|
Post by AR15 on Aug 25, 2012 18:47:54 GMT -5
Richard was the lead. It was his show. Just my opinion , and I dont mean anything bad about it, but it has always surprised me that some fans dont like John-boy. He was the show in my book. See, I partly agree, in that I think John-Boy is great and a really good part of the show, but at the same time, I think The Waltons did just fine without him too, I equally like the later Seassons 6-9!
|
|
|
Post by goldenslumbers on Aug 26, 2012 9:25:29 GMT -5
I share Travis' view. John-Boy is not the be-all and end-all in my book; in fact, he's not even close to being among my favorite characters on the show.
In The Conflict, John-Boy is simply irritating as The Boy Wonder of Social Consciousness. (I'm not a big fan of the book burning episode for the same reason. Self righteousness is tolerable if it comes from the aged; it is NOT tolerable if it comes from the mouths of neophyte teenagers).
Richard Thomas does a great job portraying him, but John-Boy himself can be a pain. "The Children." Ugh!
|
|
|
Post by JeriJet on Aug 26, 2012 10:24:44 GMT -5
Why does John-Boy's calling the rest of the kids "the children" bother you so? It's the role he played in the family -- he was the eldest and there was a sizeable age gap between the next in line (Jason) and him .... and he'd reached a point where he was called upon to play almost a second father figure to the others..... It made a lot of sense to me. These days, it doesn't appear that the eldest in any family assumes a role-model position -- they don't want the responsibility .... whereas in the good ole days, it was a desirable place of honor, and one to be taken seriously.
|
|
|
Post by goldenslumbers on Aug 26, 2012 12:00:23 GMT -5
Why? Because John-Boy is a child himelf.
In the "good ole days" it might have been a place of honor for the eldest child...but I can guarantee you that many younger siblings saw it is a place of unwarranted, unearned honor given to the eldest child who then assumed opportunities, wealth and prestige that the younger siblings were never to receive (or even get a chance to earn).
"The eldest desireable place of honor" tag often isn't earned. It is bestowed by chance. To say that John-Boy is in the "desireable place of honor" is to say that the other six children aren't and never will be.
|
|
|
Post by JeriJet on Aug 26, 2012 12:19:35 GMT -5
Can't agree..... I think it's generational..... It's similar to the fact that nowadays people don't want to name a first son after the father because future sons would feel they were something lesser. For me, I think there is something to be said for tradition..... I like it. But doubt if younger folks on this forum would ever agree.... As far as "place of honor" -- that compares to respecting one's elders, another "tradition" that is mostly lost these days.....
John-Boy by virtue of his age had lived longer, experienced more, "been there, done that", etc., and therefore would always be more advanced and worthy of having the younger children listen to his advice. It is a responsibility not to be taken lightly, and it wasn't..... he was in fact quite a good role model.
Surely each child realizes (or should be taught) that he/she will always have folks around who are more advanced, and less advanced for that matter. It's a life lesson.
|
|
|
Post by goldenslumbers on Aug 26, 2012 12:45:17 GMT -5
Just because someone is eldest doesn't mean that their views and experiences are more sacrosanct than those of others.
It also doesn't mean that they are superior and more worthy of those younger. Are they more experienced and wordly? Yes? As they should be. But it hardly makes them superior.
That they are more experienced, however, doesn't equate to - or merit - having access to opportunities, wealth and prestige that younger siblings will never have a crack at simply because they weren't born first.
You're right. We'll never agree on this subject.
|
|
|
Post by JeriJet on Aug 26, 2012 15:48:45 GMT -5
Just because someone is eldest doesn't mean that their views and experiences are more sacrosanct than those of others. It also doesn't mean that they are superior and more worthy of those younger. Are they more experienced and wordly? Yes? As they should be. But it hardly makes them superior. That they are more experienced, however, doesn't equate to - or merit - having access to opportunities, wealth and prestige that younger siblings will never have a crack at simply because they weren't born first. You're right. We'll never agree on this subject. You're inferring things I haven't said...... I said nothing about the eldest sibling being superior or more worthy. It's a question of position and respect. It appears I've hit a nerve, but you're not reading me correctly.....
|
|
|
Post by AR15 on Aug 26, 2012 15:53:11 GMT -5
Just because someone is eldest doesn't mean that their views and experiences are more sacrosanct than those of others. It also doesn't mean that they are superior and more worthy of those younger. Are they more experienced and wordly? Yes? As they should be. But it hardly makes them superior. That they are more experienced, however, doesn't equate to - or merit - having access to opportunities, wealth and prestige that younger siblings will never have a crack at simply because they weren't born first. You're right. We'll never agree on this subject. Just to say a few things in John-Boy defence: He often complained that he was made into an "Old Mother Hen" showing that he didn't feel that it was a roll he wanted to fill. Plus, he was also shown to be wrong, remember when he sold his land? Or when his smoke piping (to make himself look more intellectual I believe) potentially burned down their whole house? I don't believe that John-Boy was really given any more oppertunities than the other children, Jason, Mary Ellen and Erin all moved onto colleges after school just like he did and all of them had their fair share of jobs and other oppertunities too. Plus, while he did call them "the children" Olivia would say things like "John-Boy, can you look after the children this afternoon?" rather than "John-Boy, can you look after your brothers and sisters this afternoon?" so perhaps he got to calling them "the children" based on the fact that his parents already saw them as separate groups. Finally, I've never really seen John-Boy as self-righteous. In The Conflict, everything he does to prevent Zebulon using the guns all stems from John telling him something along the lines of "Make sure your Grandpa doesn't get his hands on a rifle, we don't want him getting carried away" and so John-Boy fulfills his father's wishes throughout the episode. And in The Firestorm, when he defends Mein Kampfs publication, there may be a hint of self-righteous-ness, but he's not so much as sticking out his own point of view, rather saying that ALL point of views need to be properly understood and never ignored or burned. I will say that, oftentimes, John-Boy is depicted in a overtly good way, but I certainly don't see it as a thing that always happens, rather an occasional occurance in episodes. But yes heh, look at this big discussion over a fictional characters the joys of the internet I suppose! ;D I just wanted to explain why I don't agree with what you've said.
|
|
|
Post by goldenslumbers on Aug 26, 2012 16:35:02 GMT -5
JeriJet: What do you think "question of position and respect" is exactly, if not superiority? What does respect mean, exactly? Just because you're older doesn't mean you've "earned" anything at all, least of all respect. I haven't witnessed my peers' older siblings acting in ways that merits respect from their younger siblings. Quite the contrary. In fact, I've witnessed many eldest siblings earn nothing more than a kick in the pants. Being eldest does not mean you are entitled.
Oftentimes, John-Boy just wanted to push his younger siblings around. And then when they didn't do as he unsolicitedly advised, he'd whine and stomp his feet.
AR15: Our views of John-Boy differ. I see him as self-righteous. And frequently a pollyanna. If you disagree, that's fine. If he was all that great, IMO, he would have informed his parents that he also was "one of the children". Alas, he didn't do that. Instead, he relished the dual role of (1) put upon eldest sibling, and, (2) "wise", 18-year-old sage.
If John-Boy actually disliked this dual role, he would have put an end to it. There were four adults in the Waltons household already. There was no need for a phony fifth. John-Boy wouldve spoken up if the role wasn't to his liking. He certainly told off his parents, siblings and townspeople on all sorts of other matters.
John-Boy just wanted to whine a lot, that's all. It's how he got the attention he craved.
Jason and Mary-Ellen (and occasionally Jim Bob) would nail John-Boy on his childish behavior. Especially Mary-Ellen. Kudos to the writers of the show for recognizing how annoying John-Boy could be.
That's my take, and I'm sticking to it.
|
|
|
Post by AR15 on Aug 26, 2012 16:49:35 GMT -5
AR15: Our views of John-Boy differ. I see him as self-righteous. And frequently a pollyanna. If you disagree, that's fine. If he was all that great, IMO, he would have informed his parents that he also was "one of the children". Alas, he didn't do that. Instead, he relished the dual role of (1) put upon eldest sibling, and, (2) "wise", 18-year-old sage. If John-Boy actually disliked this dual role, he would have put an end to it. There were four adults in the Waltons household already. There was no need for a phony fifth. John-Boy wouldve spoken up if the role wasn't to his liking. He certainly told off his parents, siblings and townspeople on all sorts of other matters. John-Boy just wanted to whine a lot, that's all. It's how he got the attention he craved. Jason and Mary-Ellen (and occasionally Jim Bob) would nail John-Boy on his childish behavior. Especially Mary-Ellen. Kudos to the writers of the show for recognizing how annoying John-Boy could be. That's my take, and I'm sticking to it. It certainly is interesting to read such a different interpretation of the character than the one I have ;D
|
|
|
Post by goldenslumbers on Aug 26, 2012 17:03:47 GMT -5
Isn't it great?! I very much enjoyed reading your take on John-Boy as well, even if I can't fathom it! LOL
|
|
|
Post by JeriJet on Aug 26, 2012 17:50:37 GMT -5
JeriJet: What do you think "question of position and respect" is exactly, if not superiority? What does respect mean, exactly? Just because you're older doesn't mean you've "earned" anything at all, least of all respect. I haven't witnessed my peers' older siblings acting in ways that merits respect from their younger siblings. Quite the contrary. In fact, I've witnessed many eldest siblings earn nothing more than a kick in the pants. Being eldest does not mean you are entitled. Again, you are inferring things I did not say.... To repeat, I think this is definitely generational...... We were brought up at different times..... I was taught to have respect for my elders and also for authority. It's how the Walton children were brought up, too.... This does not mean one necessarily thinks another person is superior. However, acknowledgement of one's position was at one time considered vital. It's how one got along at work with the boss, it's how the armed forces have always operated, and it's how most families were run at one time. It was a strong part of common courtesy. I understand little of this exists today.... and I personally think that's a shame. I enjoyed the graciousness involved, as well as the inherent private jokes!
|
|
|
Post by travis on Aug 26, 2012 22:37:20 GMT -5
Lol..Golden and I must be on the same brain frequency when it comes to the John Boy role. No one will ever say he was not critical to the show and the cast seemed to adore him. (outside Michael Learned saying some up and down times) All I will say is: Wonderful to have feedback from this experienced audience. And, I will stand by the assertion the show was just fine once the character left.
|
|
|
Post by awesomemixtape10 on Aug 26, 2012 23:07:17 GMT -5
if the other kids had a equal number of story lines as John-boy, at least in the early years, the show wouldnt be as good as it was. They were not good enough actors. They just wernt. Heck, it might not have lasted to a season 6 if they went that direction. About John-boy being self-righteous and thinking he was better than the rest of the children- well, that is just the way it was. Blame the characters of Olivia and John Sr for rasing him like that . lol It was realistic, and iF john boy told the adults off about it, He probably would have got whipped. If Olivia and Grandma are constantly telling him, "Go get The CHILDREN. Look after the CHILDREN. etc" Then he is gonna think that to a certain extent. Plus, he was like 17 or something. What 17 year old is gonna want to be a "old mother hen" all the time.? Yeah, he wined...He was 17 ! They WERE Children. No 17 year old is gonna say he or she is a child. If he didnt wine sometimes and have other personality problems, then the show wouldnt be as realistic! I mean, isnt that what the charcter was about- The age between childhood and adulthood? He was just a emotional teenager who got mixed up sometimes, but he did a pretty good job keeping it together. Dont get me wrong- He annoyed me when He convinced his parents not to sell the land. It was easy for him to say. he was going to college and then he was going to New York. Anyway, anything People say about JB , they can say about Mary Ellen. She was far worse in every concievable way. Edit-It looks like all my points have been said by other posters. My bad- I didnt read them all before I posted.
|
|
|
Post by JeriJet on Aug 27, 2012 7:40:04 GMT -5
if the other kids had a equal number of story lines as John-boy, at least in the early years, the show wouldnt be as good as it was. They were not good enough actors. They just wernt. Heck, it might not have lasted to a season 6 if they went that direction. About John-boy being self-righteous and thinking he was better than the rest of the children- well, that is just the way it was. Blame the characters of Olivia and John Sr for rasing him like that . lol It was realistic, and iF john boy told the adults off about it, He probably would have got whipped. If Olivia and Grandma are constantly telling him, "Go get The CHILDREN. Look after the CHILDREN. etc" Then he is gonna think that to a certain extent. Plus, he was like 17 or something. What 17 year old is gonna want to be a "old mother hen" all the time.? Yeah, he wined...He was 17 ! They WERE Children. No 17 year old is gonna say he or she is a child. If he didnt wine sometimes and have other personality problems, then the show wouldnt be as realistic! I mean, isnt that what the charcter was about- The age between childhood and adulthood? He was just a emotional teenager who got mixed up sometimes, but he did a pretty good job keeping it together. Dont get me wrong- He annoyed me when He convinced his parents not to sell the land. It was easy for him to say. he was going to college and then he was going to New York. Anyway, anything People say about JB , they can say about Mary Ellen. She was far worse in every concievable way. Edit-It looks like all my points have been said by other posters. My bad- I didnt read them all before I posted. Love your post, awesome..... Others may have contributed similar ideas, but yours somehow "gets it" and makes perfect sense. I have always thought that some folks are "turned off" by Richard Thomas (for whatever reason) and thus just don't give John-Boy his due !!
|
|