Joe Aguirre: what do you think of this character as portrayed in the movie?

[Monika]

I've always been intrigued by the idea that in the short story AP stresses the ways in which J&E are alike; but in the film, there is more of an effort to highlight the ways in which they are different. 

Marie

I think all of the things that AP points out are in the movie (that they are rough mannered, rough spoken, poor etc), but in the short story their similarities are almost "listed" and therefor they become very prominent. All the same info is in the movie as well, but more spread out. I´m not sure this was intentionally done, but simply what happens in the process of transforming words into moving pictures.

[Front-Ranger]

You have a point there, Monika. The movie and story begin so differently, the one is verbose while the other is austere.

Now, I would like to mention how Annie Proulx describes Aguirre in the story, even though this thread specifically asks about the movie.

I was noticing in the story how Aguirre has "wavy hair...parted down the middle" just like the Red Sea (only his is the color of cigarette ash). Also, in his trailer are venetian blinds (separating the window into light and dark) which are hanging askew so that they "admit a triangle of white light." In other words, a mountain-shaped light. And his hand gestures as he gives instructions to the two boys, moves in the light with a chopping motion, as if he's cutting the mountain in two. He decrees that Ennis, the camp tender, should stay in the light and tend the fire, while Jack is on the QT, staying with the sheep and having no fire, in the dark.

I now see Aguirre, in laying down the law, as more of a Moses type character than a Jehovah one. He not only gives the commandments but he also requires sacrifices. He gives out the tools ( a .30-.30 for Jack, a cheap ticker for Ennis), and commands them to come down from the mountain at the end. He can look through his binoculars at the summit of the mountain and the sweet life there but he can't attain it himself, being trapped in the choky little trailer. Moses escaped the Egyptians and became a shepherd. He led his people around as if they were sheep and lived to be 120 but never was able to enter the Promised Land due to botching the miracle of bringing forth water from stone.

[mariez]

I think all of the things that AP points out are in the movie (that they are rough mannered, rough spoken, poor etc), but in the short story their similarities are almost "listed" and therefor they become very prominent. All the same info is in the movie as well, but more spread out. I´m not sure this was intentionally done, but simply what happens in the process of transforming words into moving pictures.

Yes, that's true, they are "listed" in a way in the book, and the they are both shown as poor, etc., in the movie.  But, I still think the movie makes an effort to make them "different" in ways the short story does not. 

A few small examples - in the short story they both have trucks at the beginning; in the movie only Jack has truck (albeit a broken down one) and Ennis has to hitchhike. 

In the book, Jack is still driving his old truck and wearing the same beat-up hat at the reunion and Jack tells Ennis that L.D. doesn't let "her" (Lureen) have any of the money so it's a "hard go" for them - in the movie Jack pulls up in a nice, new truck, with "fancy" clothes and some pretty nice jewelry, so it doesn't look like they are having a "hard go" and the differences between their social stations and lifestyles are already evident, and that doesn't happen until much later in the short story.

Also, in the short story, Ennis is not particularly mumbly or close mouthed - he talks as much as Jack does.  In the movie, Jack is very clearly shown to be gregarious and talkative, while Ennis has a hard time putting a few words together.  Anyways, I'm getting way off topic here and I'm not criticizing the movie, just noting the differences, which I think are deliberately made. 

Marie

[Front-Ranger]

True about the differences friend. My theory is that Ang Lee played up the differences in the characters because of his ongoing interest in the yin/yang concept of complements.

As far as parallels between the story of Brokeback Mountain and the story of Moses, there are several. While in the desert, Moses saw a burning bush, while Aguirre and Jack referenced a tree struck by lightning that led to the death of 42 sheep. Aguirre is first introduced to us in the story by a description of his desk where there are scribbled-on papers and a Bakelite (A kind of stone) ashtray brimming (brimstone?) with stubs.

Also, when God chose Moses to lead his people out of Egypt, he had Moses practice "transforming his rod into a serpent and inflicting and healing leprosy, and told him that he could also pour river water on dry land to change the water to blood." The leprosy part reminded me of Aguirre's remarks about pneumonia. As for "God had Moses practice transforming his rod into a serpent," no comment!!

Later, Moses got into trouble with God because of a circumcision issue regarding his son. When attempting to get the Pharoah's permission for the Isrealites to leave Egypt, Moses and his brother Aaron caused a plague of frogs to occur. Pharoah insisted he get rid of the frogs, whereupon he made them all die, causing a horrible stench.

Other plagues included gnats and flies, which bothered both Aguirre and Ennis, and diseases to cattle, oxen, goats, sheep, camels, and horses. All of these animals appear in Brokeback Mountain except camels. But wait! Ennis says a coyote is so big it looks like it could eat a camel! Hail and thunder are another of the 10 plagues, and the last one is a lethal epidemic which strikes the first-born male child in each family. Not among the Israelites, though. The plague "pass over" those families, so Uncle Harold did not die after all.

In the end, the Israelites are condemned to wander in the desert until all those who were 20 years old at the beginning of the trip had died. Their children, not them, would be the ones to enter the promised land.

[mariez]

True about the differences friend. My theory is that Ang Lee played up the differences in the characters because of his ongoing interest in the yin/yang concept of complements.

Yep, definitely a yin/yang feel - that theory makes a lot of sense! 

Marie

[Sammi]

A question about Aguirre - why did he not say anything to the guys about what he had seen until Jack came back the following year?  He was dissapointed in their work, and told them he was not happy with the job they did, saying "ranch stiffs never worth a damn" but he never lets on that he knows until the following year when Jack comes back (alone).  Why did he wait?  If Jack had never happened to come back Aguirre would have never let on to them that he knew?  He seemed pretty mad but kept it to himself while they were both there unloading the sheep.  Did he need time for it to sink in?  I don't understand why he did not say anything about it right then.

[southendmd]

That's a good question, Sammi.

If you see Aguirre as a businessman, then it doesn't matter that he knows.  He knows the count isn't what he wanted, and what's done is done. 

In fact, when Jack comes back alone the next year looking for work, Aguirre doesn't mention it then either.  Just "ain't got no work for you".  It isn't until Jack mentions Ennis that he lets on that he knows.  And he does it in a business context--"you wasn't gettin' paid to let the dogs babysit the sheep while you stem the rose".

[Sammi]

So he was just upset that they did not return the amount of sheep he wanted, regardless of what they were doing.  He saw it like they were goofing off. 

I wonder what the count they returned was.  The year before he said he had a 25% loss.  I wonder what % it was that year.  We only saw one sheep killed, but just guessing, say if only 10 were lost was that too many?  I wonder if he expected zero loss.  Tell you what, that seems unrealistic even if they were doing their job perfectly.

[Front-Ranger]

I agree with southendmd and others about Aguirre's tolerance of the Ennis/Jack relationship up to a point. I think brokeplex put this best when he said, earlier in this thread, about Aguirre starting to get irritated just at the point when Jack tried to use him as a (LOL) dating service:

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,15379.msg303580.html#msg303580

Regarding the sheep count, that has always been something that has puzzled me too, Sammi. Particularly when Aguirre wasn't happy with the count at the end of Ennis' and Jack's year together. It seems to me that there would be a higher count which should make Aguirre happy, especially when he noted that "some of those sheep never went up there with you."

Methinks there is something allegorical going on here. I would like to think that Annie Proulx is saying that there are blue-paint-branded sheep and red-paint-branded sheep, and they are all mixed together, and there are all different ways of sorting and accounting for these sheep, but they are ALL SHEEP, so it doesn't matter, particularly after we have all been up on the mountain together, been through lightning storms, hail, the spin cycle, wind and rain, and the paint brands are worn and faint so what does it matter, enniway!

[Monika]

Personally, I doubt Aguirre would give the boys and credit even if they managed 0% loss. It just seems that he thinks of Ennis and Jack as a pair of deuces from the start, and nothing will ever change that. He has more power and money than them two, he knows it, and is not about to let them ever forget it.