Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

An American Myth Rides Into the Sunset (Bush is not a real cowboy)
The New York Times ^ | 03/30/03 | SUSAN FALUDI

Posted on 03/29/2003 6:59:48 PM PST by Pokey78

PORTLAND, Ore. — On the eve of the Iraqi invasion, the president's advisers were working hard to embed George W. Bush inside the script of the American Western. Rejecting the widespread European frustration with Mr. Bush's Lone Ranger act, Vice President Dick Cheney used his "Meet the Press" appearance to make clear that the president is "a cowboy" who "cuts to the chase." Mr. Bush's blunt talk, the vice president told Tim Russert, is "exactly what the circumstances require."

The president has done his part. For some time now, Mr. Bush has been obliging, dutifully working his way through the Western cliché checklist: "smoke 'em out of their holes"; "hunt 'em down"; "go it alone"; "wanted: dead or alive."

The image being invoked by the president and his posse has deep roots in the American soil. But if Mr. Bush's cowpoke credentials seem to be all simple syntax and bodacious belt buckle, his policies actually flout the cowboy charter. Teddy Roosevelt, in "The Cattle Country of the Far West," called cowboys "quiet, rather self-contained men." The president's actions have violated the basic terms of the American Western romance and, thereby, the terms by which we call ourselves Americans. He's declared war on a foundational national myth.

It's worth recalling that the cowboy of the myth wasn't trigger happy and he wasn't a dominator. He carried a gun to protect himself and his cattle — cattle that didn't even belong to him. His mission was their safe passage, and by extension, the safe passage of the civilizing society to follow. And his honor was grounded on his civilized refusal to fire first. "Didn't I tell you he'd not shoot?" says a spectator to a gun fight that didn't happen in "The Virginian," Owen Wister's 1902 novel. "He's a brave man," he adds. "It's not a brave man that's dangerous. It's the cowards that scare me."

"The Virginian" is the urtext of the cowboy myth. Its protagonist, like Wister and Wister's old Harvard classmate Teddy Roosevelt, was a transplanted Easterner whose manhood was fashioned in the West. "No man traveling through or living in the country need fear molestation from the cowboys," wrote Roosevelt. They "treat a stranger with the most whole-souled hospitality" and "what can almost be called a grave courtesy."

Wister dedicated "The Virginian" to Teddy Roosevelt. Our 20th-century presidents have lived under the sway of its central ethic, and never more so than in the grave buildup to conflict. Understanding the necessity to at least appear to uphold the credo, no matter what the reality, William McKinley took advantage of the sinking of the Maine in Havana harbor, Franklin Roosevelt waited (some say intentionally) until our fleet was destroyed at Pearl Harbor, and Lyndon Johnson contrived the Tonkin Gulf "incident" before entering their respective wars.

One cannot imagine F.D.R., before declaring war on Japan, or even Ronald Reagan before Grenada, pumping a fist and saying of himself, "Feel good" — as President Bush did before he announced the beginning of the Iraq war. Indeed, the doctrine of pre-emptive warfare flies in the face of the humble, reluctant cowboy myth Mr. Bush holds so dear.

Of course, American identity has always contained competing models; even the original frontiersman, the cowboy's immediate ancestor, had two faces. He was either Daniel Boone or Davy Crockett — that is, either the man who rode into the wilderness to build and nurture a society called Booneville, or the man who ventured out only to collect and count the pelts. In his time, Daniel Boone was the hero at the heart of our myth, the Indian fighter turned homesteader, the war-hating American archetype. As Richard Slotkin observed in "Regeneration Through Violence," his history of the American frontier, for this kind of man "solitary hunting trips are, not ends in themselves, but means to a social end . . . the ultimate creation of a better society." By contrast, Davy Crockett was, as V. L. Parrington, the literary critic, dubbed him, "a frontier wastrel," a rapacious aggressor and "a huge Western joke."

As the nation industrialized, however, Crockett's heaps of dead pelts became the equivalent of America's capitalistic might, and his own profile began to rise from pathetic joke to vaunted hunter and Alamo hero. The honored activity was no longer husbandry but dominance.

These two contesting ethics were neatly framed at the close of World War II in the debate over our future. Were we on the threshold of "the century of the common man," a phrase coined by Henry Wallace and represented by Ernie Pyle's homely soldiers? Or were we on the cusp of "the American Century," defined by Henry Luce, founder of Time Inc., as the nation's manifest right "to exert upon the world the full impact of our influence, for such purposes as we see fit and by such means as we see fit"? Luce's vision won the day.

 In this regard, President Bush's self-presentation culminates a progression long in the works. We've been on the way to becoming a different America for a while.

A little more than a year ago, the old and vanishing American mythology of common-man virtue enjoyed an unexpected comeback — in the aftermath of 9/11. That antiquated ethic returned to infuse our romance with the sacrificial firefighters and police officers, and the average citizens martyred in our national tragedy. Its presence was palpable in the self-image of an ordinary embattled people rising to the occasion in countless ways, as if we were once more "out in some strange night caring for each other," as Ernie Pyle wrote of the G.I.'s he chronicled.

Perhaps that is why so many Americans now feel even more painfully the loss of a myth that, in truth, has been on its sickbed for a generation. As the invasion of Iraq began, a lament could be heard across the political spectrum. A letter in The Times seemed typical: "The president was speaking and I realized that an old and dear friend of mine was gone."

What Americans grieve for is not reality. We've carried out regime change before, whether on Chief Sitting Bull or Manuel Noriega. We've also waged elective wars, whether in the Dominican Republic or the Philippines. But to call it a myth is not to diminish its importance. Mythologies are essential to defining who we are and, more importantly, who we want to be. We caught a powerful glimpse of our myth's possibilities, just before its end. Sept. 11 gave us its final spark, like the bright flash that the sun shoots up before it sets for good.

Susan Faludi is author of ``Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Man.''


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush; cowboy; iraqifreedom; liberalmedia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last
To: Pokey78
That reminds me of a joke

Three strangers strike up a conversation in the passenger lounge in Bozeman, Montana, awaiting their flights. One is an American Indian passing through from Lame Deer. Another was a cowboy on his way to Billings, Montana for a stock show. The third passenger is a fundamentalist Arab student, newly arrived at Montana State University from the Middle East. Their discussion drifts to their diverse cultures. Soon the two Westerners learn that the Arab is a devout, radical Muslim. The conversation falls into an uneasy lull.

The cowboy leans back in his chair, crosses his boots on a magazine table, tips his big sweat-stained hat forward over his face. The wind outside blows tumbleweeds, and the old windsock flaps, but no plane comes.

Finally, the American Indian clears his throat and softly, he speaks: "Once, my people were many... now we are few." The Muslim student raises an eyebrow and leans forward, "Once my people were few", he sneers, "and now we are many. Why do you suppose that is?"

The Montana cowboy shifts his toothpick to one side of his mouth and from the darkness beneath his Stetson says in a drawl, "That's 'cause we ain't played Cowboys and Muslims yet..."
21 posted on 03/29/2003 7:39:25 PM PST by Swiss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: merrin
So, they tried to ridicule him by calling him a "cowboy," and that backfired because the American people kinda like cowboys. So, now the new line is he's not a cowboy.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

22 posted on 03/29/2003 7:41:16 PM PST by FrdmLvr ("No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: okie01
May I suggest that this could be the most stupified collection of sentences ever assembled.
23 posted on 03/29/2003 7:45:02 PM PST by sirchtruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
I think Falludi has too much 50s and 60s television on her mind. What's next? Bush as Gilligan, Cheney as Skipper and Rummy as the Professor?

Wister's cowboy was a creation or construction of his own mind. For every Virginian in a white hat there was at least one villain in a black hat. For every good cowboy, there was a heel, as Falludi herself notes. Wister's hero was a good man who tried to do right, but I'm not sure how representative he was of the "cowboy code," or how much Falludi is really talking about actual cowpunchers and how much she's talking about the myths postwar America used to domesticate baby boomers. It's Hollywood that told us that to be a cowboy meant to be decent, upright and foursquare.

I'm not sure how much the opposition between Boone and Crockett that Falludi presents really holds. History or legend has it that Boone brought his people west but left as soon as he could see the smoke from neighbor's cabin from his own and he could no longer live by hunting -- A peaceful, decent fellow, but one who wasn't crazy about society. Crockett was elected to Congress and might have played a role in an independent Texas had he survived the Alamo, so he doesn't quite qualify as an anarchic spirit.

Walter Mead has compared Bush's approach, and Reagan's, to that of Andrew Jackson, a frontiersman Falludi doesn't mention. That looks to be a more sensible place to begin than a specious contrast of Boone and Crockett.

24 posted on 03/29/2003 7:48:15 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swiss
Classic. Heard it before, but was even better this time around.
25 posted on 03/29/2003 7:49:55 PM PST by bluefish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Sounds like a real America hater. I hope the FBI is keeping track of her.
26 posted on 03/29/2003 7:57:28 PM PST by unspun ("Well I'm proud to be a FReeper, where at least I know I'm an American; and I won't forget....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Faludi ought to sign up for quilting lessons. She's patched together quotes from here and there to create, in her mind, a pattern, but this thing just doesn't hang together. I can't imagine anyone staying comfy and warm under her frayed logic. Too full of holes.

I'll leave it to someone else to speculate on what sort of hole she is.
27 posted on 03/29/2003 7:58:59 PM PST by PoisedWoman (Fed up with the liberal media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
To paraphrase Mark Twain, Ms Faludi's powers were under a cloud on the morning she wrote this.
28 posted on 03/29/2003 8:06:52 PM PST by Erasmus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78

Oh look, a sh*tty little mean-spirited hit piece on Bush in the New York Times. Hooda thunkit?


29 posted on 03/29/2003 8:13:31 PM PST by Nick Danger (More rallys planned! www.freerepublic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cajun-jack
Not gorgeous, but I'd give her a spanking. Her piece was still drivel, though.
30 posted on 03/29/2003 8:22:35 PM PST by fhayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Drivel. Too bad this woman doesn't have a clue what she's talking about.
31 posted on 03/29/2003 8:36:15 PM PST by McGavin999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Ok, I have to admit that I skipped over most of the article because the premise was so stupid. That said, I don't know how much time the author has spent here in Texas, but she has obviously bought into the old cowboy stereotype. You see, cowboys are only reserved and humble when the cows are armed with nothing more than never-ending supplies of manure. Granted, this is fairly rare, but when the cattle use weapons that they aren't even supposed to possess, and when they commit homicide bombings against other cattle, the cowboys suddenly become very aggressive and determined. They know that these evil cattle must be removed at virtually all costs. Perhaps these are the cowboys after whom President Bush has modeled himself.
32 posted on 03/29/2003 8:46:29 PM PST by TXBlair (Sucks to be flattened by a bulldozer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Susan Faludi deserves to be forcibly married to a minor Saudi Arabian bureaucrat. As his fourth wife. I'm sure her father could get at least a camel in trade. Maybe even two.
33 posted on 03/29/2003 8:47:30 PM PST by homeagain balkansvet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
I think this poor woman has waaaaaay to much time on her hands.
34 posted on 03/29/2003 8:48:28 PM PST by CyberAnt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x
And Condaleeza Rice as Mary Ann??? I might actually watch that show's reruns on TV Land now!
35 posted on 03/29/2003 8:49:46 PM PST by GOP_Raider (OAKLAND RAIDERS AFC CHAMPIONS!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The media, including Faludi's pals at the Times, have done more to foster the "Bush is a cowboy" slogan than anyone else.
36 posted on 03/29/2003 8:50:41 PM PST by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
She's best known for writing a much ballyhooed book called "Backlash," a huge load of drivel about how Hollywood keeps women down. The major criticism of it was that she would only cite examples and statistics that supported her tenuous conclusions and ignored the many that contradicted her. Nice to see she's still using that same tried and true method of argument.

One sidelight: as a native Texan, I'd like to ask the New York Times, "Just once, when you run an op-ed analyzing Texas or Texans, could you please, please, PLEASE find someone to write it who has actually BEEN here at least once in his or her life, or has actually MET someone who lives west of the Hudson River?" God, that would be such a refreshing change! Why not get Woody Allen to tell us all about Texas and cowboys next time?

37 posted on 03/29/2003 9:23:17 PM PST by HHFi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
Age 11???? Where are you getting your information. George W Bush's parents moved him to Texas when he was 2 years old.
38 posted on 03/29/2003 10:06:07 PM PST by Kath (Lubya Dubya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kayak

"Stiffed"?

Susan?

Not in years I bet.

39 posted on 03/29/2003 10:12:04 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (The Ever So Humble Banana Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
I tried to read this. God, my head hurts.
40 posted on 03/29/2003 10:19:40 PM PST by sunshine state
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson