it on an even footing with the Dime Novel, with clearly demarked emotional responses in both, and a story that is told rather than shown. Either story could be read out loud, preferably with voices pitched to each character. They would be very entertaining, and even without changing the reader’s voice each character could still be discerned based on the words they use, and how they use them. As long as someone reads Seth Bullock with his dialect intact, and reads all of Calamity Jane’s very colorful curses, and Hickok’s threats hidden in each sentence, then you will always know when the story changes character without even reading the character names. The dime novel is similar in that each chapter shifts POV, so it will start with either Wild Bill or his Antagonist, and half way thru it will shift to the other character. Usually the shift happens when the character is having one of their monologue, thought drops, and the other character is nearby to hear this and make their own commentary on it. Sort of a passing of the torch as they encounter each other and take the POV. So how does one fix the issues with the language in the Dime Novel, well there are no standards for the dime novels of the era, merely the expectations of the genre. But specifically with this story from Buntline, perhaps if he actually used more accent/ dialect. The fact that he uses it so sparingly actually makes you question every time he does use it. It is far more glaring to see just the occasional odd word or phrase; it pulls you out of the story. Now if this was being read aloud most of the odd accent would simply just be an accent.

So part the fourth, the use of language and how it interacts with influences from historical and cultural sources. The “Wild West” is a time period that is much loved, romanticized, and portrayed in a wide variety of media. As such there are many set tropes, or ideas, that are not only accepted, but must have expectations as well. Both stories really do seem to be written to be told or acted out, as such there is expected dialect written out, and the use of western euphemism and idioms. So they are compatible in that manner, with some moments where the turn of a phrase might take you out of your comfort zone. They do have two conceits, one to each of them, that would jar readers, depending on which era they are from. The dime novel has some stereotype, racist language in it, while the script is trying to raise awareness of just how prevalent the use of cursing was in the Old West. While the use of swearing and delivering basic cowboy and Indian stereotypes might seem a draw back and would probably offend the audiences if you switched which had them. Modern readers are willing to accept the swearing but are growing tired of the racism, while putting Deadwood level swearing in a book back in the 1880s would cause a riot. All the above still helps to create the setting and make it all believable. The dialect speech is expected, even if the script hadn’t written it out; the actor would still probably have delivered the speech with the dialect. All the cursing is also interspaced with more formal language, and is also a measure of register and social status among characters. As to the dime novels stereotypes, not only were they generally accepted as truth, they were expected as tropes to be used in these types of stories. Without them, the audience might not have bought another book from the author, and these stereotypes might not even reflect the author’s personal beliefs, but rather be tropes he had to check off a list in order to make the book fit the market. Sadly most of the racism is “casual”, in the form of “Indian Facts” being mentioned, they are pretty ignorant statements by today’s standards, but were most likely considered true back in writing of this piece. Of course none of the Indians have speaking roles in this piece, instead they are led by a tanned white man, an ex-soldier who likes to kill union soldiers so has become a native chief. Though to be clear, this Dime Novel was written by Ned Buntline, a man who rode in the west with Buffalo Bill, who worked with Wild Bill, who was gifted a gun by Wyatt Earp and even had a model of Colt Revolver named after him. He knew the truth of plains Indians and the western “heroes” he wrote about, so any stereotypes in his books are either true, or believed true by him, or again, were something he had to put in the book because it was expected. So is the onus on the writer or on the audience for their beliefs, or at least what they expect out of the medium? It’s a western, therefore there has to be all the trappings we expect; gunplay, violence, lawlessness, brothels, poker or faro, bad Indians (sorry), and possible gold or territory disputes. These are all things people expect, and both get delivered by their respective stories. Language wise we expect certain dialects, strong guy speeches, deadly gunslinger whispers, and a host of out-of-date slang. Words like tinhorn, greenhorn, five-dollar words, The East, Injuns instead of Indians. Sayings like slap leather and pull iron. In the movies there are hundreds of gunslinger showdowns, two guys in a street, they face each other and draw guns and fire. This is expectation, versus a history that says this rarely ever happened. Watch any movie about Wyatt Earp and the OK corral and he and his friends walked into the corral with revolvers in quick draw rigs on their hips and looking for a fight. While the true history Earp and his men didn’t wear holsters, they kept their guns in deep pockets in their dusters, only Wyatt’s brother had a gun ready and that was because he had a shotgun. The Clantons got the drop on Earp as they had guns ready and in their belts. People prefer the movie to the reality. As such both sources are geared to audience expectations and are influenced by cultural beliefs.

Both stories are also influenced by the history of their real setting, Deadwood South Dakota. So to clarify, in the 1870s the Dakota’s were called Indian Territory and were not part of the United States. Instead the lands were controlled by the various tribes of the Sioux Nation. Deadwood was an illegal settlement in the centre of these lands, up in the Black Hills region. Of course most people were there looking for gold and such. So you are outside the US, you have no sheriff or marshal, and the Indians out in the territory are really hostile and actually might kill you. With all of this going on it makes sense that people would be armed, people would have to be adventurous or on the run to settle here, and without law and order a lot of criminal enterprises are going to flourish. So criminals and outlaws, prospectors and retailers, and just people brave enough to try and claim ‘free’ land, are all come together. Harsh language, cursing, negative stereotypes about the people who want you dead and off their land, and the occasional adventurous, maybe educated, sort thrown in the mix and you can see the influence on language and temperament.

So the influence runs in a linear arc that then loops back and repeats. The setting practically demands the type of characters that would pick such a place to live, to flourish. As entertainment, campfire stories are told about the very people who inhabit these camps. Someone decided to publish these oral stories, creating the first dime novels. The more successful dime novels determine the tropes that the audience likes the most, this creates the Western genre. Time marches forward and we get Western movies, and in 2004 David Milch writes a script for a show that is based on Deadwood, and while entertaining he wants it to be as historical as can be, in the main cast only one character is fictional. 1880 Buntline publishes his hatchet-job fictionalized death of Wild Bill in Deadwood, one hundred and twenty-four years later Deadwood is written and we come to the actual version of Wild Bill’s death. Every movie and western novel written goes back to a historical event or a dime novel written about a story of the west, the same tropes, the same characters, the same idioms get used with only minor upgrades to show modern influence. It’s a cycle of repetition that isn’t the same in other genres of fiction. Take fairy tales for example, every time they get retold, something is changed. The language is constantly modernized, the darker endings where deemed too scary for children, the setting gets updated. The newest fad is to place them in the real modern world and see how they work. But with westerns we don’t stray from the tried and true tropes. Now that’s not to say that westerns haven’t been mixed into other genres to create something interesting and new. We have things like Firefly, a sci-fi western, and Weird Westerns, which are western stories with horror or cosmic pulp added to them. But a true and pure western tends to keep it’s language and tropes pure as well, and even with those two modern sub-genre’s the use of language is often were you get the western add in.

In summary, the language is the key that creates “Western”, without characters dropping their “g”, saying ‘em for them, or using specific idioms like “slap leather”. We just don’t have a western. As such whether a book is hundred years old of current, if it’s a western then it probably reads the same. The only issues come when doing deeper analysis and one has to ask if the older story is using accent or trying for a double, deeper meaning with its word choice. I still stand by “staid” being used as an accent and not as the double meaning that the sentence could imply.

Work Cited

Buntline, Ned “Wild Bill’s Last Trail.” The Hero of a Hundred Fights, edited by Clay Reynolds, Union Square, 2011, pp 361-419.

Milch, David. Deadwood: The Pilot, August 19, 2002. Script.