| You Think
  You Know Westerns— A Double
  Western Review by Mike
  Baker 
 
   
  Stay
Away, Joe 
 by Dan Cushman Popular Library, 1953   
 
 In Stay
Away, Joe (1953) by Dan Cushman, Louis Champlain and his family live on a
Cree reservation in Montana just after the Korean War. Louis has been given 19
heifers and one bull by the Federal government to help him and his family out
of poverty. News travels fast on the Rez about Louis’ newfound wealth and a big
whoop up, a large unruly three-day beer party, spontaneously commences with
Louis and all his friends and relations. Louis wakes up hungover on the third
day to discover they drunkenly slaughtered and ate his only bull. His son Big Joe, bronc riding
  WWII and Korean War vet, comes back from the rodeo riding circuit and offers
  to help his dad get a new bull which everyone tells Louis is a bad idea, as
  Joe is a drunken, philandering, petty criminal, but Louis loves his boy, and
  things go horribly and ridiculously wrong from there. Stay Away, Joe
  sequentially tells a series of stories about how Louis goes from having
  nothing to being “rich” to having nothing again. Each step along the way
  either Louis or his family, driven either by the “old ways” are too generous
  or by trying to be like how they imagine “white folks” would act derail the
  Federal program of which they are currently a part. The book’s opening, and if
  you’ve read my reviews you know how much a I love a strong opening, is
  charming and hilariously funny. I can’t say more than that. You need to read
  it. Beyond that, the book meanders. It reminds me of Max Evans’ Rounders
  which seemingly goes nowhere except it does. It has what I call a “ta da”
  moment that cinches together all the threads into something tangible you can
  take away. Stay Away, Joe doesn’t do that. The book hangs. Cushman’s characters are
  fulsome and meticulously drawn deeply flawed human beings. They are not
  Indian stereotypes but, because Cushman was a white guy, you might make that
  claim. He doesn’t seem to me to be judging them but rather his critique might
  be what happens when you impose values on someone who isn’t native to those
  values or worse, you see someone else’s values as superior to your own and
  you acquiesce. 
   
 Cruel
Angel Past Sundown by Hailey Piper Death Head’s Press, 2023   
      Meanwhile, Cruel Angel Past Sundown (2023) by Hailey
  Piper is about ranch wife Annette Klein the day she’s visited by a naked
  pregnant woman dragging a cavalry saber out of the desert. Annette and her
  husband Frank bring the woman inside where upon the woman straddles Annette’s
  husband in bed and eviscerates him with the saber as Annette, in a weird
  bloody eyed stupor, watches unable to stop the deranged pregnant woman as the
  woman eats her husband’s viscera. Later that night, Annette
  stabbed by the pregnant woman’s father who shows up looking for his daughter
  who he believes is the reborn virgin Mary carrying the Christ child. Annette
  gets away on her bull Big Pete who takes her into the town of Low’s Bend where
  she and her friends fight off father and daughter who have come to Low’s
  Bend, for different reasons, to pretty much murder everyone there. The book
  evolves rapidly though from a straight-ahead splatter western with a goth
  twist, something like a weird western but with a horror bent, into something
  more metaphysical which I did not see coming, wasn’t prepared for and
  struggled against until the end of the book. Piper writes in a mix of the
  mundane and the poetical and sometimes suffers for this because, imho,
  her voice feels uneven. It would be hard to write a book that was solidly
  poetical so that you have to find a balance drawing out certain lines. It
  reads here like two separate narratives, almost. There’s a particular moment,
  somewhere in the middle, where the main character gets bogged down arguing
  with a supernatural villain. It would be comical if it wasn’t meant to be
  deadly serious. It’s where the book is heading. Like I said, somewhere metaphysical. Also, the book deals with
  LGBTQ+ issues which I imagine might turn some readers off, you know who you
  are, even you guys should read this. I would, like Marcellus Wallace
  suggested, fight through that shit because it pays off. You might not like it
  but a few days later, as what I experienced sunk in, I got that I’d read
  something maybe important and, at the very least, interesting enough to be
  worth my time. You might ask yourself why I’m
  reviewing these two vastly dissimilar books simultaneously. It works like
  this: I started both books believing they were westerns and, it turns out,
  they are westerns in the same way Star Wars is a movie about trash compactors
  and intergalactic cabarets. They both have cowboys and Indians and horses and
  stuff but neither fits the bill for what most anyone would call a western.
  This is not a bad thing. The genre, which I love
  dearly, needs to be stretched and changed if it is to survive. My generation,
  as well as the generation before mine, won’t keep it alive. I believe that
  traditional westerns will only live on if first younger readers see a way into
  the stories and books and writers like Hailey Piper will bring in those
  readers. I wonder if Dan Cushman’s book had a similar effect in 1953 when it
  came out. I would like to imagine that it was the gateway drug from cultural
  elitists who read it, felt intellectually vindicated and then, while buying
  smokes at the corner store, saw a Louis L ’Amour book and thought, why not. |