Talk:The Ballad of Buster Scruggs

"First time?"

In Near Algodones' summary, I added a brief reference to the cowboy saying "First time?" to his neighbor on the gallows. It was reverted in the usual spirit of minimalist zealotry. For those who missed the significance of that quip, the preceding events are essentially the set-up for that punchline. It adds a sense of culmination to the tale, and in that respect, it is in fact a more significant plot point to include than "there's a pretty girl". 73.207.153.20 (talk) 02:51, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

That's a good point. WP:FILMPLOT says to avoid minutiae like dialogue, scene-by-scene breakdowns, individual jokes, and technical detail.

The "there's a pretty girl" has the appearance of minutiae, though I kept it in when I was trimming down the summaries because it seemed like it had weight as the final line. If other people think that it's just as overly detailed as "first time?" we can take it out, too. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 17:08, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

The "first time?" line isn't minutiae. It is not an individual joke or extra detail. As I said, it is the culmination of events that preceded it. In as much those events can be said to have any point, setting up that punchline is it. 73.207.153.20 (talk) 18:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

You make a compelling case for replacing mention of the pretty girl line with "first time." I'll go ahead and change it. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 05:34, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Instead of changing it yourself, the edit initially provided in this discussion should been reverted back. It is inappropriate to remove someone's edit and then "concede" the removal was a mistake by adding your own entry. This actions suggests you are not allowing others to edit the article even when the edit is valid. One individual does not enjoy greater authority own ownership over Wikipedia articles than another. 2601:C0:8100:16:756F:EC28:958A:AB4A (talk) 22:05, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, that's not how our Wikipedia conduct policies work. See WP:BRD and WP:OWN. Nobody has time for this kind of nitpicking, but if you really believe that I've acted inappropriately, you can take it to ANI. Regards. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 05:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

cholera

I question whether the brother died from cholera. In the movie he is coughing and walking around, while the symptoms of cholera are diarrhea and dehydration (none of which are shown in the movie). JettaMann Dec. 18, 2018

@JettaMann: Billy Knapp says cholera as Knapp and Arthur are burying Gilbert. The Ballad of Buster Scruggs by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen. "English subtitles The Ballad of Buster Scruggs" at Open Subtitles.com.

Billmckern (talk) 06:19, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

@Billmckern: The book is not the same as the movie. In the book, Gilbert "doubles over sick" when Alice sees him. In the movie, he has chronic coughing. The transcript you link to is for the first three minutes of the movie and does not cover the time in question. I can't figure out how to make it cover that time. Using the site's search turns up nothing. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:10, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Maury Markowitz: The script, which I cited, says cholera. I also re-watched the film and looked for the scene in question. Billy Knapp clearly says that Gilbert died of cholera.

Billmckern (talk) 16:04, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Maury Markowitz: I just watched again. Between 1:15:50 and 1:16:00, Billy Knapp says Gilbert died of cholera.

Billmckern (talk) 17:52, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Well, fair enough. It's wrong, but if that's what they say that's what they say. Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:26, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

redirect

May I suggest a redirect from 'Ballad of Buster Scruggs'?Robbmonster (talk) 08:01, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. Barte (talk) 18:38, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

explain the plot?

"Realizing his fate"? René may have realized his fate, but I didn't. What the heck is going on here? Are they all doomed to be taken by the bounty hunters? (And they're not just assumed to be bounty hunters; Thigpen acknowledges they are, though he doesn't like the term.) If they're telling the truth, they're only after people with bounties on their heads, so what's the problem? - Kalimac (talk) 19:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Rene realized they were in fact the ones going on a 'passage' to the afterlife, not just Mr Thorpe. You'll notice that the camera angle is often from his point of view. He is the sane one we identify with compared to the tedious man and the religious lady.

Once they get to the hotel he looks out to see the bags being carried off and the other buildings are mere 2-dimensional facades. He finally accepts death with a tap of his hat as he enters the hotel. LegendLength (talk) 15:07, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Surly Joe

There has been some back and forth about "Surly Joe" and "Çurly Joe", and I think it might be time to try and clear up the confusion and come to a consensus.

The character is credited as "Çurly Joe" with the cedilla in the final credits. I double checked because I thought it might have been a typo. It makes sense then that we should write that name in the cast section, exactly as it appears in the credits.

The problem and the joke is is that C with a cedilla would be pronounced like 'S', giving us Surly Joe. There isn't room to explain this joke in the plot section. Even though it is technically correct to write Çurly in the plot section I think we need continue with the odd situation of "Surly" in the plot section for the joke to make any sense. (Perhaps we should add a comment in the markup), and Çurly in the cast section. Or perhaps someone can suggest a different way to do the plot section so that the Çurly/Surly joke makes sense, but I don't think writing Çurly in the plot section

Either way I encourage people to discuss what would be best for readers, and hopefully resolve the issue. -- 37.110.218.43 (talk) 10:41, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I think we have to go with reliable sources. The character's name is Çurly Joe per the credits and that's the name we should use when referencing the character throughout. The song is credited as "Little Joe the Wrangler" with additional lyrics by the Coens. Those additional lyrics include the refrain, which the subtitles spell as "Surly Joe". But lacking a script or guidance from the Coens, we don't whether that spelling is literal or phonetic. Barte (talk) 16:10, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Well I was actually agreeing with your changing the plot section back to "Surly" which it had been for some time, so if you're okay with it then I guess we have the makings of a local consensus to always write Çurly. If anyone disagrees they can discus further instead of more reverts. -- 37.110.218.43 (talk) 16:35, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I changed it to "Surly" because in reverting some unexplained deletions, I had also reverted the spelling change made by someone else. So that was a clerical fix, not an opinion. Barte (talk) 16:58, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps a footnote pointing out the two names (and thereby explaining the joke)? I think the Coens did this just to confound Wikipedia readers and editors!Relbats (talk) 21:31, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Added footnote to plot section and character list.Relbats (talk) 22:05, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Looks good. Nice work. -- 37.110.218.43 (talk) 09:59, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I grouped it in a new Notes section per WP:REFGROUP. Barte (talk) 17:39, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Looks great -- thanks. Relbats (talk) 19:42, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I hope a dissenting voice won't be poorly received, but I think we shouldn't be trying to explain jokes in the wikipedia article. All of the stories are told in a very sparse fashion, with a lot let up for the reader to interpret, as is common in the Coen Brothers' work and I think it is a mistake to add interpretations, however seemly banal and agreed upon by WP editors. I feel the plot summary section also includes a lot of interpretation of the details of the scenes, that would be better served by bare descriptions of what is seen and hear by the viewer. On the C/Surly Joe spelling, I think it is better to just assert that this is the spelling in the credits and not tell the reader how it should be pronounced, since we do not have an source to tell us that it is supposed to use French orthography. Ashmoo (talk) 11:53, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

You make an interesting point. We know that the character's name from the credits and the name in the song is pronounced "Surely Joe". But we've connected the two without a source. The screenplay would be a source, and a PDF of it seems to have been online. But no longer. (Perhaps @Relbats is right: this is a Coen plot to frustrate Wikipedia editors. (Of course that's an interpretation.)) Barte (talk) 14:18, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Per this discussion, I've changed the note to assert the spelling, not the pronunciation. Barte (talk) 05:33, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Looks good. Hope we don't get a steady stream of (un)helpful "Surly Joe" edits! Also, this would be Spanish vs. French orthography, correct? Good article here on the history of the cedilla and why it's no longer much used in modern Spanish: https://www.quora.com/What-Spanish-words-have-a-cedilla Relbats (talk) 15:12, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

To address the steady stream of SJ edits, I've changed the note to reflect my contention that the spelling and capitalization of the song lyric is speculative and thus unclear. It could be "Surly Joe", "surly Joe", or "Çurly Joe". Barte (talk) 15:33, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

What year did "The Gal Who Got Rattled" take place?

I have been trying to guess what year The Gal Who Got Rattled might have taken place. After reading the Oregon Trail page and the History Channel page on the Oregon Trail, I guess it could have been between 1843 and 1854, during which Alice Longabaugh and her husband could have claimed a square mile as a married couple.

Any real historians care to take a stab at setting the year?

Phersh (talk) 04:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Well at least I know where on the trail the story takes place: east of Ft Laramie where Matt has been promised half his wages.

Phersh (talk) 05:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@Phersh: I believe this vignette takes place in the mid-1870s.

The dog is named President Pierce, and Pierce was president from 1853 to 1857, so it's definitely after 1853.

The trip depicted in this vignette takes place between Council Bluffs, Iowa/Omaha, Nebraska and Fort Laramie Wyoming. We know from the dialogue that Fort Laramie is the halfway point, which they don't reach before Alice's death. There were two start points for the Oregon Trail - Independence, Missouri, and Omaha, Nebraska. Council Bluffs is on the east side of the Missouri River, across from Omaha on the west side. Alice Longabaugh says her brother's business in Iowa City, Iowa did not fare well, which necessitated their move to Oregon. It makes sense that they'd begin their trip from the Omaha start point, not the Independence one.

Repeating rifles became available in the early 1860s, and the rifle Mr. Arthur uses appears to be a Winchester Model 1873, a .44-40 caliber with an octagonal barrel.

Billy Knapp specifically mentions claiming land under an 1872 law. There wasn't an 1872 Homestead Act, but there was one that was signed in 1873. The original Homestead Acts applied to Oregon, and as far as I can tell, so did the 1873 Timber Culture Act. Claimants under an earlier act could obtain 160 acres, and claimants under the 1873 act could obtain an additional 160 provided they planted and cultivated trees on 40.

The Oregon Trail began to fall into disuse after completion of the railroad across Panama in 1855 made ship travel between the coasts more reliable. Use of the trail continued to fall after completion of the first Transcontinental Railroad in 1869. The last wagon trains made the Oregon Trail trip in the early 1880s.

The town of Fort Laramie was established in about 1860. The Fort Laramie military post was abandoned in 1890.

Given all these facts, I'd put the time of this vignette after 1873 and before 1880.

Billmckern (talk) 09:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

"First time" meme

Quote "first time" from the movie became a widespread meme. Should this be mentioned here? Maybe under "Reception" section? Here is the Know Your Meme entry about the meme. Mateussf (talk) 16:59, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Cholera or not

@Barte: If you don't want to do something to stop every contributor who argues that Gilbert didn't have cholera in "The Girl Who Got Rattled", then can we at least do something to tell contributors not to change what's written? I don't want to argue with you any more than I want to argue with anyone else. I just want the issue resolved so people stop making the edit saying a coughing fit is not a symptom of cholera.

Billmckern (talk) 02:26, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Every so often, someone indeed argues the point, and I'm happy to address it every so often in Talk. In the alternate universe that is Buster Scruggs, she was deemed to have died of cholera, regardless of symptoms. The current wording says that and works for me. Barte (talk) 02:42, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

We could put an invisible comment <!-- like this --> — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 03:50, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Much of the script is on Google Books including the part we’re discussing here. If a long url isn’t objectionable, we could cite it: [1] Barte (talk) 08:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

@Aeusoes1: @Barte: Reference to screenplay and invisible comment added, as per this discussion. Maybe this'll solve the problem.

Thanks,

Billmckern (talk) 11:21, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

It's my understanding that citations for plot summaries are unnecessary, as it's understood that the work itself is the source. IMHO, a link to the script would be redundant. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 14:06, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I agree the cites are redundant. I just wonder if, per Billmckern's concerns, it might still be useful here. (Though the current cite, used twice, doesn't work). In any case, per MOS:INUNIVERSE, the rule is against "Describing aspects of the work as if they were real." Whatever strain of fictional cholera the fictional Gilbert died of, it doesn't require fact-checking with the CDC. Barte (talk) 14:37, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

It is for just this reason that I put quotation marks around the word: to show that's what they called it, even though it clearly wasn't. And no, it wasn't checked with the CDC: that cholera is an intestinal disease marked by diarrhea is pretty common knowledge. Characters in a work of fiction (or even non-fiction) can be wrong; you don't have to construct an entire "alternate universe" with one thing out of place to cover for such a mistake (which may have been intentional on the part of the author). If writer had the characters claim the sky was green, when we can clearly see it isn't (which may indicate their state of mind), some sort of separation is a good idea. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 18:16, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Looking at the paragraph as it stands, I think Ƶ§œš¹ has a point about the cites being redundant. The work itself is the definitive source for plot summaries, whereas the script, which may differ from the work, is not. Barte (talk) 18:36, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

@Aeusoes1: @Barte: Cite removed.

Billmckern (talk) 19:46, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Barte (talk) 19:55, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Long plot?

An anonymous user has tagged the plot section with {{long plot}}. It seems to me that an anthology of six stories like this constitutes what MOS:PLOTLENGTH refers to as particularly complex plots which it says may need a more lengthy summary than the general guidance. Thoughts? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 16:45, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't recall the exact details, but my memory is that this came up at the time the film was released and the article was created. I believe there was general agreement to do short summaries on each segment, with the recognition that combined they would exceed the usual 700 word summary. Maybe someone else who recalls the details better can confirm.

Billmckern (talk) 18:49, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm removing this tag. It's been up since October 2021 and there have been no edits and no comments.

Billmckern (talk) 01:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

DVD release?

Has there been one? 142.205.202.71 (talk) 18:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC)