Jump to content

Talk:John Ford: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 75: Line 75:
So, why did the Catholic ban on (or, more to the point, non-recognition of) divorce apply, but the Catholic ban on extra-marital sex never seemed to bother him in the slightest? I think we need a citation that demonstrates the marriage thing was important to him but the other thing was not. At the moment, it reads like we've just made it all up. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<font face="Papyrus"><sup>[Talk]</sup></font>]] 12:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
So, why did the Catholic ban on (or, more to the point, non-recognition of) divorce apply, but the Catholic ban on extra-marital sex never seemed to bother him in the slightest? I think we need a citation that demonstrates the marriage thing was important to him but the other thing was not. At the moment, it reads like we've just made it all up. -- [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<font face="Papyrus"><sup>[Talk]</sup></font>]] 12:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


:I've altered that as it's not clear his religion relates to his sticking to the marriage. She was apparently non-Catholic and divorced when they married. Possibly her previous marriage didn't count according to the Church of the time, but it still might have been doable for him to annul such a marriage. Also he reportedly stated he was "Catholic, but not very Catholic." All that said there have been Catholics, some of the [[Kennedy family]] come to mind, who had a bigger problem with divorce than adultery. This can maybe be justified via the faith. In Catholicism remarriage after divorce is considered adultery or polygamy because marriage is for life. All forms of adultery can be forgiven though if you end the adultery, repent, and try never to do it again. However that means the way to repent of being "remarried after divorce" is to end your "serial polygamy" marriage and either renew your valid marriage or never remarry as long as your valid spouse lives. That can be more complicated than just ending an affair. Also a second marriage after divorce would mean a marriage outside the Church and before Vatican II even attending a non-Catholic marriage was sort of a folk-taboo among many Catholics. So taking that together some may have felt adultery was still "wrong" but less wrong as it was easier to get out of it and didn't run the risk of you engaging in heretical or heathen ceremonies. (Because I'm assuming a Kennedy or what not would not be thinking of life-long celibacy after a divorce) I've read stories of divorced Catholics, in older times, who would "shack up" with people rather than marry them and I guess it's because one is forgivable but the other was seen as essentially abandoning the faith outright. Although it strikes me, a Catholic, as fairly weird too.--[[User:T. Anthony|T. Anthony]] ([[User talk:T. Anthony|talk]]) 22:30, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
:I've altered that as it's not clear his religion relates to his sticking to the marriage. She was apparently non-Catholic and divorced when they married. Possibly her previous marriage didn't count according to the Church of the time, but it still might have been doable for him to annul such a marriage. Also he reportedly stated he was "Catholic, but not very Catholic." All that said there have been Catholics, some of the [[Kennedy family]] come to mind, who had a bigger problem with divorce than adultery. This can maybe be justified via the faith. In Catholicism remarriage after divorce is considered adultery or polygamy because marriage is for life. All forms of adultery can be forgiven though if you end the adultery, repent, and try never to do it again. However that means the way to repent of being "remarried after divorce" is to end your "serial polygamy" marriage and either renew your valid marriage or never remarry as long as your valid spouse lives. That can be more complicated than just ending an affair. Also a second marriage after divorce would mean a marriage outside the Church and before Vatican II even attending a non-Catholic marriage was sort of a folk-taboo among many Catholics. So taking that together some may have felt adultery was still "wrong" but less wrong as it was easier to get out of it and didn't run the risk of you engaging in heretical or heathen ceremonies. (Because I'm assuming a Kennedy or what not would not be thinking of life-long celibacy after a divorce. If you don't remarry I think divorce was acceptable, or non-existent, but I doubt that's what we mean) I've read stories of divorced Catholics, in older times, who would "shack up" with people rather than marry them and I guess it's because one is forgivable but the other was seen as essentially abandoning the faith outright. Although it strikes me, a Catholic, as fairly weird too.--[[User:T. Anthony|T. Anthony]] ([[User talk:T. Anthony|talk]]) 22:30, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


== 'sexual preferences' ==
== 'sexual preferences' ==

Revision as of 22:34, 14 June 2013


World's foremost movie directors in 1940?

I'm currently translatin this article into Finnish (great job, by the way, - and with sources :) ), but the statement "by 1940 he was acknowledged as one of the world's foremost movie directors" struck me as odd. I always thought John Ford's real rise to fame came with the Auteur theory in the late 50s and early 60s. Please correct me if I'm wrong.--Nedergard (talk) 09:40, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At one point, THE INFORMER was considered the greatest sound film ever made. Hard to believe now. Ford won his first Academy Award for THE INFORMER, and then his 2nd and 3rd in 1941 & '42 (for THE GRAPES OF WRATH & HOW GREEN WAS MY VALLEY). So, he was pretty much established as the foremost American director other than Frank Capra (who had segued into his own hybrid of comedic films by 1940), who racked up three Oscars by 1940. Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 21:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a reference will help to support this view - can anyone assist? - but I think the point is pretty much borne out by the article -- by the early '40s his films had won a slew of major awards including numerous Oscars, and he was one of the highest-paid paid directors in the world - in fact (as I note) he was earning more than the US President. Dunks (talk) 11:57, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Fords silent movies

20110130 by Pandion: I just viewed "Upstream" a 1927 silent film directed by John Ford at the NY premiere at the Museum of the Moving Image, Astoria, NY of the restored print found in the New Zealand Film Archives . The handout for the screening said that John Ford directed over 60 silent titles and only about dozen films survive. I would like to add this to the opening sentence of this article if no objects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pandion (talkcontribs) 02:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Silent movies were made on cellulose nitrate (basically gunpowder) until safety film was invented in 1951, and I've read reports that 50% of all films made before 1950 were lost or destroyed. 63.192.100.202 (talk) 21:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The Searchers" Medal

In "The Searchers" the medal that John Wayne gives to Debbie at the beginning of the movie is the Order of St. Sava medal, a Serbian decoration established in 1883. The scene in the movie takes place in 1868 and the medal is supposed to be from John Wayne's time in Mexico after the Civil War. Why would John Ford, who was an Admiral in the Navy, use the wrong medal? Does the medal have a symbolic significance? The medal is light blue and white, like Aunt Martha's costume, does this signify that Natalie Wood is actually John Wayne's daughter in the movie? Where is the medal nowadays? 63.192.100.202 (talk) 21:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:John Ford c1920.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:John Ford c1920.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:John Ford c1920.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As he was a practising Catholic,[5][not in citation given] the Ford marriage lasted until his death, although he had many extramarital relationships.[6]

Religious scruples, and lack thereof

So, why did the Catholic ban on (or, more to the point, non-recognition of) divorce apply, but the Catholic ban on extra-marital sex never seemed to bother him in the slightest? I think we need a citation that demonstrates the marriage thing was important to him but the other thing was not. At the moment, it reads like we've just made it all up. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 12:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've altered that as it's not clear his religion relates to his sticking to the marriage. She was apparently non-Catholic and divorced when they married. Possibly her previous marriage didn't count according to the Church of the time, but it still might have been doable for him to annul such a marriage. Also he reportedly stated he was "Catholic, but not very Catholic." All that said there have been Catholics, some of the Kennedy family come to mind, who had a bigger problem with divorce than adultery. This can maybe be justified via the faith. In Catholicism remarriage after divorce is considered adultery or polygamy because marriage is for life. All forms of adultery can be forgiven though if you end the adultery, repent, and try never to do it again. However that means the way to repent of being "remarried after divorce" is to end your "serial polygamy" marriage and either renew your valid marriage or never remarry as long as your valid spouse lives. That can be more complicated than just ending an affair. Also a second marriage after divorce would mean a marriage outside the Church and before Vatican II even attending a non-Catholic marriage was sort of a folk-taboo among many Catholics. So taking that together some may have felt adultery was still "wrong" but less wrong as it was easier to get out of it and didn't run the risk of you engaging in heretical or heathen ceremonies. (Because I'm assuming a Kennedy or what not would not be thinking of life-long celibacy after a divorce. If you don't remarry I think divorce was acceptable, or non-existent, but I doubt that's what we mean) I've read stories of divorced Catholics, in older times, who would "shack up" with people rather than marry them and I guess it's because one is forgivable but the other was seen as essentially abandoning the faith outright. Although it strikes me, a Catholic, as fairly weird too.--T. Anthony (talk) 22:30, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'sexual preferences'

I was sceptical of the O'Hara cite, so I checked it on Amazon's preview. It is there in black and white! Whether it is true, or some misunderstanding or vindictiveness on O'Hara's part is irrelevant (for the purpose of inclusion). I don't know if reliable sources have commented on her claim. If they have, they can also be included, but as things stand I see no reason for this entry to be (repeatedly) removed in its entirity. The Gallagear cite is more oblique, and especially when combined with O'Hara, might fall foul of WP:SYNTH. Some rephrasing or trimming might be in order, but the O'Hara claim stands. RashersTierney (talk) 09:20, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Practicing catholic

I have a couple problems with this:

As he was a practising Catholic,[5][not in citation given] the Ford marriage lasted until his death, although he had many extramarital relationships.[6]

The citation given for "As he was a practising Catholic" does in fact say that. But I have two other problems with the statement. One is the synthesis that being a practicing Catholic resulted in his marriage lasting until death. The other is that I'm not convinced adherents.com counts as a reliable source. Comments? Kendall-K1 (talk) 13:14, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]