TVCH FORUMS HOME . JOIN . FAN CLUBS . ABOUT US . CONTACT . CHAT  
Bomis   Quick Links   TOPICS . TREE-VIEW . SEARCH . HELP! . NEWS . PROFILE
PBS Texas Ranch House

The TVClubHouse: Other Reality Shows ARCHIVES: Archives for 2006 - 1: PBS Texas Ranch House users admin

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through May 02, 2006Curlyq25 05-02-06  9:42 pm
  ClosedClosed: New threads not accepted on this page        

Author Message
Curlyq
Member

07-10-2002

Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 9:52 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Curlyq a private message Print Post    
Colordeagua, I don't know about you but I felt the Cookes set a bad tone from day one when they accepted that dinner invitation only to take the food and send the men away. They're treating the men like they should be grateful for any little thing when they have no idea how hard their experience has been. Letting them hear that remark about doing them a favor by feeding them was really over the line. The wife wants to treat the men the way a mother would treat petulant children, but you can't treat employees that way. There's no incentive to show that initiative that Mr. Cooke is looking for.

Puzzled
Member

08-27-2001

Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 10:13 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Puzzled a private message Print Post    
Thanks, Colordeaqua.

You're right, Curlyq, it's amazing how the people "in charge" get all high and mighty in no time at all.

The Cookes don't seem to realise that the success of the enterprise depends upon feeding the men well and not rubbing their faces in things.

I live in farm country, and the help usually has the main meal with the family.

Biscottiii
Member

05-30-2004

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 4:32 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Biscottiii a private message Print Post    
Interesting reading your comments. I had figured to come and ask if anyone else thought the wife and the girl-of-all-work were stepping over the line? And it looks like you all have already beaten me to the draw! They seem to have an agenda to prove they are more macho than the gispachos, certainly not in keeping with the 1867 times.

The women also seem to have too much time on their hands. Taking away the cowboys only luxery, the whiskey, for hair products - - after confiscating the cowboy's saddles for a pleasure ride during the less hot & less strenuous (more work produced) time of the day.... I'm not clear if the Cookes even WANT this venture to fly.

At first, I wasn't sure why the cowboys were upset to eat with the family (after the Nacho was fired & less chance for gastrointestinal problems). But now I'm seeing the hoity toity tones coming from the women, I don't think the cowboys are being overly sensitive. Who wants to work their tails off, in unbearable weather, and hear snippiness when you finally get to eat?

And another thing, why was a cowboy needed to replace Nacho? If the cowboys are uncomfortable at the family table, the women don't have enough to do, let the women cook and set the food down there at the bunkhouse?

I wouldn't be surprised if the Mrs. doesn't set the cowboys to planting posies around the ranchhouse. I think Mr. Cooke needs to fire Mrs. Cooke next! Send her packing!

Biscottiii
Member

05-30-2004

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 4:40 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Biscottiii a private message Print Post    
BTW, my brother was a cowboy for many years at various ranches in Arizona, so I met a LOT of his fellow cowpoke friends. Once, it really ticked him off when I sent a postcard to the ranch:

Old Cowboys Never Die
They Just Smell That Way!


But one thing for sure is that they are not brainless children and seriously DON'T like to be treated as such. I bet we're heading for a mutiny on tonight's program!

Curlyq
Member

07-10-2002

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 5:00 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Curlyq a private message Print Post    
Biscottiii, I was wondering the same thing. Why not put Maura in charge of the men's meals? The Cookes have 3 daughters. Surely they can spare Maura. If they think they could spare her for the cattle drive, they could spare her for the more immediate need of feeding the men.

While Nacho wasn't doing the greatest job, it was Mr. Cooke's responsibility to make sure that he had a replacement cook before firing him. He fired Nacho not because of the job he was doing, but because Nacho had the nerve to speak out against Mr. Cooke's behavior to the cameras. It was all about posturing and ego rather than what was best for the men or for the ranch. Remember how Mr. Cooke insisted his wife turn off her microphone when arguing with him?

I think it irritated the men even more that they took all the provisions and brought them back to the house so the men had no choice but to come there for food, and then get treated like ungrateful charity cases.

Mrs. Cooke's statement about playing their hand and letting them mutiny showed her ignorance, but her husband's statement in the previews that the men are all replaceable really takes the cake. He really is all about winning the argument rather than doing what's right.

It's amazing that they still haven't caught on to how their own behavior has caused them to lose the men's respect. They treat this whole experiment like it's just a long weekend, and Mrs. Cooke has her "honey-do" list for her husband to keep him busy all day. He should've been out working with the men every single day instead of staying home to build little luxuries for their house.

I didn't disagree with them taking the whiskey away after the way the men behaved, howling in the middle of the night. Plus, it was stated that in those days whiskey would've been prohibited anyway. However, I do think it's interesting that Mrs. Cooke couldn't understand why the men should get any whiskey back after they had just brought in a large herd of cattle. She acted like they were being rewarded for bad behavior when they'd just put in a good day's work.

Biscottiii
Member

05-30-2004

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 6:07 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Biscottiii a private message Print Post    
Great post Curly! I can understand your point about the whiskey, but I think the problem was more in the order of events. Taking of the food, taking the saddles, then taking the whiskey for unnecessary 'girlie stuff'. If Mr. Cooke wished to give his womenfolk treats, why would it come at the cowboys' expense?

On the other hand...Yes, whiskey would likely have been prohibited. For one thing I think the govt would have been fearful of the Native Americans getting ahold of the Fire Water. (see note below.) But even if it weren't, I don't think actual ranchhands would have been given so much - at one time. Maybe some for medicinal purposes, maybe a little doled out for celebrations, but not a whole keg at a time. Someone might likely end up with alcohol poisoning, chugging too much after being deprived too long beforehand.

As far as Maura leaving the kitchen duties to ride with the guys.... in those days, no way. They would have been too concerned about the Apaches or the banditos kidnapping her with intent to ravish or scalp. Certainly wouldn't allow a YOUNG woman to roam along alone. Might have been a sexist society, but they protected their womenfolk.

Can ANYONE believe this?
Here we are hooked for 4 nights in a row. And TONITE, of all nights, "Lost" is NOT a re-run!!
Lucky I have a 2nd TV w/VCR!

(Note: I believe maybe it was in a James Michener book where I read this. But the issue with the Native Americans and the Fire Water was because, since it was introduced to them by the incoming settlers, over the generations the Native Americans had not developed a tolerance to alcohol and they were more susceptible. Back in Europe, the white men over centuries had drunk wine or beer practically since infancy, because their water was not clean or hardly drinkable. So their bodies had, over generations, developed kind of an immunity to the power of the spirits. As I recall & all.. Bisc)

Bluejaxrock
Member

04-23-2004

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 7:28 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Bluejaxrock a private message Print Post    
Bisc, ITA about Maureen. First, the "man of the house/ranch" would have had to be pretty forward-thinking to even allow the conversation much less consider letting a woman ride with the cowboys. And if he were that forward-thinking, I believe he would have been shunned by neighbors/townfolk - they'd have thought he was crazy. Women were to be taken care of by their menfolk, even though women were (still are) mentally stronger and had enormous endurance. And they let their menfolk believe the women needed their protection. There's truth behind the cliche, "man will work from sun to sun, but woman's work is never done".
And let me get this straight - basically the girls don't have to wear what 1890's women wore because it's too hot? I thought when you signed up for something like this, you had to follow the period to the "t". Modesty alone would have not permitted the girls to walk around in what essentially was period underclothes.
However, I am now officially sucked in and will continue to watch. I'd really like to see the Cooks get their comeuppance (how's that for a turn of the century word? lol) but I'd like to see the ranch come together and start working with each other, instead of against each other.

Twiggyish
Member

08-14-2000

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 8:01 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Twiggyish a private message Print Post    
You all have written just about every point I have so far.
The wife bugs me with her controlling attitude. It makes her husband look weak. I think Mr. Cooke is used to taking commands from her and so is now clueless without her direction.

Colordeagua
Member

10-25-2003

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 8:23 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Colordeagua a private message Print Post    
Biscotiii said: I think Mr. Cooke needs to fire Mrs. Cooke next!

As Robby said, Mr. Cooke is an ox, not a bull.


Curlyq, after Nacho left they did find his kitchen was quite unsanitary -- even for 1867.

Whoami
Member

08-03-2001

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 9:48 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Whoami a private message Print Post    
I don't think Mr. Cooke needs his wife (or anyone for that matter) to make him look weak. He's doing a fine job of it on his own. He might sit up in front of the group and crow that he's the owner/boss/etc. But I'm betting on the real 1867 Texas Ranch, no foreman, cook, maid or wife would get away with talking to a real ranch owner like they all do. I've never seen a person jump from one side of the fence to the other as often as this guy does!

I'm wondering just why any of these people signed up for the project. Probably the same old tired "get my face on tv" thing. I wonder if the wanna be actors from the reality competitions have now invaded the PBS "real experience" type shows. None of these people are willing to put anything they have into what is was like back then. Sure, a 20th century woman would never put up with the restrictions of life back then. But how are they supposed to know what it was like to live life on a ranch in those days if they're not willing to put their 20th century egos aside for even a short time?

This isn't Wife Swap. They didn't trade places with an 19th century woman to help teach her (and her family) what life could be like if the woman took a more active role in managing a ranch while bossing her husband around. They signed up for the project to get a history lesson on life in 1867. In this I believe they are failing miserably.

Curlyq
Member

07-10-2002

Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 10:04 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Curlyq a private message Print Post    
Biscottiii, I understood it that the whiskey was part of the payment for all the food that was ordered because they didn't have cash and were asking for credit. I thought the soaps and smelling salts were just shown to explain why the guys were disappointed that there was nothing man-friendly for them to purchase with their own money (except the apples).

Well, Maura and Mrs. Cooke are getting on my very last nerve. They're trying so hard to play the role of the victims of sexism, but they're ignoring the glaring fact that they have created the hostile environment they're complaining about.

I'll bet if Mrs. Cooke opened her own business, and Mr. Cooke insisted on sitting in on all her meetings, chiming in with his two cents at every turn, second-guessing her decisions, and leaning on her to change those decisions just minutes after making them, her employees would think she was a joke. They'd never take her seriously. She would never let her husband undermine her like that. No matter the gender, you don't handle business this way.

Meanwhile Maura is out-and-out impertinent with her boss. She talked back to him and disrespected him when she didn't get her way, to where even Mrs. Cooke felt the need to apologize for putting him in that position. He fired two men for being disrespectful, but the girl-of-all-work gets a pass. How's that for sexism?

If Maura wanted to be a cowgirl, why did she go on a show that was all about recreating a point in history when women couldn't even vote, much less work alongside men on a cattle drive? Why not just find a 2006 ranch and try to make a go of it in this day and age?

I did think it was amusing when Mrs. Cooke admitted she wanted Maura on the cattle drive so she wouldn't be around the house with the family anymore. Guess it wasn't all about women's rights.

The funny thing is that the guys kept giving Mr. Cooke the benefit of the doubt, blaming all of his nonsense on his wife even when he's being rude and disrespectful all on is own. I'd never let anyone talk to me the way he talked to those men at that meeting. The very day after their best work ever, he's dressing them down and yelling "Shut up!" at them. And how silly that Mrs. Cooke brought up his years of business experience after he had shown such incompetence and even miscounted how many heads of cattle he'd need by 130.

I feel sorry for the guys because they really should've walked off, but they don't want to let the Cookes take this once-in-a-lifetime experience away from them. How nasty of them to say that the guys were just there to play cowboy, and not to work on the ranch. The men have been working hard and enduring sickness for this project, while the Cookes have been stitching up bras and slippers and playing with their "pet" goats.

A few days ago I thought this show was dull, and now I can't stop venting about it.

Puzzled
Member

08-27-2001

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 12:48 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Puzzled a private message Print Post    
LOL at the great business man not counting the horses when they left the Comanche camp.

Mr. Cooke talks with both sides of his mouth and can't make any decision that he sticks to. Robby is really full of himself and in 1867 he would have done what the owner said and shut up, or left. However, how can he respect Mr. Cooke after all the bad decisions he's made?

The Cookes have been an unmitigated disaster. The cowboys have been working hard, Robby knows what he's doing, and you can't help wondering how this show would have been with a different family.

I was amazed, too, that Mrs. Cooke said that, coming from California, she had no idea that the land had belonged to someone else. WHAT???? Where did she think the native Americans lived--on Mars?

Hereiam
Member

03-29-2002

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 1:59 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Hereiam a private message Print Post    
I agree with what everyone has said.

The Cookes are amazingly bad. The daughters might be ok, but Mom is on some mission to bring womens rights to 1867 - it just wasn't that way, you can not rewrite history so deal with it. Plus, she seems to get offended very easily - just because Shawn wanted to have a man to man talk with Mr. Cooke. GET OVER YOURSELF Now Dad, oh my, is he not the epitome of henpecked by all the women. Perhaps he should explore some of these issues in therapy?

Maura came with an agenda and is quite full of herself. I agree with above that with 3 daughters and wife the Cookes would not have had a maid. Plus, when Nacho left she should have put in charge of cooking for the cowboys. Now, telling Shawn he will have to keep cooking because he is better at it and she was/is a vegetarian is completely unfair. He had to learn how to cook when he started, if they had just started her then it would not have been a problem.

The cowboys I like. Yes, they are cocky and full of themselves but that is what I think real cowboys were probably like. I think Robby knows a lot and treated properly would have made a fantastic foreman. I would much rather work for him than the Cookes. When Jared made the deal to buy his horse I was hoping all the cowboys would do that too - then just get on their horses and ride away - lets see the Cookes deal with that. Honestly, I think in a real 1867 they would have all left by now and found other ranches to work on. It is just the fact that they have no where to go in this recreation that has kept them there.

Ok. I am feeling better now after getting all that out . I am looking forward to the conclusion tonight. Oh, and I laughed too about the horse deal with the Native Americans.

Colordeagua
Member

10-25-2003

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 3:15 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Colordeagua a private message Print Post    
Puzzled, I too have been wondering what the show could have been with another family. If nothing else -- better. It's still interesting to hear from the narrator how things should be operating on the ranch.

Wonder what feedback Mr. & Mrs. Cooke are now getting from friends and relatives back home in the real world.

Puzzled
Member

08-27-2001

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 3:40 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Puzzled a private message Print Post    
Well Colordeaqua, she's doing what all these reality people do--blaming it on the editing:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/04/28/DI2006042801171.html

Colordeagua
Member

10-25-2003

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 4:19 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Colordeagua a private message Print Post    
Puzzled, thanks. I've started reading it.

In answer to a question, Mrs. Cooke said:

To answer your question, as participants we were told very clearly that we were to be 21st century people living in an 1867 environment.

If she says so, but I question that. Doesn't make sense.

Colordeagua
Member

10-25-2003

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 4:41 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Colordeagua a private message Print Post    
I wonder.... At first I was going to say that Mrs. Cooke is a different person in the Q&A, but reading more -- I don't know. She is coming off too sweet, too goody-two-shoes in the Q&A also. I wish they had chosen a different family.

Ketchuplover
Member

08-30-2000

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 4:49 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Ketchuplover a private message Print Post    
Is this show good? I may watch tonight.

Colordeagua
Member

10-25-2003

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 4:53 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Colordeagua a private message Print Post    
Yes, I've watched it all so far and will watch the end tonight. But if you've read the thread so far, you'll see that the ranch family, the Cookes (that is the mr. & mrs., not the daughters) aren't very popular -- with the ranch hands or the viewers.

Ketchuplover
Member

08-30-2000

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 5:09 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Ketchuplover a private message Print Post    
My pbs affiliate has an auction on. I don't think the show was ever on here.

Colordeagua
Member

10-25-2003

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 5:12 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Colordeagua a private message Print Post    
Ketch, would think they'd air the program some time. It is worth watching. Then you can see for yourself how bad the mr. & mrs. are.

Puzzled
Member

08-27-2001

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 5:18 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Puzzled a private message Print Post    
Her answer doesn't make sense to me, either, Colordeagua. My guess is that either she or the producers made that up after everything fell apart.

Curlyq
Member

07-10-2002

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 5:20 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Curlyq a private message Print Post    
Ketchuplover, this show is very good, but you'll appreciate it even more if you can catch any reruns of the first 6 episodes that show how the morale got so low.

Can you imagine if these guys had guns? I think the Cookes might've been a little more cautious.

How funny that Mrs. Cooke is claiming it's all in the editing, while Nacho is saying they really were that bad. We know they were conscious of the cameras, given that they turned mics off to argue for fear of how they'd come across. Who knows? When I've got time I'll have to check out the website videos she's talking about.

Prisonerno6
Member

08-31-2002

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 7:23 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Prisonerno6 a private message Print Post    
I loved the line about Mrs. Cook greeting the men in her underwear as they returned from the cattle drive. The irony of the Cooke's calling Jared a horse thief after they "purchased" his horse that was stolen by the Indians was irony at its best.

Colordeagua
Member

10-25-2003

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 8:10 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Colordeagua a private message Print Post    
And so the ranch and everyone was assessed. The ranch would not succeed in the long-term. Mr. Cooke kept poor books that should have been very detailed. The Cookes' management of and relationship with ranch hands was not good. Mrs. Cooke could have been something of a "peace keeper / maker" between her husband and ranch hands. She was more an instigator of problems. Mrs. Cooke didn't spend her time wisely in the household. Generally, the ranch owners didn't do a good job. And generally the ranch hands did.

Good riddance to the Cookes. I won't miss them.

From the PBS site about Mr. Cooke:

The tight-knit family lives in a suburban home in California where Bill recently worked as a controller at a hospital and is now an emergency services administrator.

During the epsiodes, narrator continually said he worked at a hospital. From the above and what we saw of him in the program, makes we wonder about his work history for the last year or two. His real world and ranch house work style are similar?

Curlyq
Member

07-10-2002

Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 9:32 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Curlyq a private message Print Post    
That was the best ending! I felt bad for Jared (especially since I found him the most likeable), but when the guys came up to him and said they were riding out with him I actually had to stop myself from cheering out loud and waking the neighbors.

What a lying crook that man was! I couldn't believe he sat there saying he bought Jared's freedom knowing darn well that his big stipulation with that Comanche deal was that Jared was not a part of it. It was so saddening to see his wife and daughters patting him on the back and saying they were proud of such a cheat, and profane threats of violence as well.

After watching that, I can only see Mrs. Cooke's Q & A answers as a joke. They tried too hard to make themselves look good in public without realizing the cameras would catch them in a lie. Now I understand that strange scene where Mr. Cooke sat Maura down and asked her if she'd like to join the cattle drive as if the idea had just occurred to him, and she oh-so-demurely said she'd love to. She had been lobbying for it for days, but they must've hoped they'd be able to make it look like it was his idea.

Absolutely loved seeing Mrs. Cooke stumbling over her negative assessment. Hilarious! Sure all those vegetables were rotting in the garden. The vegetarian girl-of-all-work had been sent out to prove herself with the cowhands and "win."

I tried to look at the videos at the website, but it looks like they've gone to that annoying podcast format that I can't view. If anyone can tell if there's anything enlightening there, I'd sure appreciate it.

Colordeagua
Member

10-25-2003

Friday, May 05, 2006 - 5:28 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Colordeagua a private message Print Post    
During the whole series, often it looked like Mrs. Cooke and daughters had too much time on their hands. Just sitting around chatting. Life didn't look so bad. So the Cookes weren't interested in the vegetable garden for themselves. Tend it well and give the produce to the ranch hands. Good relations with them. The better fed they are -- the happier.

Hereiam
Member

03-29-2002

Friday, May 05, 2006 - 11:42 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Hereiam a private message Print Post    
Best ending ever!

I love that the Cookes were slammed. The only complaint against the cowboys was that Robby would have backed Mr. Cooke up more, but how could he with Mr. Cooke being who he was? In real 1867 I am sure all the cowboys would have left before the cattle drive to find work on other ranches and the Cooke ranch would have been bankrupt.

I would have liked to hear more about where the other cowboys were and how they were doing.

Biscottiii
Member

05-30-2004

Friday, May 05, 2006 - 4:36 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Biscottiii a private message Print Post    
Millions & Billions of Flies a-Flying
Couldn’t mean everyone ELSE must be lie-ing!


Good thing Mrs. Cooke and her daughters are back in the land of dishwashers, or we’d have to worry about another Typhoid Mary running loose!

In this WHOLE thread, I have yet to find a post that I don't agree with, excellent discussions! What a great series, better than I expected even and ranking up almost to Frontier House!

BOTH Mrs. Cooke & Maura (who is still one of the family since) later said that they were told to think like 21st Century Women. But when PBS goes to such extent in making everything historically accurate, why would PBS sabotage their own storyline by throwing the mindsets out of synch? I can’t buy that argument, just seems like excuse making. However, after seeing last night’s shows I sure can see how hackles are up and excuses are flying. Before one’s friends and neighbors see the embarrassingly dirty details.

I think Mr. Cooke was emboldened by his (LUCKY!) cattle sale bartering, then decided to take it a step further trying to yank his cowboys to make MORE profit off their horses after all THEIR hard work. (ENRON type behavior.) Kind of like corporate American mentality or thought process nowadays. Such as the Mr. saying stuff previously: ‘if you don’t like it, leave’ - ‘you can be replaced’, - ‘you’re not cowboys, you’re JUST ranchhands on MY ranch’ - (Mrs. Cooke chiming in, ‘if we ranchers didn’t hire them, they wouldn’t even have jobs!’) – THEN him telling the Comanches ‘I won’t barter for employee benefits (ahem, human beings)’ and basically saying go ahead and slit Jared’s throat so I can hang onto MY profits. I think Mr. and Mrs. Cooke’s 21st Century mentalities totally blindsided them in this venture and it’s unlikely they will ever absorb the lessons either.

I bet hearing THAT refusal to barter for Jared was what finally decided the cowboys they were one for all and all for one! Plus, when Jared was cheated & fired & called a HORSETHIEF!, their cattle drive cowboy adventure was finished. Who wants to stick around another couple of days to clean up the Cooke’s pooper scooper problems and pretty the place up before inspection?

I think in those days there HAD to be more mutual caring for each other and mutual respect. Simply a necessity for survival on either side. I believe the evaluators pointing out how Robby should have worked better with Mr. Cooke was mostly so that the Reckoning didn’t look biased or totally one-sided.

I was so GLAD that the evaluators did such a fair and thorough job (plus sticking it to ‘em!). Did you see faces drop when Mrs. Cooke told them she spend about a day EACH in making the silly cornhusk dolls? With manure piling up out front, food supplies sitting on the floor enticing mold and rodents, and the garden in such disarray? Dishes unwashed for over 8 days after the jamboree, giving the flies even MORE fertile breeding grounds closer to home. Even the poor pig looked uncomfortable!!

I actually rewound my tape and watched the last hour all over again. Would love to know, with all those flies crawling, if the evaluators had the stomach to even EAT anything from the welcoming buffet or drink from those dishes. Shudder!

Curlyq
Member

07-10-2002

Friday, May 05, 2006 - 7:47 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Curlyq a private message Print Post    
Biscottiii, that's what I was thinking when I watched them. They had to have strong constitutions to eat under those conditions. Nacho must've had a good laugh if he was watching that. It must've been especially frustrating to the woman who had come in and done so much work for the fandango dinner.

I was wondering how this might've been slightly different had they chosen a family with at least one or two little children rather than all teenagers. At least the dollmaking would've been more practical. I think the little guys were what made Frontier House so enjoyable.

I understand the concept of bringing your 21st century mentality into the project. By that I mean they probably wanted to get their honest reactions to what they were experiencing and how different that life is, rather than getting into a character and play-acting like it's all perfectly normal for them. I don't think it meant that they were supposed to actually live like it's still 2006. They should've been clearer on this.

There was some fault on both sides. The assessment did say the cowboys' behavior was sophomoric and Robby did basically steal Bravo, since he had paid a lesser price for a different horse and took Bravo instead. However, as they said in the report the responsibility for keeping up morale falls on the ranch owner. I wonder if Mr. Cooke would've pulled all that waffling nonsense on the original manager, the Colonel.

Biscottiii
Member

05-30-2004

Friday, May 05, 2006 - 9:58 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Biscottiii a private message Print Post    
Meant to say earlier:
Thanks Puzzled for that Washington Post link! I also enjoyed the 2nd day of discussions with Maura and Ian – where the Colonel pops in with some negative snarls to Ian.

http://tinyurl.com/orymx
(Had to sign into the WA Post, but free subscription.)
Participants Maura Finkelstein and Ian Roberts of the PBS series "Texas Ranch House" and Series Producer Luis Barreto fielded questions and comments about the program on Tuesday, May 2, at 2 p.m. ET.

Re-reading the Mrs. Cooke & Nacho input, Nacho apparently felt he was accused of giving them conjuntivitis (highly contagious pinkeye), amongst other things, with his cooking, when the ladies were talking about his dirty kitchen etc. Now that I've seen the finale, I want to reread both WA Post articles:

Emphasis mine, but in his very last comment I noticed that Nacho said:

Nacho Quiles: Hi to everyone and thank you for all the support, and I hope you watch the show in its entirety. Because the final episodes are incredible. The finale is just great! You must see it!

Nacho must have been rolling on the floor laughing!
_______________________


I am just itching to know what the whole story was about somebody doing something where they violated the rules, losing horses for a few days as punishment. Mentioned in 2nd article comments between Ian and the Colonel.

I think (maybe I saw) at the beginning when the Cooke family disembarked from the coach they were hand hauling a 2 wheel wagon to bring the furniture and luggage. Anyone remember?

Another thought that I had later. The lady evaluator had TWO opportunities for checking out the food/kitchen/home situation. Not only the 2nd time when the place was all spiffed up for the evaluation. But especially the first time when she had to work 24 hrs into exhaustion preparing for the party. No matter how ready they were for the Reckoning, I bet she already had some feelings about how Mrs. Cooke was handling her house and hearth.

PS-perhaps the cornhusk dolls were intended as Souvenir Gifts from 'the vacation' for friends and relatives back home, from the Lady of the Manor.

Colordeagua
Member

10-25-2003

Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 8:17 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Colordeagua a private message Print Post    
From the Post article:

Tampa, Fla.: What did you expect going into this experiment? How did it differ from what you really experienced?

Maura Finkelstein: Unlike the other participants, I was unsure as to my role going into this project. Finding myself as the maid was a huge surprise: I had hoped to be out with the guys, riding the range, fixing fences, and branding cattle. I had not seen myself as the domestic type, and the life of a woman, tied to hearth and home, was daunting and uncomfortable.
_____________

I have a very hard time believing that Maura did not know that she would be domestic help as opposed to a ranch hand. You show up, get to the ranch, and that's the first you know of the role on the ranch. I don't think so. Simple common sense today should tell a female that in 1867 she'd be doing domestic work.

Puzzled
Member

08-27-2001

Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 8:57 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Puzzled a private message Print Post    
I don't believe it, either.