There was no need for the Jason retcon

[Chris2]

In the miniseries, it was established that Jock and Digger were business partners. They discovered oil, and Jock registered the claim in his name only, in order to prevent Digger from gambling away his half of the business. Digger misunderstood Jock’s intentions and went after him with a gun. Jock, enraged, decided to keep the whole business for himself.

From a legal standpoint, Jock had no right to decide himself to cut Digger out of the business. If Cliff had written documentation of their partnership, he could have brought the case to court. That could have been a compelling storyline in itself. The show was careful to have us root for the Ewings, but in reality, the Barnes family had some claim to the business.

Where I live, there was a case about two different branches of a family fighting over a supermarket chain. The judge ruled branch 1 had cheated branch 2 out of their portion of the business, and awarded them controlling interest (51%). You could see something similar happen with Ewing Oil.

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

In the miniseries, it was established that Jock and Digger were business partners. They discovered oil, and Jock registered the claim in his name only, in order to prevent Digger from gambling away his half of the business. Digger misunderstood Jock’s intentions and went after him with a gun. Jock, enraged, decided to keep the whole business for himself.

From a legal standpoint, Jock had no right to decide himself to cut Digger out of the business. If Cliff had written documentation of their partnership, he could have brought the case to court. That could have been a compelling storyline in itself. The show was careful to have us root for the Ewings, but in reality, the Barnes family had some claim to the business.

Where I live, there was a case about two different branches of a family fighting over a supermarket chain. The judge ruled branch 1 had cheated branch 2 out of their portion of the business, and awarded them controlling interest (51%). You could see something similar happen with Ewing Oil.

I think you make a point that the story could have been written differently.
It might have been compelling for Cliff to win, and see the battle that would follow

 

[Luke_Krebbs_Ewing]

I think you make a point that the story could have been written differently.
It might have been compelling for Cliff to win, and see the battle that would follow

But Digger was a drunk.

Jock only did what he did to prevent Digger from frittering away his share of the profits and damaging the company.

Jock only had Digger's best interests at heart but Digger took it the wrong way and believed Jock had cut him out of their oil strike and the new company which was formed.

Digger didn't give Jock a chance to explain why he did what he did. He only wanted to shoot him for supposedly swindling him out of the profits of the oil field.

Jock was only trying to save Digger from himself in one of his weaker, drunken moments.

 

[Mustard]

Jason was long gone by then. He ran out of patience with Digger a lot earlier than Jock did.

 

[Mustard]

But Digger was a drunk.
Jock only did what he did to prevent Digger from frittering away his share of the profits and damaging the company.

Is that really Jock's place, i.e. to say what Digger spends his money on?

Jock only had Digger's best interests at heart but Digger took it the wrong way and believed Jock had cut him out of their oil strike and the new company which was formed.

Jock did exactly what Digger said, and took power by force. On Jock's side, you can say that Digger was too far gone to have any hope of beating Jock in the legal and business sense, and that Digger had let his old standards slip badly.

Digger didn't give Jock a chance to explain why he did what he did. He only wanted to shoot him for supposedly swindling him out of the profits of the oil field.

Jock was only trying to save Digger from himself in one of his weaker, drunken moments.

The real question is whether it was ever Jock's place to do so? Digger was still strong in some ways, like how he could sober up to do some work and get more money, like how he overcame all that crazy drinking for decades. Was it really Jock's place to effectively say "No Digger, I won't have you wasting all our money on all that drink, so I'll make it my money instead"? In this way, it's Digger's fault for ever letting it get to this point, but Jock's fault for cutting Digger out.

 

[Luke_Krebbs_Ewing]

Is that really Jock's place, i.e. to say what Digger spends his money on?


Jock did exactly what Digger said, and took power by force. On Jock's side, you can say that Digger was too far gone to have any hope of beating Jock in the legal and business sense, and that Digger had let his old standards slip badly.


The real question is whether it was ever Jock's place to do so? Digger was still strong in some ways, like how he could sober up to do some work and get more money, like how he overcame all that crazy drinking for decades. Was it really Jock's place to effectively say "No Digger, I won't have you wasting all our money on all that drink, so I'll make it my money instead"? In this way, it's Digger's fault for ever letting it get to this point, but Jock's fault for cutting Digger out.

Jock was the only one who thought outside the box about the ramifications of the oil strike and the formation of the new company.

Digger didn't. Therefore I'm going with Jock's decision to protect Digger from himself and safeguard the new company.

You can disagree with me, that's fine but Jock only did it to safeguard Digger from himself.

After all, Digger was a drunk & an unfit Father and the sooner he was shoved in a Sanitarium the better off we'd all be! I'm kiddin'!

 

[Luke_Krebbs_Ewing]

Jason was long gone by then. He ran out of patience with Digger a lot earlier than Jock did.

Jock was more patient with Digger because at least he appreciated Digger's talent to sniff out oil.

This showed that Jock wasn't only Digger's friend but had a high regard for his abilities.

I think it's a shame that Digger turned on Jock when it's quite clear that he was only trying to save his friend from himself.

 

[CeeCee72]

If Jock only wanted to save Digger from himself, he could have kept control of the company and given Digger half the profits. Jock may have started out in the right, but he wronged Digger in the end.

Jock was no good hearted hero. Remember what he did to Sam Culver's uncle? Was he only looking out for his best interest when he put the man in a sanitarium and swindled him out of what was rightfully his?

 

[Mustard]

If Jock only wanted to save Digger from himself, he could have kept control of the company and given Digger half the shares. Jock may have started out in the right, but he wronged Digger in the end.

Jock was no good hearted hero. Remember what he did to Sam Culver's uncle? Was he only looking out for his best interest when he put the man in a sanitarium and swindled him out of what was rightfully his?

I think Digger was mostly correct with what he said about Jock, even though Digger should have accepted his own responsibility that his own behaviour made it happen rather than whinging about it for decades afterwards. Jock didn't do his friends wrong easily, and Digger had alienated other oil businessmen long before he had alienated Jock.

Jock values strength and standing up for yourself, even to him. He will respect that in anyone. But yes, he can be utterly ruthless. What he did to Tom Owens too. Jock wanted Tom Owens' land, Owens refused to sell, and Jock then stopped Owens' customers from buying anything from him and put him out of business and into temporary poverty, and Jock didn't remember all those years later. J.R. learned all his stuff from Jock. Everything that J.R. is exists in Jock too, but Jock has many redeeming qualities on top of that.

 

[Luke_Krebbs_Ewing]

If Jock only wanted to save Digger from himself, he could have kept control of the company and given Digger half the profits. Jock may have started out in the right, but he wronged Digger in the end.

Jock was no good hearted hero. Remember what he did to Sam Culver's uncle? Was he only looking out for his best interest when he put the man in a sanitarium and swindled him out of what was rightfully his?

Yeah I remember that but as he said to Tom Owens he ran rough shod over a lot of people to get what he wanted back then.

I guess as Jock got older he regretted some of the things he did when he was younger.

Jock wasn't perfect by any means and it takes a big man to admit when he was wrong. At least in his own way Jock did apologize to Tom Owens but I do take your point about Sam Culver's Uncle.

 

[tommie]

If Jock only wanted to save Digger from himself, he could have kept control of the company and given Digger half the profits. Jock may have started out in the right, but he wronged Digger in the end.

Exactly - sure, you can get that he wanted to block Digger from literally gambling his part of the company away and potentially leading to Jock having to deal with strangers on board who would do God-knows-what with Digger's share. But that doesn't mean Jock had to block him from profits - or for that matter pay him a fair amount of money to buy him out. If Digger wanted to drink himself to death with that money... well that's unfortunately his business.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

That what makes these old rivalry stories so compelling and often ring true (and provides the most potent fuel for show): when you get the distinct impression that both parties are essentially telling the truth about each other.

The same was true about Blake and Alexis on that other show,

Or Angela and Jacqueline.

 

[Taylor Bennett Jr.]

I always thought the ambiguity of the Jock/Digger backstory gave Jock's "real power is something you TAKE" speech to Bobby an added dimension: was it unwittingly a confession?

Of course, this was before Jason was added and we found out that Jock nearly singlehandedly prevented the Holocaust during the war, a few years after launching the Civil Rights movement in the US and saving a tree full of helpless kittens from an evil landowner.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I always thought the ambiguity of the Jock/Digger backstory gave Jock's "real power is something you TAKE" speech to Bobby an added dimension: was it unwittingly a confession?

Of course, this was before Jason was added and we found out that Jock nearly singlehandedly prevented the Holocaust during the war, a few years after launching the Civil Rights movement in the US and saving a tree full of helpless kittens from an evil landowner.

Yes, as the show went on, they got away from its memory of Ruthless Jock" and seemed to be trying to deify the memory of the actor. Understandable perhaps, but unfortunate.

 

[Luke_Krebbs_Ewing]

I always thought the ambiguity of the Jock/Digger backstory gave Jock's "real power is something you TAKE" speech to Bobby an added dimension: was it unwittingly a confession?

Of course, this was before Jason was added and we found out that Jock nearly singlehandedly prevented the Holocaust during the war, a few years after launching the Civil Rights movement in the US and saving a tree full of helpless kittens from an evil landowner.

Those kittens were named Lucy & JR.

JR is a bit wild he'd scratch your eyes out!