Is it or is it not a Western?

Can “The Purpose of this Creature Man” be described as a typical western? It’s hard to say. It can go both ways really. On the one hand, like most westerns, there are the typical characters one would find in the works of this genre, more specifically Doc and his crew, the “desperadoes”, a ragtag team of outlaw rogues who mock society’s vaunted rules, risking their freedom and lives in robberies both for the thrill of it and for their own enrichments. They perform heists and hide from the authorities, guns always within reach. One will find this breed of individuals in, most likely, any western story. It is rare, though, to encounter them as the protagonists of the tale, portrayed not as out-right villains, but as psychologically complex individuals most can identify and sympathize with. There’s Doc himself, the leader and mastermind of the team, always scheming and plotting yet he’s a true gentleman and never fails to give his victims medical advice; Jim, the religious eccentric, constantly making peace with his Maker; Kid, the transvestite, not a character one would ever expect to find in a traditional western… Within all these characters lies the deviation that makes the story not of the typical genre, at least not generically.

Chandler, author of The Problem of Definition, at least to my understanding of it, argues how genres are not as set as one would ordinarily expect them to be, that, despite the basic ideas of said genre (in this case, westerns) being ever present, the way it is presented, in any media, will always include certain divergences depending on a number of factors, the way of writing certainly being one of them. And this story being written as a sort of modern-style western, complete with semi-current event issues (and even a “1906 Hobbes motorcar”), is a direct result of it turning out the way it did.