L.A.Times Has a Problem with U.S. History
-By Warner Todd Huston
… and the problem is they don’t know any of it.
The story in the L. A. Times was supposed to be a story of lighter fare, a less hectic sort of human interest story that is supposed to be interesting, but not earth shaking. It’s all about the trials and tribulations of the folks that re-create the famous Gunfight at the O.K. Corral in the dusty streets of Tombstone, Arizona.
Apparently a brash new sheriff is in town (really, I do mean the real local lawman) who has decided that the actors and reenactors that portray the original gunfight participants have gotten out of hand and need to be regulated out of existence, or at least scaled back.
The L.A. Times tale is supposed to be about the back and forth between the new laws written to quash their performances and the actors and reenactors involved. It should be a pretty simple set up, present a few paragraphs to set up the history involved and move into today’s conflagration.
And right off the bat, the L.A. Times can’t get history right.
In fact, right in the first paragraph, the Times gets a simple detail wrong. (My bold)
Reporting from Tombstone, Ariz. — Marshal Larry Talvy’s phone rang. There was trouble in town. A bunch of men in black dusters with guns were walking down Allen Street. Again.
Dusters were not black. They were white or natural muslin in color. They were not black. Sometimes cowboys wore what they called a “fish,” a yellow rainslicker made of either a rubberized sort of material or made of a muslin duster that was treated heavily with linseed oil to make it waterproof — a process that often made the overcoat look yellow.
But, so what? A minor mistake, right? Only someone with a passing knowledge of the material culture of the late 1800s and early 1900s would know that and it doesn’t really do much to change the story any. Granted. Me, I know this because I am a student of that era. But, heck, even movies get the white duster thing right even as they usually get everything else wrong!
The Times, though, follows that with another mistake, this one a tad more glaring. (again my bold)
It’s been 127 years since Doc Holliday and Wyatt Earp fought the Clantons and McLouries at the O.K. Corral here, and Tombstone is still trying to get a handle on its gunslinger problem. Only the desperadoes are no longer brawling over cards or horses. They’re fighting for tourist dollars.
Even a casual check of Google proves that the name was spelled McLaury, not McLourie.
Like I said, these aren’t the sort of errors that makes the story invalid. It certainly isn’t the end of the world or anything. It’s just a simple matter of a lack of professionalism, a lackadaisical attitude toward simple facts that could possibly call everything written into question. But it is also an example of the casual treatment that American history always gets in the press. All too often they don’t even care to make sure names of historical figures are spelled correctly.
If the Times can’t get simple historical facts straight, what can it get straight?
It certainly makes you wonder.
Email This
Posted by Warner Todd Huston on April 2, 2009 9:15 am
» Filed Under History, Journalistic Malpractice, Liberal Media/Bias, Liberal World, News, liberalism
Trackback URL:
Comments
5 Responses to “L.A.Times Has a Problem with U.S. History”
-
-
-
Affiliations
The Giants
Advertise
-
-
Our Store
- Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
-
- More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
I think the reason the article refers to “black dusters” is because author Nicolas Riccardi has been hanging out at too many leather bars:
http://teerexleather.com/shop/images/UNIK%20Leather%20%20Photos%20236.jpg
I hate to tell you, but the LA Times article basically had the story right. There’s a heck of a lot more to it, including intimidation of business owners by said “law and order” cop, etc.
They local players WERE NOT out of hand. One of the new local business owners did not like the way customers were out on the street at 4:30 every day for the traditional “walk down” to the OK Corral.
I’m friends with one of the guys in the group cited. They are not out of hand, they are doing nothing wrong, and were only adding to the mystique of the town.
Have you been to Tombstone lately? Have you ever been to Tombstone? Have you ever seen the 4:30 “walk down” that was stopped?
Like the city historian, the venerable Ben Traywick told me the other day, every once in awhile someone new moves to town and tries to make it “accurate”. Tombstone was about making money. It has always been about making money.
Oh, and I’m writing a book on fashion in the Wild West. I’ve yet to find one of those “dusters”. I know they existed, but so far I cannot find a photo of one that pre-dates 1910. If you can, please let me know. As for the “black dusters” I suspect the author was referring to the long coats that were worn – and they WERE worn during that time frame – I have photos of them. It is an easy mistake.
If you know anything about the current community of Tombstone, you will know that the guys doing the “acting” were not making trouble. They are a tradition. It’s all about a new mayor who is allowing his friends and associates access to things in the town.
SJ Reidhead
The Pink Flamingo
author of:
TRAVESTY: Frank Waters’ Earp Agenda Exposed
A Church for Helldorado: Endicott Peabody’s 1882 Tombstone Diary
two novels about Tombstone & numerous articles on the subject and the life of Wyatt Earp
Man. Sometimes you have to wonder if people actually READ anything they are replying to?
Reidhead’s above is a perfect example of what I am talking about.
Sir, your reply had NOTHING to do with what I wrote. Zilch. Nadda. Nuthin.
No where did I say the actors were out of hand. I said the real sheriff of the town was saying that and THAT is a true claim… it IS what he was saying. I did NOT, however, claim to agree with Sheriff Talvy. Also, no where did I say that the basic story the Times was trying to relate was wrong.
ALL I was saying is that they don’t have any idea what a “duster” is and that they didn’t take 2 seconds to find out how to spell McLaury.
So, sir, your “I hate to tell you” was a non sequitur. It had NOTHING to do with what I wrote.
Todd –
Yea, so, what you have to understand is that this feud that is going on in Tombstone between the gunfighter factions goes back a long way. It even predates the arrival of the new actors referred to in the article in question. As such, there are a LOT of emotions involved and hence you are going to get people from either side who will go off about the whole thing.
Now, I’m friends with *several* of the guys in the group (Huckleberry Productions) as well as an employee of the “new local business owner” referred to. I believe he means the owner of Six Gun City.
As for exactly what he liked or disliked about it… well you would have to speak with him but I can tell you that it is not as simple as Reidhead makes it sound.
That said I can tell you part of the issue was that they were allowed to perform on the street but we were not. Another component is that there used to be a sort of unspoken agreement about stepping on each others toes (show times) between gunfighter groups. Actually I think it was an unspoken understanding based on a meeting back about 5-6 years ago between the groups the *last* time things got really bad between them.
Anyway, you basically stirred the hornets nest by even mentioning the feud. I totally get why he went off on you.
Oh and, for the record, I think the walk down was great and that they should be allowed to do it but I also think if they are allowed to do street performances that other groups should b allowed as well. In the long run it will be better for the tourists.
Th problem is that Tombstone has, and probably always will be, bent on self destruction.
The new administration is no big help either…
Thanks for explaining it further, sixgun. Truth is, I didn’t have a dog in that fight, so was not in any way attempting to assess blame to any side with the Sheriff, the theater groups and reenactors. (In fact, I like reenactos and know many Wild West, Civil War, revolutionary and WWII guys).
I was ONLY talking about the garbled history that the LATimes gave us all.