Oh Brother, Where Art Thou
rf...@aol.com
watched the film last night. I rented it so I could hear the music,
which was great. But I also totally enjoyed the movie for what it was.
I'm surprised it didn't do better in the theaters. Now I wish I'd
followed the threads on here, especially the one about Man of Constant
Sorrow. Can anyone recap what all the discussion was about this tune?
Thanks.
Rick Daly
Folk U.S.A.
http://members.aol.com/rfdjr
MAIB
in whatever subject you want, and limit it to whatever group you want. That
way you can access anything that has been written here. BTW, there was far
too much to "recap."
Mark
<rf...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6vuhkt0u63n2p2l38...@4ax.com...
G. M. Watson
<http://groups.google.com> instead.
----------
In article <CN727.35772$J91.1...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
Calvin Rice
could have been done a bit better, I thought. Mainly the Ku Klux Klan scene,
which was grossly overdone - completely unbelievable. To a lesser extent I
thought the mass baptism scene was unrealistic too. Except for those two
reservations, it was a fine and rewatchable (and rehearable) movie, IMO.
-cr
Doug Ashford
Not to turn this into a film discussion group, but I think one
characteristic of an epic fable (which this movie was) is that it *is*
unrealistic, through its use of icons, symbols, and exaggeration. You
can find a long list of "inaccuracies" in the movie at IMDb (Baby Face
Nelson was killed before the year in which the movie was set, etc.), but
I think that's to miss the point.
Doug
MAIB
is, IMO, easier to remember.
Mark
"G. M. Watson " <gm...@pop2.intergate.ca> wrote in message
news:tkj1gk9...@corp.supernews.com...
Jim Glockling
>Mainly the Ku Klux Klan scene,
>which was grossly overdone - completely unbelievable.
Ah, but did you catch what they were chanting? "Eeney, meany, miney, moe".
Hilarious!
The only thing that bothered me were the liner notes from the soundtrack,
saying that the Tommy Johnson character was based on Robert Johnson.
-Jim G.
G. M. Watson
have trouble remembering URLs, why not simply bookmark the Google site? In
some ways it's an improvement over Deja-- and in some ways not.
----------
In article <PSi27.29856$C81.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
MAIB
But you're right. I ought to just learn the new URL....
Mark
"G. M. Watson " <gm...@pop2.intergate.ca> wrote in message
news:tklb5qs...@corp.supernews.com...
B.Ross
> The music was great, but there were a couple of things about the movie that
> could have been done a bit better, I thought. Mainly the Ku Klux Klan scene,
I think the point was to be unbelievable, and it got more so as the film
went along (cf: the flooding scene at the end, & the "Sirens"). But, I,
too, was a bit put off by the KKK scene -- more because the KKK is hardly
a good subject for jolly joke making.
Just to add some music content: the music was all the critics had
raved about! A must see for folk-music lovers.
Jack Aldrich
photograph of him, and they found him at a crossroad waiting for the
Devil.
j...@jaisunphoto.com
>I think the point was to be unbelievable, and it got more so as the film
>went along (cf: the flooding scene at the end, & the "Sirens"). But, I,
>too, was a bit put off by the KKK scene -- more because the KKK is hardly
>a good subject for jolly joke making.
Not joke-making. Ridicule. There's a difference. And you gotta admit,
that's the best use of "Oh, Death" since the Kaleidoscope turned it
into a psychedelic rap dirge in 1967.
Jef
Jack Dingler
grandparents. The baptism scene was one my grandmother described as a
common on in East Texas during that period. Not counting the Billy
Graham tent revivals that came later. My grandfather did some backup
recording work in Dallas during the 30s. From him I heard a lot of tall
tales about Bonney and Clyde, hoboing, racing Model A's, running on
moonshine and other adventures.
Perhaps they made up all of those stories, and Cohen made up similar
stories, or maybe there was a common theme to life during this period.
Perhaps people live differently, if there is no television in their
caves to keep them hypnotized.
If nothing else, it was nice to hear the tunes, once agin, that my
grandfather used to play on the porch when my grandmother was at the
Piggly Wiggly.
Why did he quit playing music, and recording as a backup muscician on
78s? My grandmother said she saw Bonnie and Clyde ride through main
street in Dallas and decided it was time to move out to the sticks
(Irving). I think it had something to do with the all night, integrated
jam sessions at Mary's Whorehouse, my grandfather used to talk about.
Seems they didn't end until just before dawn. Any white man caught there
during daylight hours, was subject to arrest. Since the sheriff stayed
there after the bars closed, he didn't say much. The trick was to be
sober so you could scoot accross the tracks unseen, or have friends you
could count on.
My other grandfather used to say he was a hobo. My other grnadmother
would say, "No he wasn't, he just liked riding the trains." Heard lot's
of CCC stories about cooking beans on mountain tops from him.
Jack Dingler
Ron Natalie
> > The music was great, but there were a couple of things about the movie that
> > could have been done a bit better, I thought. Mainly the Ku Klux Klan scene,
> > which was grossly overdone - completely unbelievable. To a lesser extent I
> > thought the mass baptism scene was unrealistic too. Except for those two
> > reservations, it was a fine and rewatchable (and rehearable) movie, IMO.
> >
You think anything in the movie was supposed to be "believable?" Your
first clue should have been the opening title that says it was based on
Homer's Odyssey.
Jack Dingler
elements, the distortions and the exagerations, but an accurate
paraphrase of your argument, is that everything in the movie was
unbelieveable. I don't agree with that extreme either.
The movie was composed a series of vignettes, from daily life, to
popular stories and legends of the era.
Jack Dingler
MAIB
idea what the below is supposed to mean. But to my eyes the movie was a
complete spoof, with nothing whatsoever intended to be "believable", and the
whole damn thing just intended to be funny. Almost to a slapstick level.
Frankly, as I've mentioned before, I thought it was a mediocre film, largely
for that reason... I got bored fairly early on with the movie itself. The
music, OTOH, was quite good.
Mark
"Jack Dingler" <jdin...@texas.net> wrote in message
ADG01369
very well done and very funny - especially the Wizard of Oz-like Klan rally. I
just can't stop laughing at that part. I should note however that "The Jerk" is
one of my other all time favorite movies... I love this newest favorite movie -
Once again how music saves the world for one more time, or at least a few guys
for a little while.
"Make yourself useless as well as decorational" WWG
Jack Dingler
wouldn't have worked it if it wasn't based in truth.
One aspect already mentioned as unbelievable, is the baptism scene. I
remember clearly though, my late grandmother Edna, lamenting that no one
did those anymore. She missed them.
Which vignette in the film, did you find was completely lacking of a
grain of truth?
Jack Dingler
MAIB
although I certain acknowledge that is just a matter of perspective.
Nor do I view it as a film to which the question "true or not?" can or
should be applied.
I guess, in an odd kind of way, I put it in the same category as something
like "Ghostbusters" or "Caddyshack" (two of my favorite movies). It's just
funny, that's all. That's all it's supposed to be. Nothing in it is
supposed to be "true" or not.
To me, and this is purely a personal and subjective view..., film can
usefully be divided into two categories: films that intend to be viewed as
"true" or "capable of being true", and films that have no such intent.
Which category a film falls into has nothing to do with it's real
"believability" in the practical sense. It's more the design of the film...
(BTW, I don't claim to have thought this "theory" up... I think I picked it
up in some film crit class over 20 years ago.)
For example, "Jurassic Park" falls into category 1 -- it is intended to draw
you into it, to make you become or identify with some character, and to
cause you to "believe" in some sense. It is intended to be regarded as
"truth," in the sense that the story-teller (filmmaker) wants you to "accept
the possibility" that what you are seeing is or could be true. Same with,
say, "Star Wars," or "Dracula" (most versions) or "Robocop" or "Mad Max" or
the Wes Craven things, or even some animations. They want to get inside
you; and you get inside them. Regardless of the objective believability of
the "facts" of the story.
Then there is the second category of film. It is not intended to be
"believed," or "believable," or "true." It's just a presentation of
something to make you laugh, or experience some other reaction. A lot of
comedy falls into this category. As do many so-called "art films." And I
suppose some "political" films, perhaps. Of course, there are many films on
the fence.... Some sci-fi and horror falls into a special sort of
in-between category. For example, I would tend to place "2001" in this
second category... it was more about images, strange ideas, thought
provocation... than it was about any notion of believability w/r/t to actual
story. Same with, say, "The Shining," more a commentary on the genre than
anything else (and again, one of my absolute all time favorites).
Anyway, I think OBWAT is in category two, and I never even considered
analyzing it in terms of "truth" or potential truth.
Having said all that.... which parts of the film did I find devoid of
"truth"? Well... all of it, I suppose, because I never "got inside"
anything in it. Oddly, and I do find this funny, perhaps the one scene in
the film that struck me as most "reality oriented" was, in fact, the baptism
scene. Having been baptized myself at the ripe young age of 8 (albeit in a
pool)... and having grown up in rural Southern parts more years ago than I
like to remember... the whole scene struck me as quite believable.
Well... I suppose this has been a lot of senseless rambling... but I was
trying to engage the question you were raising. Hope I did so.
Mark
"Jack Dingler" <jdin...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:3B7ADFE0...@texas.net...
David Rintoul
notes to the album. Here's a quote:
"The trio journey through a landscape of wonder and adventure populated by a series of
outlandish characters who jumble together classical mythology, Southern archetypes and
pop-culture imagery. And there is music every step of the way...There was a real Pappy
O'Daniel (Charles Durning); and he did campaign to the strains of country music. But,
he was in Texas, not Mississippi. "You Are My Sunshine" was, indeed a campaign theme
song. But it was for the governor of Louisiana. Pappy's opponent, Homer (get it?)
Stokes (Wayne Duvall) has the Whites on his bandwagon singing The Carter Family's "Keep
on the Sunny Side" as his competing "sunshine" campaign song. There was a real
gangster named Baby Face Nelson, (Michael Badaluccio).too. But he died in a hail of
FBI gunfire three years before he makes his wildly manic appearance in O Brother, Where
Art Thou? What is real and what is mythic is beside the point in the topsy-turvy world
of the Coen brothers. What counts is the sheer joie de vivre of the film. Similarly,
the music of O Brother, Where Art Thou, is a joyous mishmash of periods and styles."
I liked the movie, myself. It was fun. I thought they did a very clever job of
re-setting Homer's Odyssey in America. They chose amazing versions of old time music
to tell the story. I've kinda given up worrying about whether stories are believable
or not. I try to just sit back and enjoy the tale.
--
David Rintoul
david....@sympatico.ca
http://www3.sympatico.ca/david.rintoul
"In prosperity, our friends know us. In adversity, we know our friends."
J. Churton Collins
Jack Dingler
we mean by 'true'.
My intention, or context of the meaning, is 'True to the Period'. I
wasn't arguing that the story was true, or that the characters actually
existed. I was arguing that the circumstances the film put the
characters through, had a basis in both fact and legend.
The hobos, chain gangs, political campaigns run from flatbed pickups,
pardons for favorite musicians, and other details were based on fact.
The 'Tommy Johnson' character and the devil chasing down our heroes with
a hound as his trusty companion, definitely belongs to the legends
territory.
Jack Dingler
MAIB
sure, there is a such thing as golf courses, and they do have caddy's, and
sometimes they have caddy shacks. So... "Caddyshack" is "based on truth."
But to make that point simply misses altogether what I was talking about.
Oh, well.
We tried. Communication is not always easy.
Mark
"Jack Dingler" <jdin...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:3B7B0999...@texas.net...
Ron Natalie
Jack Dingler wrote:
> My intention, or context of the meaning, is 'True to the Period'. I
> wasn't arguing that the story was true, or that the characters actually
> existed. I was arguing that the circumstances the film put the
> characters through, had a basis in both fact and legend.
The pieces that you claim as real are just caricatures of the events
they represent. The movie is pure enjoyable fantasy.
Abby Sale
>My intention, or context of the meaning, is 'True to the Period'. I
>wasn't arguing that the story was true, or that the characters actually
>existed. I was arguing that the circumstances the film put the
>characters through, had a basis in both fact and legend.
This is a valid description from the folklorist's standpoint - That the
story is true to the general publicly held mythology of the people / events
involved. Well, basis in fact isn't necessary but ok in this case.
In this sense, it is often taught, the story of George Washington and the
cherry tree is True. ...the story truly recapitulates our perception of
the man. It is irrelevant that "in fact" he was this kind of an honest,
courageous person. It is irrelevant whether, "in fact," the event ever
occurred (it didn't.) An example of a False story would have Washington
studying Chinese martial arts and vanquishing his enemies in the middle of
the night with magical spells.
Just a semantic problem - most people believe that "True" equates with
"Factual." It doesn't in, eg, Folklore or in Symbolic Logic, but does need
to be explained. BTW, I've learned since I was elected chief editor of the
"Happy!" files and researching the events, that the folk story / song /
legend may often prove more factually reliable than the commonly accepted
History. Historians don't have time machines or hard evidence for a vast
percentage of history - especially obscure history. They just have what
they consider best evidence. Much, however, is old wives tales,
reiteration of other historians' inaccuracies, rumor, exaggeration, etc. I
have several times pinned text-book writers down on sources to find they
were only going by a guess, not even a newspaper account. Who killed JFK,
anyway? I still don't know who killed JR.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
I am Abby Sale - in Orlando, Florida
Boycott South Carolina!
http://www.naacp.org/communications/press_releases/SCEconomic2.asp
Cheryl
Sounds like an interesting movie! We'll have to rent it sometime. Mike has
the movie of THE JERK. Didn't know ya liked that one. If ya ever wanna borrow
some funny movies just ask Mike. Have a groovy day... Peace! :)
Peace & have a nice day! Cheryl Harrell-- A T2 diabetic Married To A T1
diabetic...
Personal Quote: "The best thing you can do for your diabetes is to always keep
your faith in Jesus no matter what".. By: My folksinger friend ADG
Michael Ollier
"The 'Tommy Johnson' character and the devil chasing down our heroes with
a hound as his trusty companion, definitely belongs to the legends
territory."
Well, some would dispute that, depending on whether you believe in God/Satan
or not. Where did Robert Johnson get his guitar technique? According to
people such as Son House he could hardly play a note before he went
'missing' and when he returned it was as if he was possessed, and he WAS
playing 'the Devil's music.' Son House, Honeyboy Edwards and Robert Jnr
Lockwood (amongst others) certainly believed Johnson was possessed. And
Muddy Waters refused point blank to talk about Johnson even though he had
known him. Did he know/believe something?
The film is a 30s 'road movie' fashioned from Homer, and as such certainly
had stuff in there that had a ring of truth to it cos it was based on the
30s (hence the Baby-Face and Johnson characters). For God's sake, it's a
movie... it's supposed to suspend belief and entertain. And what do you
expect from the Coen Bros (or indeed American movies), the TRUTH???
Just be thankful the film brought some great music to people's attention who
maybe wouldn't have heard it otherwise (and gave a small part to Gillian
Welch in the process).
Mike
Jinxblues
>people such as Son House he could hardly play a note before he went
>'missing' and when he returned it was as if he was possessed, and he WAS
>playing 'the Devil's music.'
>Son House, Honeyboy Edwards and Robert >Jnr Lockwood (amongst others)
certainly >believed Johnson was possessed.
Absolutely not true . . . .
I am the person who rediscovered Son House in 1964. We spent many hours talking
about "Young Robert" and Mister House NEVER brought for the theory that Robert
Johnson was possessed.
He thought the whole crossroads story was total bullshit (can I say that here?)
and diminished Johnson's ability to create from within his own talent.
Dick Waterman
Oxford, MS
Tribe
"Jinxblues" wrote:
> He [Son House] thought the whole crossroads story was total bullshit (can
I say that here?)
> and diminished Johnson's ability to create from within his own talent.
Of course it's bullshit. That's why it's a myth.
Putting all that aside though, in the Ishmon Bracey (sp?) interview in
"Chasin' That Devil Music", Bracey talks about a similar
crossroads/Satan/blues playing legend regarding the "real" Tommy Johnson.
I'm too lazy to go and dig it out right now, but while Bracey, being a
highly religious man in his last years, didn't give the story much credence,
he did maintain that Tommy Johnson was a so-so player, disappeared for a
bit, and then re-appeared as a more than competent player.
Maybe it was that Canned Heat!:)
Tribe
Tribe
"Jinxblues" wrote:
> I am the person who rediscovered Son House in 1964.
Was House as bitter about Charley Patton as Wardlow paints him to be in his
biography of Patton? Throughout that book the author seems to not miss an
opportunity to discredit anything House had to say about Patton, attributing
it to professional jealousy on House's part.
Thanks.
Tribe
Jim Glockling
Or maybe it was something as simple as woodshedding. Of course that's not something
the UFO/Ouija Board/New Age Crystal crowd wants to hear.
Jinxblues
>his
>biography of Patton? Throughout that book the author seems to not miss
>an
>opportunity to discredit anything House had to say about Patton, attributing
>it to professional jealousy on House's part.
Not at all. Patton got him a commitment from Paramount Records without Son
having to go down to Jackson to audition. Charlie's word was good enough for
them.
Son thought that Charlie was a joking prankster who spun the guitar around and
focused very much on being an entertainer.
I'm sure that Son would be amused that Patton is now considering to be a
'founding father' of Delta blues.
Whenever Son and I would hear, "You can shake it / You can break it," he would
smile and say that THIS was the Charlie that he knew so well.
Dick Waterman
Tribe
"Jinxblues" wrote:
> Son thought that Charlie was a joking prankster who spun the guitar around
and
> focused very much on being an entertainer.
>
> I'm sure that Son would be amused that Patton is now considering to be a
> 'founding father' of Delta blues.
>
> Whenever Son and I would hear, "You can shake it / You can break it," he
would
> smile and say that THIS was the Charlie that he knew so well.
Which is nothing to be ashamed of. Wardlow seems to take House's comments
about Patton's "entertaining" style as an affront. Hell, ultimately, these
guys (and gals) were all entertainers first, not artists. They are artists,
don't get me wrong, but only in retrospect. At the time, they just wanted
for folks to have a good time.
Tribe
Abby Sale
>I am the person who rediscovered Son House in 1964. We spent many hours talking
>about "Young Robert" and Mister House NEVER brought for the theory that Robert
>Johnson was possessed.
>Dick Waterman
Dick, I've been meaning to ask... (And BTW, I've long meant to personally
thank you for your efforts in this - House was _fine_) We caught the great
bluesist in Central Park in NY about 1966. He said that that was the first
time he's ever tried an electric guitar - but he played it like a simple
amplified acoustic guitar so his playing was not ruined by it at all. :)
1) Can you lock down the actual time he played that time?
2) Do you know if he ever played in Scotland?
Been wondering.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
I am Abby Sale - in Orlando, Florida
Boycott South Carolina!
http://151.200.0.60/communications/press_releases/SCEconomic2.asp
Jinxblues
>Dick, I've been meaning to ask... (And BTW, I've long meant to personally
>thank you for your efforts in this - House was _fine_) We caught the great
>bluesist in Central Park in NY about 1966. He said that that was the first
>time he's ever tried an electric guitar - but he played it like a simple
>amplified acoustic guitar so his playing was not ruined by it at all. :)
>
>1) Can you lock down the actual time he played that time?
I have undated photographs of him opening for Buddy Guy at Wollman Rink in
Central Park somewhere in that time period. It was played in a driving
rainstorm and someone held an umbrella over Mister House while he played.
>2) Do you know if he ever played in Scotland?
He did the American Folk Blues Festival in the fall of 1967. I was not with him
but I doubt if they had dates in Scotland.
I was with him when he toured Great Britain in 1970 and I know we did not go to
Scotland.
Dick Waterman
Peter Stone Brown
news:20010822102948...@mb-md.aol.com...
>
> >Dick, I've been meaning to ask... (And BTW, I've long meant to
personally
> >thank you for your efforts in this - House was _fine_) We caught the
great
> >bluesist in Central Park in NY about 1966. He said that that was the
first
> >time he's ever tried an electric guitar - but he played it like a simple
> >amplified acoustic guitar so his playing was not ruined by it at all. :)
> >
> >1) Can you lock down the actual time he played that time?
>
> I have undated photographs of him opening for Buddy Guy at Wollman Rink in
> Central Park somewhere in that time period. It was played in a driving
> rainstorm and someone held an umbrella over Mister House while he played.
>
Dick,
I saw that show. The only time I saw him. The bill was Jr. Wells (not
Buddy), Big Boy Crudup and Son House. Junior couldn't play his harp because
of the rain. He said, "Sorry I can't blow my whistle for you."
--
"The game is the same, it's just up on another level." --Bob Dylan
Peter Stone Brown
e-mail: ps...@earthlink.net
http://store.yahoo.com/tangible-music/petstonbrowi.html