Jessica's backstory from a modern day perspective

[Alexis]

I guess Kenny was referring to the stereotypes of a 40-year-old program, not biological or social evidence. It wouldn't be nice to talk about these things in 2020 and after so many unpleasant recent events ... Stop

Only he's not referring to the stereotypes of a 40 year old programme. He says...

"That's because that's not applicable to men. Are you suggesting he'd be ashamed of being a stud? That's the male persona - it attracts women to men. Always has, always will. That's reality. Political correctness is the denial of reality. What attracts women to men is not the same thing that attracts men to women, thank God! Opposites attract. It's the way of the world. If it weren't, human beings would have gone extinct a long time ago. Male and female behavior each ensure the survival of the human race in their own distinct ways."

Sounds like his own biological and social ideas to me.

 

[Willie Oleson]

It's not 1940 or 1950

No, but it'll feel like it!

sorry, couldn't resist

 

[Alexis]

No, but it'll feel like it!

sorry, couldn't resist

Regarding the younger generation and their views on sex, relationships, and gender roles. I wouldn't imagine so.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

To change this incandescent climate ... when Dusty meets Sue Ellen at the Ewing Rodeo, he says that his mother's name is Farlow and the Southern Cross of San Angelo belongs to the Wayne. In my opinion these details change a lot the dynamics of Dallas. Dusty is already aware that Jessica is his mother, while the owner of the ranch is Amy Wayne, Clayton's wife killed in the fire caused by Jessica. It all seems right to me ...

Why did Dusty say Farlow as his mother's maiden name? Was it a writing error? What do you think?

 

[James from London]

Why did Dusty say Farlow as his mother's maiden name? Was it a writing error? What do you think?

It was Dusty's first episode. If anything, the "error" came later when they gave Clayton the same surname as his son. But I kind of like southfork88's suggestion that:

Dusty is already aware that Jessica is his mother

It turns everything on its head!

 

[stevew]

This is starting to make Southern Cross: The Early Years seem like a juicy missed opportunity.




To be more specific, it's the other way round: I think of Joe and Rose Kennedy as analogous to Jock and Ellie, despite the Kennedys existing first (and in the real world). That's because I've only recently read up on some of the darker aspects of the Kennedys, whereas Jock and Ellie have been in my world for four decades. When I was reading about some of the Kennedy dynamics, I found myself kind of projecting the Ewings onto them. It's only in the last couple of months that I read with horror what had happened to Rosemary. At the time I saw parallels with Gary.




Absolutely. Give a dog a bad name and all that. That kind of environment - surrounded by that level of poor mental health day in day out, and presumably being analysed and patronised by staff - would probably create psychiatric difficulties in even the most sane of people. Like the Big Brother house with ECT.

Regarding the Kennedy’s, the best fiction gets you with the reality of it all.

 

[stevew]

But you are a man, with very black and white opinions on male and female behaviours speaking on behalf of women in regards to what attracts them to men. So I cant really buy your reasoning. I have three sister's in law and a lot of close female friends. Believe me, being a "stud" is not and has never been that high on the list of things a woman looks for in a partner. That's more a certain type of male's idea of what a woman looks for in a man.

But you are saying a promiscuous man is desirable to women and yet a promiscuous woman isn't or cant be desirable to a man which is not fact. It's your opinion.
Facts are hard to establish on a show like Dallas which is a work of fiction told often from points of view of people who have an agenda, a point to prove or something to gain from what they are saying.

Your point is well taken. I think there’s two things going on. 1) sexual desire and 2) partnership (like settling down, raising a family etc.). In the first case many people of both genders find “studs” and “sluts” (not my words) desirable. Take Hollywood. A lot of both “studs” and “sluts” and many in the world find them attractive. But in the second case, survival of the human species requires more than animal behavior to be desirable. In fact the “stud” who is aggressive, animal like, is often not the best for raising children and creating the best home environment, so men and women tend to settle down with with point wiper who provide more of the characteristics that provide stability to their home, “stud” and “slut” not being among those desirable and stable characteristics of either gender.

But there’s also a class, money and religious aspect to consent back in the late 40s / early 50s and much of it requires discretion. A pregnant would had trouble keeping her secret more than a man who got a woman pregnant - hence leave the county. In the highest levels of American society discretion was paramount and so women went away and men his entire families (H.L. Hunt). In the western world marriages had been arranged and affairs were tolerated among the elites, as long as paternity wasn’t of issue, regardless of gender - then comes free love, the idea one should be free to marry for love. This isn’t very old in the western world. With it came divorce, though uncommon among the lower classes at first, the elites often got divorced. By the 20s women of a certain level married and divorced and no one batted an eye (Barbra Hutton).

So I think you’re correct. Sexually both men and women often find both “wild” men and women desirable. And for purposes of procreation often “wild” is an undesirable characteristics, though with enough money Hunt was able to provide stability to three families going on at the same time. Pretty complicated topic which is certainly in flux as society changes to adapt to modern realities.

 

[stevew]

I'm speaking based on my own observations. It's not that being promiscuous makes a man desirable to a woman; I'm saying it doesn't destroy his reputation like it destroys a woman's reputation. She won't be taken seriously as potential marriage material. There's a reason why rock bands bang the groupies but never marry them!

What is desirable in a man is not what is desirable in a woman. That's the way of the world. Don't blame me; I didn't invent it. Masculine women and feminine men aren't in demand, obviously. They would be seen as highly undesirable to each sex. Opposites attract.

A 25 year old male virgin has destroyed his reputation, if that fact becomes publicized. A 25 year old woman remaining a virgin (while unnecessary) may still help her attractiveness to men, but it will make the man a joke. I didn't make the rules. We are how we are because men and women are biologically wired differently. If that angers you, be angry at nature.

Your rules may apply for your class of people, as you say your observations, but are not applied as universally in nature as you seem to think in the post industrial world. Virginity is an issue of power often desired by both men and women who seek it. Yes there are women in the world who seek it as well and they don’t see that persons reputation as distorted but as something to obtain. When this issue is sought out these people are often predatory or insecure. But both genders have members who seek it out. Also, both genders are attracted to “wild” members of the opposite sex. Hollywood is full of examples of highly desirable “sluts” and “studs.” A woman isn’t less or more desirable than a man for such behavior universally. I see no evidence of that.

 

[stevew]

Might I suggest that your own observations reflect an outdated way of thinking. A single woman's sexual habits are her business and her business alone. It's not 1940 or 1950, a woman's reputation isn't something that can be destroyed like that. Most young singles, male and female, sleep around and date a lot of people before they settle down now. People don't meet at 18 or 19 and fall in love and marry. I don't think one sex is having it's reputation destroyed and the other not.

Heaven forfend.

Because those men hold double standards?

What's desirable to a person is a deeply personal thing. It's not a one size fits all thing. It doesn't boil down to masculine and feminine, not by a long shot. Men can be and are attracted to all kinds of women. Even women with masculine traits. The same goes for women and men. You are implying that sleeping around is deemed acceptable and attractive in men generally and that this is the way of the world. While it is highly unacceptable and unattractive in a women. Which is utter nonsense. You are also asserting basic stereotypical ideas of male and female. That men are dominant, studs that women desire for these reasons, and that women are subservient and pure and only desirable as such. Incidentally oftentimes similar attract.

You didn't make the rules. The rules don't exist. What you are saying doesn't anger me, it's just your opinion and not true at all.

By the way there’s plenty of evidence of female rock bands “banging” and not marring their groupies as well.

 

[stevew]

There's a lot of talk about Jessica being "wild" when she was growing up. This seems to amount to her going to lots of parties and kissing lots of boys. Maybe "wild" isn't so far from "high-spirited". Nevertheless, Clayton speaks gravely of needing to "protect her from herself." He also describes her disapprovingly as "a dreamer. Texas just wasn’t big enough for her. She had her head full of a lot of crazy notions, travelling all over and meeting all kinds of people." What could be more natural than to dream, to want to see the world? It's notable that Garrison Southworth and Jason Ewing also had a desire to travel but, as men, were referred to as natural-born wanderers rather than as "crazy." (Admittedly, both are also perceived as cowards for "running away.")

Then Jessica gets pregnant. Clayton ungallantly suggests that she didn't know who the father was, but she insists Atticus Ward "wanted to marry me after I told him I was pregnant, but [Clayton] wouldn’t give us the time." As Ray points out, an out-of-wedlock pregnancy would have caused quite a scandal at the time, and avoiding such a scandal seems to have been Clayton's first priority: "We agreed upon a plan. Amy and I took her on a long trip overseas so she could have the baby" after which he and Amy intended to take the kid to raise as their own. At least part of this plan appears to have been against Jessica's will. ("Who banished me to England in the first place? You!")

"After the birth, Jessica went into an emotional depression that was so bad we had to put her in a rest home, a place to see that she got proper care," says Clayton. This would be in the late 40s, early 50s, when comparatively little was known about depression, including postnatal depression, and "proper care" might have included electroshock therapy. Despite this, Clayton and Amy took Dusty back to America while Jessica was still ill in hospital. So by the time she's released, her baby is already on the other side of the world, she's alone in a foreign country and she doesn't get to see her family again for at least ten years. Nevertheless, Clayton was sure that she had "recovered beautifully." It's curious that he and Amy never adopted Dusty legally - possibly because they never received the natural mother's permission?

It just makes me wonder, if Jessica's story was told today, whether if she'd be depicted as the same two-dimensional "evil psycho" archetype she was in the '80s (fun as that was).

I think it might be a classic case of two worlds colliding. Jessica wanted to be part of a different world than the one of the Farlows, I’m guessing a religious, conservative farm family. With oil money all around her she got a glimpse of a different world that was more open to sex out of marriage and marriage to a person you loved opposes to an arranged marriage. I doubt that Clayton’s parents agreed with such and as many say the freedom of a different life style as a mental illness and as the people with the money they’ve expected control - or even if by then Clayton was in charge of the money he wanted control. There’s no reason a women with their money couldn’t raise her son as a single mother. Many women did even then but they were women with power on their own. My guess is Jessica’s father and brother held all the power and so she was “wild” by their definition. She seemed to have done mental illness but certainly it’s fair to ask did her treatment nurture the mental illness? If I had to guess, I’d say it did and that Clayton carried a lot of guilt when it came to his sister.

 

[Franko]

The Kennedy-Ewingverse conspiracy widens ... Julie Harris attended a White House state dinner in 1962. It was in honor of Andre Malraux, a minister of state for cultural affairs (could this be any more of a Kennedy-era dinner?). Quite the guest list: Malraux, Julie, Charles and Anne Lindbergh, Archibald MacLeish, David Rockefeller, Thornton Wilder, Leonard Bernstein, Tennessee Williams and Arthur Miller, according to a Lindbergh bio.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I couldn't help thinking of Rosemary Kennedy.

I generally think of Jock and Ellie as semi-analogous characters to Joe and Rose Kennedy,

Oh, the Kennedy/Ewing parallels are endlessly fascinating. And they spill over onto Knots with Greg's backstory

With two brothers shot four years apart, the elder a philanderer named John with a wife who whispers, the younger named Bobby. There's a third brother who drinks named, or played by, a Ted.

DALLAS had some structural parallels to the Kennedys. I always wanted DYNASTY to have some tonal parallels to the Kennedys, but no such luck.

 

[southfork88]

Why did Dusty say Farlow as his mother's maiden name? Was it a writing error? What do you think?

I think when Clayton tells the whole Ewing family he warned Dusty that Jessica was his mother, lied to the family avoid admitting that Dusty already knew everything. And I have a question for you. Was officially said that Amy's last name was Wayne? Thanks !

 

[Kenny Coyote]

By the way there’s plenty of evidence of female rock bands “banging” and not marring their groupies as well.

Write a book about the music business if you want. Of course it would have to be fiction.

Your rules may apply for your class of people, as you say your observations, but are not applied as universally in nature as you seem to think in the post industrial world. Virginity is an issue of power often desired by both men and women who seek it. Yes there are women in the world who seek it as well and they don’t see that persons reputation as distorted but as something to obtain. When this issue is sought out these people are often predatory or insecure. But both genders have members who seek it out. Also, both genders are attracted to “wild” members of the opposite sex. Hollywood is full of examples of highly desirable “sluts” and “studs.” A woman isn’t less or more desirable than a man for such behavior universally. I see no evidence of that.

Three red Xs. Wow. It's not exactly the same as offering another perspective containing some or any intellectual substance, is it? I don't see anything here about Dallas. You do realize this forum is for Dallas related discussion, don't you?

Since you brought me and "my class of people" into it:

As for my observations, I've been around the world and have yet to have found a country where Jessica's type of behavior, acting like a slut, is seen as virtuous or as a plus in any way. Wilt Chamberlin claims to have had sex with 20,000 women. Gene Simmons has about 5,000 women on his resume. I guess he was more selective. You won't find any woman in the world who is a star of their magnitude who would be willing to brag about the number of men she has had sex with. The world doesn't work that way.

I was making a point that Clayton protected Jessica by taking her to a foreign country so that she wouldn't get the type of undesirable reputation a woman like her would get. It worked for a while.

 

[James from London]

Was officially said that Amy's last name was Wayne?

I'm pretty sure the name was only mentioned once, by Sue Ellen in Rodeo: "I thought the Wayne family owned that."

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I think when Clayton tells the whole Ewing family he warned Dusty that Jessica was his mother, lied to the family avoid admitting that Dusty already knew everything. And I have a question for you. Was officially said that Amy's last name was Wayne? Thanks !

Thanks for the actual Dallas related discussion @southfork88. It was starting to become a rarity here. Your idea that Clayton warned Dusty ahead of time is certainly possible. My question would be: Why pass up a chance to show as dramatic a moment as Dusty finding out his mother wasn't who he thought? I'd think that would have thrown him for loop. It would make entertaining TV and that was what they were going for. So yeah, I think it's possible, but unlikely.

Good question! That was sort of a throwaway line in one of the earlier episodes. I don't recall exactly what was said. If you want to look for it, I believe it was said in the first rodeo related episode. However, to the best of my recollection, Dusty told Sue Ellen he was from the Southern Cross Ranch and Sue asked him isn't that the Wayne ranch? Dusty says, yeah, but his mother's name was Farlow so he goes by Farlow.

OK. Apparently Dusty doesn't want to gain fame by riding on his dad's coattails. Admirable enough. Except then Clayton is introduced as Clayton Farlow. I think it's safe to say that someone in the creative department was asleep at the wheel. Or I don't remember it accurately. Take your pick.

 

[stevew]

Write a book about the music business if you want. Of course it would have to be fiction.

My comments are on your post on Dallas so it is related.

Three red Xs. Wow. It's not exactly the same as offering another perspective containing some or any intellectual substance, is it? I don't see anything here about Dallas. You do realize this forum is for Dallas related discussion, don't you?

Since you brought me and "my class of people" into it:

As for my observations, I've been around the world and have yet to have found a country where Jessica's type of behavior, acting like a slut, is seen as virtuous or as a plus in any way. Wilt Chamberlin claims to have had sex with 20,000 women. Gene Simmons has about 5,000 women on his resume. I guess he was more selective. You won't find any woman in the world who is a star of their magnitude who would be willing to brag about the number of men she has had sex with. The world doesn't work that way.

I was making a point that Clayton protected Jessica by taking her to a foreign country so that she wouldn't get the type of undesirable reputation a woman like her would get. It worked for a while.

You brought up the music business so I’ll wait for your story. I’m not really interested in it.

I don’t care about your travels, as seeing things isn’t the same as understanding culture nor all the sub groups in a culture. You’re correct I don’t know any scenario where women “brag” about their number of sexual partners in the same way, but women have bragged about the quality of their sexual conquests. Barbara Hutton and Doris Duke both married Porfirio Rubirosa and it was well known his desirability was the size of his penis. Being with this man, and married to him was an issue of “bragging” rights for many women. Of course these are examples of women who were extremely wealthy without a man controlling their money. Jessica apparently was not. So while I’ll agree women don’t generally brag about thousands of lovers, but then most men don’t either, there are women who do brag about the quality of their lovers and among some women it’s a boost to their reputation just as 20,000 women is a boost to the reputation of some men among some men (not me).

I was making the point that it appears your class of people and Clayton’s class of people might have found her behavior as a hit to her reputation but that doesn’t mean in either case either person has the right to control another person. There are places where women and men, including the English aristocracy where she was sent, do engage in a more “wild” if still “discrete” behavior. In terms of American oil check out the Getty family. Yes the money and thus power is still in the hands of a man, but when money and power are in the hands of women, many women engage in this “wild” behavior. Some classes encourage it among men and discourage it among women. Some encourage it among both but require discretion. And all other sorts of endless variety in an endless number of groups around the world and throughout time. Most of a man’s ability to “brag” is tied to his historical control of money and is only bragging to other men. I don’t know many women who would find such bragging desirable in those men. Women like most men are generally more discrete but it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen and yes discreetly women have been know to brag of sexual partners.

The point is control - where in the Farlow family the men held control they determined what behavior was acceptable. If Jessica had control her behavior might of been looked down on by the men in her family, but they wouldn’t be able to ship her off to Europe and take her son. Your view point, observation, is very narrow, and probably much like Clayton himself, but even back then it wasn’t the only view point and certainly not today. Women and men equally engage in “wild” behavior without shame and even brag and while some disapprove, many do not, and further more consider it none of their business to judge one way or another.

 

[Willie Oleson]

I was making a point that Clayton protected Jessica by taking her to a foreign country so that she wouldn't get the type of undesirable reputation a woman like her would get. It worked for a while

Well, she got to see more of the world, ironically.

Thanks for the actual Dallas related discussion @southfork88. It was starting to become a rarity here

To be fair, it was your broader stance on the slut/stud issue that moved the topic away from "Dallas". Not that it bothered me, but I don't see why forum members who respond to your statements need to be blamed for going "off-topic".

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I’ll wait for your story. I’m not really interested in it.

I don’t care about your travels

Yeah, I get it.

You’re correct I don’t know any scenario where women “brag” about their number of sexual partners in the same way

There is no woman who is a star of that magnitude who would brag about about it because it would badly tarnish her reputation. It would ruin her career. Masculinity and femininity exist and they're distinctly different. Don't get mad at me if you don't like it. I didn't invent these ideas that men and women, in general, behave differently and are attracted to different things. If you look through this thread you'll see I'm not making value judgements on masculine and feminine behavior; I'm describing reality. I specifically chose not to make value judgements on those subjects. Looking at the responses here, you wouldn't know it, but it's the truth. That we're living in an age where simply describing the nature of reality can be seen as controversial by some people says something, but that's their problem. Reality exists whether they like it or not.

Dallas is fiction, yet they attempted to maintain a certain semblance to reality. It's not in the best interest of a single woman the age Jessica would have been at that time to get pregnant. That she'd be thoughtless enough to engage in behavior where that was likely to happen, so indiscriminately that the father was unknown, was embarrassing enough that they took her out of the country. I'm not saying it should or should not have been embarrassing. Again, I'm not making a value judgement; I'm describing the story. Apparently that sort of thing needs to be emphasized here. I'm not sure why that is. Ray mentioned something about how he imagined that would have caused quite a scandal and Clayton said it would have. It wasn't Ray's idea or Clayton's idea that it should be scandalous; they were simply commenting that it likely would be.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

To be fair, it was your broader stance on the slut/stud issue that moved the topic away from "Dallas". Not that it bothered me, but I don't see why forum members who respond to your statements need to be blamed for going "off-topic".

It wasn't my intention to move the topic away from Dallas. I thought what I was writing still related to Dallas because I came across a question from a reader who seemed to genuinely be confused as to why Jessica would be treated one way and Clayton treated another in their specific circumstances. The question I was asked is:

Why should Jessica be punished and mistreated for behaving in the apparent same way as her brother? Why should a woman be shamed and scolded while a man should be revered and deemed more desirable?

Knowing how controversial the answer to that question would be, I would have simply answered: "Should" did not enter into the matter. Clayton acted upon what was - not what "should" be.