Image from my Stencil membership
Over my lifetime, whether on the television or theater, I think I've seen most John Wayne films. On DVD, we own quite a few, my favorites being Hondo and Red River. They have all the important ingredients for me-- love,
discussions of the importance of honesty, courage, a clear depiction of the need sometimes to change, stirring
soundtracks, big sky, desert landscapes, often humor; and of course, John Wayne as a
powerful figure for right-- at least eventually.
Also, as did a lot of his films, there were strong
female counter punchers to him (love that in the books I write also). Although today, there are some counter punchers to claim these were not good films, and he was not a good hero.
The thing was in those films, you never had to worry if the good guy will win. Mostly when they are over, they leave
the viewer a satisfied feeling. Did we think they really happened? Not likely. It's the emotional uplift that they provided versus too often a world without any feel good about what has happened-- no happily ever after or it all working out as we might wish.
There
are also some problems with them if you look deeper. One is that we can
mistake image for reality. John Wayne walked or rode onto the screen
and instantly you knew he could not only be trusted to be who he said he
was but that he could take care of whatever had gone wrong. Might take
him some time, but he'd get you there. This is great for entertainment
but what happens when you take it into real life?
Politically
you can end up with the need for politicians to have an image that
people vote for more than the actual person. Some is due to the need for
instant sound bites and, at least these days, people's lack of patience with
serious messages. We want to feel good and a lengthy discussion of
policy isn't going to cut it.
So, we can get a guy, who looks good in a tuxedo, can deliver a rousing speech, maybe written for him, but who cares. Maybe it's a woman in a designer suit, with a big smile, good makeup, and a promise of joy without much discussion of issues for either.
Or maybe the image wears a Stetson, cowboy boots, buys himself a ranch, rides around in a
pickup, cuts brush (never mind if it would've been better off not being
cut), and you got a cowboy. It doesn't matter if he doesn't have a cow,
has no idea which side of the horse to mount from. He presents the
image, and what does cowboy mean to Americans? To a lot of us, especially elders, it can mean John Wayne.
The John Wayne image worked, with his stories set in the West, righting wrongs, a code of ethics, a
man of his word. Did the candidate with the image have any of those qualities? Most likely they don't have to have them. It's the illusion, male or female. Voters don't go deep enough in past records to find out if what is being presented is all image, that they may never have lived up to. Research and policy papers take too long and aren't fun. People,
including reporters, get carried away with image. It satisfies something
in us.
Images have long been with us, but are more easily portrayed with social media, which spreads those images. This one is ugly and fat. Even if they are not, the insults travel with them. That one is lovely and slickly dressed. Does that relate to anything but image?
Some politicians try to create an image that they don't really fit. They're a war hero, though maybe never in a war. That approach doesn't always lead to success with Americans if the real life doesn't fit it. But sometimes, connecting with these politicians seems to matter more with Americans than their actual policies. Would you like a beer with him or her, is the key and usually about an image.
This
goes beyond politics to who we trust in our personal lives. A young
woman goes to a bar, a guy has a square jaw, is cute, seems nice and she
trusts him. What he truly is she has no idea as she barely knows him.
It's all about image, and Ted Bundy projected a good looking guy until he
got the girl in his power when what he truly was became obvious, and it
was too late.
Another problem with images is when we get caught up in them for ourselves. Do we have to fit an image, created by the culture, that is not who we truly are? That can mean how we dress, wear our hair, jobs, hobbies, friends we choose, books we read, etc. Images might seem like a short cut, but are they to a real life?
Another problem with some of the John Wayne films (much as I love 'em) is
that they too often present a simplistic solution to problems-- either a
fistfight or guns (if it's an uppity lady, spanking will do). It is fun
to watch those films, and I wait for the action like everybody else; but
if we buy into that as a real solution, we will not only damage our
personal lives (could end up in jail) but also get talked into wars
that have no real purpose beyond looking like we are at least doing
something.
As a writer, I come up against the image problem in writing my books. Did I buy into an image for the hero or heroine, which doesn't match real life? Most readers are looking for some escapism in the choices for books, but if a character comes across as cardboard, that doesn't satisfy the rest of their need in reading, which is inspiration.
What's the answer to the image thing where it comes to our lives, voting, choosing of partners? I think mainly
it's recognizing image when we see it and understanding it is
superficial and an illusion which may or may not have substance behind
it. Real heroes and villains don't come so conveniently packaged.
