This book has merit when read has as a counterpoint to Western myths. It is told by Thomas Quirk about a cattle drive in 1882, taking place between Texas and Montana over five months, and written about 20 years after the events.
I will be up front about one aspect of this historical period that other reviewers simply overlook, perhaps because in saying “this book tells it like it is” they want to ignore one glaring aspect, the book’s casual racism. This ranges from the narrator calling his black horse “N***** Boy,” or a comment from one herder that, in brief, a good horse is worth more than any Indian or Mexican. This in spite of the fact that the Apaches and vaqueros they encounter were competent and reasonable.
The rest of the tale is about nineteenth-century work, and it turns out that cattle herding was boring and often dangerous; river crossings produced grave markers that demonstrated the deadliness of the the trade. The cowboys worked all hours, and while they did have the occasional time in front of a campfire, none of their yarns were particularly good or noteworthy. Like small talk at the office water cooler, these coworkers’ stories were equally banal and ultimately forgettable.
Along the way, they cross innumerable rivers, encounter cattle rustlers, take a dozen turkey eggs, and kill a mama bear and her cubs in a gruesome manner that the narrator unbelievably describes as “the most exciting bit of sport.”
The cowboys did have two stops in towns, Dodge City and Ogalalla. The latter had prostitutes, which the narrator candidly described as ranging from teenage girls to over-the-hill opium addicts. The narrator spends no time drinking or whoring, which seems suspicious, but if true, underscores the tedium and monotony of the whole experience. Or maybe it’s a reminder that cowboys were primarily doing this all for money (the job, gambling) more than anything else.
However, this raises the question of how much the narrator reflects the author and therefore reality. In dealing with race he hardly is any Mark Twain, but it’s hard to know how much the author was describing something he saw vs believing it himself. It’s tempting to assume that this Northerner was writing about Southerners and particularly ex-Confederates, but it’s hard to tell.
Similarly, he may have played down the drinking and whoring in order to maintain a front of Christian propriety. It’s is difficult to determine if he was protecting himself and his fellow tradesman, or telling the truth. Maybe he simply left out some parts due to censorship concerns.
As a result, the author describes a failed lecture by a professor vs going to a brothel in Dodge City. It is therefore hard to tell how actually dull cowboys’ lives could be, as opposed to how much the author had to leave out just to get this book published or hide his own sins. It therefore raises questions about how real and truthful the entire narrative is. One thing is for certain: the cowboys do not go to church, which may say something, or maybe it doesn’t. This example illustrates that the author made choices about what to include and what to leave out, raising questions about the account’s overall veracity.
As a work of potential fiction, the fact that the author is not the narrator suggests that Adams could have made more of a story out of the whole thing. There is no conflict on the trail, no strong plot, no tension in the obstacles they face, and so forth. Somehow, we have come to romanticize this whole process as being more real, vital, and glamorous than producing a mobile phone or PowerPoint presentation.
In the end, Adams tries to have it both ways. He is not the narrator, which raises the question about how much of this is actually true vs fictional. At the same time, as a potential work of fiction, it lacks the elements that would make it stand out as a novel.
As a consequence, the book rides a line between fiction and nonfiction, and it is satisfying as neither. On balance, it is a mediocre work that reminds us that the reality of the Old West may or may not have been what we imagined it to be, for better or for worse.