Zane Grey - Riders of the Purple Sage

[zespectre]

I re-read it recently enough that I won't re-read again, but I'll join in the discussion when it starts

[jgaiser]

Finished "The High Crusade" and am about 1/4 through "Riders of the Purple Sage". It's been a while since I read it and a lot is coming back, but still enjoying the read. Looking forward to discussion.

[GA Russell]

Great! That's six of us so far.

[GA Russell]

Thanks for those photos, AnemicOak! They help a lot imagining the scenery.

[AnemicOak]

Finished, now I'm trying to decide if I want to read the sequel now or later.


Interesting to find out there is a newer version of this book that restores all the things cut from it by the editor back in 1912.

[zespectre]

Interesting to find out there is a newer version of this book that restores all the things cut from it by the editor back in 1912.

What? Darnit! I'd have read that version if I'd have known.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by zespectre

What? Darnit! I'd have read that version if I'd have known.

In 2005 Dorchester/Leisure Books published an "uncut" version using the original manuscript found in the collection of the Ohio State Historical Society. Apparently the cuts made by the editor are "drastic and alter the entire perspective of the story" according to Jon Tuska

In 2004 Leisure also published The Desert Crucible which is an uncut version of Sage's sequel The Rainbow Trail again from the original found in the special collections of BYU. "Upon examination, it was found to be significantly different..." again according to Tuska


The Tuska quotes come from the forward of the uncut version of Purple Sage that I just checked out from my library (I'm toying with the idea of reading it). He's a literary agent and writer who specializes in Westerns.



Which begs the question. Are the new versions "classics" or were the cuts and alterations made by Ripley Hitchcock (Sr editor at Harper Bros.) to Purple Sage to "make the novel more generally acceptable to readers" part of what helped the book to gain classic status?

[orlok]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

Finished, now I'm trying to decide if I want to read the sequel now or later.

Thanks for this - I didn't even know there was one! Now on my TBR list, but I think I'll wait until we have reviewd Purple Sage first, to avoid confusion between the two.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by orlok

Thanks for this - I didn't even know there was one! Now on my TBR list, but I think I'll wait until we have reviewd Purple Sage first, to avoid confusion between the two.

Yeah, I think I'm going to wait too.


Link to the sequel for anyone that wants it...
http://www.feedbooks.com/book/1834/the-rainbow-trail

[Patricia1066]

Sounds interesting. I have just downloaded it to my kindle (feedbooks) and will look out for the discussion.

Finished it last night. I wish I had know about the original version.

[GA Russell]

Everybody finished? Let's begin.

Many years ago I read Owen Wister's The Virginian, which was published in 1902. As I recall, the preface to that edition said that it was the first western best seller. Riders of the Purple Sage was published only ten years later in 1912, so we are still talking about the early years of the genre.

There was way too much romance for me. I expected a lot more about cowboys, and a lot less about women's love lives.

I had trouble imagining the territory - for example how the canyon related to the cliff leading up to the dwelling on Surprise Valley. A map would have been helpful, showing how the waterfall the rustlers led the cattle through related to Surprise Valley's location.

It occurred to me that only a few years after 1912, someone could have flown a small biplane over the territory and mapped it all out, and thus eliminated the unknown nature of the geography.

A little more explanation of Millie early on would have been helpful to me. After a while she was all they talked about, yet I couldn't remember much of what had been said about her originally.

I suppose that it would be politically incorrect today to make the Mormons the bad guys. If I were a Mormon, I wouldn't be happy about it! A few months ago I read The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood, and noticed that its author Howard Pyle made the bishop the bad guy second only to the Sheriff of Nottingham, and had Robin Hood murdered by a nun, so I had to figure that Pyle was anti-Catholic. I'm a Catholic, and I'm accustomed to anti-Catholicism, so maybe the Mormons are accustomed to anti-Mormonism too.

I did think that Grey did a good job of tying up all the loose ends at the end of the book.

What say you?

[AnemicOak]

I liked it for the most part. It's definitely not your stereotypical western but at the same time it often brought to mind scenes from old western movies I watched as a kid. Grey did a good job of describing the surrounding landscape I thought and I could picture how things looked.

Surprise Valley seemed to me to be a Garden of Eden themed place, with two characters isolated together in lush surroundings.

Lassiter seemed your prototypical western hero the lone gunman fighting for vengeance and justice against those who stole his sister.

I found that at times the book didn't really grab me all that much and then at others, such as Venters chase of Jerry Card to be riveting and I didn't want to put the book down.

We have two types of villains in Sage, the cattle rustlers and the Mormons. Unfortunately I'm not knowledgeable of Mormons of the time to know if their depiction was in anyway accurate or if perhaps the author just disliked the religion a lot.

One thing Grey did a good job of was giving us characters that for the most part weren't black and white good or evil. They were all flawed just like folks are in real life and while at times his characterizations were one dimensional I think he did a great job overall.


I liked the book and am glad I read it. At the same time I doubt I'll ever read it again unless it's to read the uncut version just to see what's different. I will probably read the sequel at some point in the future.

[orlok]

I'm glad I've finally read it. I have wanted to do so for a long time. Like GA, I was surprised at how much it focused on the romance side (had Grey been reading a lot of Jane Austen and co. recently, I wonder?), and it seemed to be written from a woman's perspective in many ways. Not knocking that, just not expected.

There were a number of other things that surprised; the "Garden of Eden" Valley, which I found a bit unlikely, if idyllic, and the rather puritanical approach to sex (a product of its time, I guess), and also that the novel was more complex than my expectations of the genre, with a number of plot strands.

But mostly I did not expect it to be a polemic on the evils of Mormonism. Grey clearly had an axe to grind here, and some of his rhetoric had overtones of anti-Semitic diatribes that certainly wouldn't be acceptable in more recent times. I've always had the view of Mormons as peaceful and supportive communities, but either times have changed, or I am just showing my naivety and lack of knowledge on the subject.

I agree that there were a number of exciting passages, including the horse chase between Venters and Jerry Card, and the scene where Venters confronts Tull and his "gang" in the Church, which is pure Hollywood standoff material (was I the only one who imagined Clint as Venters in that scene?). But for me, there was not enough classic western fayre - too few gunfights. I've probably been spoiled by the westerns of latter years...

So a fun read, which I did enjoy, but like AnemicOak, not one I'm likely to revisit. I will probably try the sequel The Rainbow Trail, but not just yet.

[hartsfieldl1]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

orlok and I are reading Zane Grey's Riders of the Purple Sage this month.

Anybody want to join us?

I'd love to join the discussion. I sometimes teach this in a course called "Literature of the Southwest," and it can lead to some fascinating discussions. I'm going to be traveling soon, but I'll be checking in.