-
Howdy BetterMostians! :D
Our first TOTW in 2008, and therefore we start counting anew. We now have TOTW 01/08. Next week will be 02/08 and so on.
The topic this week is truly a classic. Souxi suggested to talk about it again. Many thanks to Souxi for her suggestion! :)
Heavy stuff this week... This topic used to be a can of worms long ago with people getting very emotional about it (over on IMDB, back in the old days...). I hope time did some healing for us, or at least we've gained some distance from those emotionally agitaded times following the our first experiences with BBM.
I combined the TOTW with a poll. So if you don't want to get into the debate, you have the opportunity to make your opinon known with a simple click. We'd love to get as many votes as possible, to have a broad base for an overview of the BetterMost Brokies' take on the question.
Edit to add: We'd also be interested in whether your perception regarding the question has changed over time. So tell us about it, if you want :).
And some additional info about the poll: you may select two possibilities, because some aren't contradictory with each other.
Do you think Jack was murdered or was it an accident as Lureen described it to Ennis?
(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m47/Penthesilea06/TOTW/DCFC0302.jpg)
Photo courtesy of Eric. Thanks Bud!
-
I tend to think Jack was murdered, but cannot know this for sure. In fact, both film and (especially) original story are deliberately ambiguous on this point. This becomes part of Ennis's tragedy, in that he will forever be haunted not only by Jack's death, but by an unresolved (and perhaps unresolvable) uncertainty as to how it was encompassed.
I do find it striking that, whether an accident or homicide, a tire iron was the agent of death.
-
:o Congrats on your 3,oooth post Moremo! :D
Yeah I think we are not supposed to know... Proulx wrote it to be deliberately ambiguous, in the same way it was and would always be for Ennis. This is part of the pain he has to deal with.
I tend to think it was the tire iron, but I hope it was the tire. I don't know ... :-\ :'(
-
Well I voted..."we are not supposed to know", in other words, I think we have to make up our own minds. I think the flashback we had in the film of Jack being beaten with tire irons, could have been one of two things. It could have been what really did happen to him, OR, it could just have been Ennis believing his own worst fears had been confirmed. IF it was tire irons, I,d be inclined to think LD had something to do with it. I wonder if he ever knew that Jack had been seeing men. He always hated Jack right from the start. No rodeo fuck up was ever going to be good enough for his precious daughter was he? So if it was that, I,d say he had something to do with it. Whatever did happen to Jack, the film didn,t so much upset me as make me mad. Sure the ending was very sad, but it made me mad, because two people, who happened to be men, couldn,t be together simply because they knew the rest of the world wouldn,t be able to mind their own damn buisness, and leave them in peace to live their lives. :'( :'(
That my two pence worth anyway.
-
Accident. All references to Jack's death are either from the narrator "Ennis didn't find out about the accident until months later" or from Ennis's point of view, which is referred to in a hallucinatory way. Ennis had absolutely no way to "know for certain" that it was a tire iron. However, he was certain that living openly with another man would lead to his and/or Jack's certain death and the comment by Jack's father about Jack planning to leave his wife and move in with "this other fella" fit his paranoid conviction. It was a measure of Ennis's paranoia that he so wilfully believed in Jack's murder.
-
:o Congrats on your 3,oooth post Moremo! :D
Merci beaucoup! :D
-
I voted, I think it was an accidentand also we aren't supposed to know
I agree the scene in the movie, is showing us what Ennis is thinking, and because of his paranoia, that is exactly what he would have assumed....all his worst fears had come true, in his mind....maybe he even justified himself, believing he had made the right decison not to go with Jack....a little bit like, "I told you so"...
I think though, that Jack's injuries would have shown whether it was a tire iron or a tire blowing up in his face....it was the 80's, and its hard to believe that there was a cover up by investigators.
It does put some doubt in our mind, of course.....maybe it was used to give some credibility to Ennis's paranoia......all through the movie, we are thinkng, "go with him, you wll be ok"....but once we are given the tire iron thought, we could now be thinking...."Well, maybe Ennis was right all along"......
Another twist to the story, that makes us make up our own mind about what really happened.
-
Accident. All references to Jack's death are either from the narrator "Ennis didn't find out about the accident until months later" or from Ennis's point of view, which is referred to in a hallucinatory way. Ennis had absolutely no way to "know for certain" that it was a tire iron. However, he was certain that living openly with another man would lead to his and/or Jack's certain death and the comment by Jack's father about Jack planning to leave his wife and move in with "this other fella" fit his paranoid conviction. It was a measure of Ennis's paranoia that he so wilfully believed in Jack's murder.
I agree with this interpretation, for just those reasons. Also, there was foreshadowing in the story that Ennis would respond that way. When he and Jack were in the motel, he said that if his dad saw them "you bet he'd go get his tire iron."
Some people say, what are the chances of Jack being killed in such a freak tire accident? Well, slim. But that kind of explosion does happen. Are they any smaller than the chances that Jack would be killed the exact same way that Ennis had always feared?
Plus, wouldn't Jack's body have been examined by someone who could tell the difference from the effects of an accident as Lureen describes and the effects of what Ennis imagines?
Ennis has a good reason to suspect murder -- he'd been fearing it all his life. But what is OUR reason, as readers, for suspecting it? All we know is that Ennis suspects it. If Ennis had said, "Oh, OK," in response to Lureen's account and never considered the idea of murder, we'd have no reason to suspect murder, either. But again, we know Ennis is paranoid, so why are his fears a good basis for ours?
The story works better for me as literature if Jack's death is accidental. It's much more ironic and sad to think that Ennis' paranoia is so strong that it leaves him eternally uncertain.
I used to be in the "we aren't meant to know" club, but more recently I've come around to this view.
-
I know in Ennis' mind it was the men with the tire irons, and that could very well be true. Also, l think that Jack got reckless with his attraction to men, and the people of the town were talking. Some of them very homophobic. Plus, from Ennis and Lureen's dialogue on the phone after he read the deceased postcard, I tend to have the thought that Lureen knew something was up with Jack. She was so cold to ennis and matter of fact with her story of the flat. I teetered between we are not supposed to know, and yes it was murder, so I split the difference with my answer. This is a good TOTW.
-
Murdered!
Since I was beaten and left for dead, because I am a gay man. And I know about many gay men who were murdered and (some if not all) police do nothing!!
Murder was then and still is such danger, unfortunately for gay men!!
Hugs!! May gay men be safe!!
-
In terms of the "rareness" of a particular cause of death... it is often said that death by lightning strike is a rare event, but I looked this up and "death by lightning strike" claims an average of 82 lives per year in the USA - not exactly "as rare as getting hit by lightning." Though the perception of "being hit by lightning" as being extremely rare continues. However, I have personally known three people who have been struck by lightning - stranger than fiction.
-
My former next-door neighbor says several members of his family has been struck at least once.
-
I think it was meant to be ambiguous but if I HAD to choose, I'd lean more towards accident.
-
Annie Proulx wrote (as quoted above)
Ennis didn't know about the accident for months
But the important thing is that story Ennis thought it was the tire iron while he talked to Lureen
But he decided that he knew it was the tire iron while he listened to John C. Twist.
Ennis has to live with what he believes - and this feeds his guilt that he could have saved Jack by saying yes to the sweet life.
=========================
Things are not so clear in the movie, .....
-
Hi Toast!
I lost you! May I request quotes from the book, concerning that?
Details are needed please.
Hugs!
-
I agree with this interpretation, for just those reasons. Also, there was foreshadowing in the story that Ennis would respond that way. When he and Jack were in the motel, he said that if his dad saw them "you bet he'd go get his tire iron."
Some people say, what are the chances of Jack being killed in such a freak tire accident? Well, slim. But that kind of explosion does happen. Are they any smaller than the chances that Jack would be killed the exact same way that Ennis had always feared?
Plus, wouldn't Jack's body have been examined by someone who could tell the difference from the effects of an accident as Lureen describes and the effects of what Ennis imagines?
Ennis has a good reason to suspect murder -- he'd been fearing it all his life. But what is OUR reason, as readers, for suspecting it? All we know is that Ennis suspects it. If Ennis had said, "Oh, OK," in response to Lureen's account and never considered the idea of murder, we'd have no reason to suspect murder, either. But again, we know Ennis is paranoid, so why are his fears a good basis for ours?
The story works better for me as literature if Jack's death is accidental. It's much more ironic and sad to think that Ennis' paranoia is so strong that it leaves him eternally uncertain.
I used to be in the "we aren't meant to know" club, but more recently I've come around to this view.
What Louise and Crayons said.
Artistically, poetically, karmic-ly, I'm inclined toward ambiguousness since to believe murder as a strong possibility just lays in the round hole like a round peg. However, what always hit me the most about BBM is its realism. And realistically speaking, it's more tragic and more common in real life that Jack died from an accident on the road.
-
Hey Toast-long time no talk! :-*
I'm interested in your John Twist angle-how do you think
EdM's conversation with JT convinced him that Jack was murdered?
-
While talking with Lureen:
...By the time someone came along he had drowned in his own blood.
No, he thought, they got him with the tire iron.
But, we also have this at the end of Lureen's phone call:
The huge sadness of the northern plains rolled down on him. He didn't know which way it was, the tire iron or a real accident, blood choking down Jack's throat and nobody to turn him over.
Here's the section regarding Old Man Twist from the story:
...Then, this spring he's got another one's goin a come up here with him and build a place and help run the ranch, some ranch neighbor a his from down in Texas. He's goin a split up with his wife and come back here. So he says. But like most a Jack's ideas it never come to pass.
So now he knew it had been the tire iron.
-
Sure wish some of you guys had been participating in a debate on this very topic a couple of months ago on imdb. It got very heated, to say the least. There were two of us arguing in favor of accidental death. One participant wound up calling me homophobic, even a virtual gay basher, because he equated my belief that Jack wasn't murdered with a denial that gay men are often attacked in real life.
It got really, really ugly. >:( Consequently, I don't go to imdb much anymore.
-
Heya,
I'm posting my answer here before I read other replies as I cast my vote here. So, I apologize if I reiterate something that's been said here already.
My main answer is that we're not supposed to know. Of course neither the film nor the story give us enough evidence to definitively say one way or the other. (And, after this, for the record what I say here is based on the film.. since I'm more of a film person when it comes to BBM).
But, I do think it's also important that we all draw our own conclusions or work-out interpretations of the scenario for ourselves. So, my secondary answer is that I have a hunch that he probably was murdered (but again, I have no real basis for proving this... it just seems like it might be the case to me). I say this because, from the very beginning, I find the accident scenario - in the way that Lureen describes it - a little too far-fetched.
In the end, all we know is what Lureen says and what Ennis thinks. I do sort of think Ennis's immediate response (of immediately jumping to the murder scenario) is a little bit a sign of his "paranoia" or a sign of how extensive and powerful his fears about violence have become. I think the murder vs. accident question has a lot to do with whether the audience believes Ennis knew Jack better of if Lureen knew Jack better. And by "knew" I mean understand both the circumstances of his daily/practical life vs. knew his inner-self.
-
I've always been of the school that Jack was murdered, so that is how I voted. But I think we are not supposed to know. We are asked to draw our own conclusions. I suppose my assumptions are based on my experience as a gay man growing up in the Midwest. Wyoming really isn't the Midwest, but I think society in Wyoming and Indiana probably have very similar attitudes towards gay people.
-
Accident. All references to Jack's death are either from the narrator "Ennis didn't find out about the accident until months later" or from Ennis's point of view, which is referred to in a hallucinatory way. Ennis had absolutely no way to "know for certain" that it was a tire iron. However, he was certain that living openly with another man would lead to his and/or Jack's certain death and the comment by Jack's father about Jack planning to leave his wife and move in with "this other fella" fit his paranoid conviction. It was a measure of Ennis's paranoia that he so wilfully believed in Jack's murder.
Yes. This was the first question my husband asked me after we left the cinema, having seen the movie for the first time. I had read the story before seeing the movie, so I told him that Annie Proulx called it an 'accident'. Of course Ennis thought that Jack had been murdered. And the reasons why he thought that are the theme of this story, homophobia.
In my opinion, if Annie Proulx wanted to be more ambiguous, she could have said 'Ennis didn't find out about what happend to Jack, or about the incident. She didn't. The word 'accident' was deliberate.
-
(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m47/Penthesilea06/TOTW/DCFC0302.jpg)
Photo courtesy of Eric. Thanks Bud!
I first voted that I tend to believe Jack's death was murder and also that we are not intended to know definitively. But upon reflection, I'm going to change my vote to I believe Jack was murdered and that we are not intended to know for certain.
Tell you what, I stood at that fence line by the railroad track in Alberta, and I FELT something. It was the only filming site that I visited (wasn't there the whole time, tho) where there seemed to be a presence left behind. It didn't even look much like the brief glimpse we had in the film - the grass had grown high, etc...nevermind Brokies traipsing all over getting a good look. ::) I stood on the roadside for long minutes, not wanting to tread on the grass - it felt like a sacrilege to even step foot there. It's sort of the feeling you get in a cemetery when you make a conscious effort to walk in the paths between the graves and not step on a one...respect for the dead, I guess. Eventually when our little group had cleared the way some, I approached a bit closer (with trepidation) and took a few pictures.
That fence row reminded me so much of some of the similar footage in THE LARAMIE PROJECT that it was eerie. I believe that location could very well have been chosen with Matthew Shepherd's murder in mind.
I agree that the ambiguity of Jack's death is one of the facets of Brokeback that makes it great. But in my heart I know it was a hate crime - I don't know what that says about me, but there it is...
Lynne
-
Who would have thought that after all this time and countless discussions of this subject-and the one that I am most vehement and passionate about-that I would get other/additional insight! Ah the layers! Toast and Paul mentioning the conversation with Twist Sr. just solidifies my leaning towards accident. The fact that Ennis could only imagine Jack not following through on his plan to move to LF with the "neighbor" is just a testament to Ennis' denial of Jack's love for him. He can't imagine that Jack just might not want to be with anyone other than him, Ennis.
Additionally, Fabienne has a good point-Annie Proulx is not casual with her descriptions. She is very deliberate and easily could, as Fabienne stated, used wording that was truly ambiguous. The fact that she did indeed call it an accident, well... In my mind that just adds to the tragedy that is Ennis. All this time his fear of the "tire irons" holding him back when, in the end, it was the tire. I think if Jack had indeed been murdered, all Ennis' fears would have been validated and the message, for me, would have been quite different-not less-just different.
O0
-
My opinion used to change back and forth on this. But with time, it stays more and more on the accident side. Therefore I voted "I think it was an accident, but can't say for sure" and for "We are not supposed to know".
It's the same sentence by Annie Proulx that others have already cited, "Ennis didn't know about the accident for months...", which makes my opinion. This is not in Ennis's mind, it's not from his POV, it's the narrator's perspective.
Same as in the beginning (for example), when the story says Ennis was raised near Sage and Jack in Lightnig Flat - we don't doubt this, do we? And we don't doubt that Jack was buckteethed, Ennis had an high-arched nose and the last time they met was in May 1983. So why should we doubt the accident?
All indexes which point to murder are from Ennis's POV.
The movie I think is a bit different. I think the movie is more ambigious. The actual scene Ang Lee shows us, where Jack is beaten, makes such a huge impact it's hard to shake off. I remember when I first saw the movie, I thought Lureen tells us a story, but what we see is the not debatable, objective truth. Only later, when I was at home, I began to question it. Judging only from the movie, I'd say I simply don't know which version is true.
-
The fact that she did indeed call it an accident, well... In my mind that just adds to the tragedy that is Ennis. All this time his fear of the "tire irons" holding him back when, in the end, it was the tire. I think if Jack had indeed been murdered, all Ennis' fears would have been validated and the message, for me, would have been quite different-not less-just different.
O0
Absolutely Rouxb. The fact that is was an accident makes this story even more tragic (if that's at all possible). To me, if Annie Proulx had called it 'murder', Ennis would have been 'right' in not choosing that sweet life. :(
He wasn't, and that is truly heartbreaking to read.
I agree that the movie is more ambivalent. I wonder if that was deliberate? It must be. The images of 'Jack's murder' are very powerful and devastating. But the way that scene was added, it was clear that that was what Ennis was thinking, not Ang Lee showing us what really happend.
-
Funny.....isn't it? Brokies don't never seem to want to stop discussing this subject. And rightfully so, I suppose. It's truly one of the great mysteries of our time.
I've always felt that Jack was murdered, that I'll never know for sure, and that I was never supposed to know for sure. I think a good poll question would be "Do you think that Annie Proulx knows for sure if it was murder or an accident?" I don't think even she does. I'm sure she's been asked the murder/accident question quite a few times. I wonder how she manages to avoid answering it?
Does anyone remember seeing Heath, Jake, Michelle, and Anne on Oprah almost two years ago, sometime before the Oscars? Oprah asked Anne how Jack died, and her response was something like "Isn't it obvious?" Because I've always felt it was murder, I thought it was "obvious" from Anne's performance that Lureen was lying to Ennis about the accident. I can also see, though, how one might believe that she was telling the truth, if you believed in the accident explanation. I wonder if Anne knows the real answer, or if she merely has a strong opinion like many of us???
-
"Do you think that Annie Proulx knows for sure if it was murder or an accident?" I don't think even she does. I'm sure she's been asked the murder/accident question quite a few times. I wonder how she manages to avoid answering it?
I've asked myself this question sometimes.Thinking of what she wrote in "Getting movied", about the characters getting so damned real to her, you might easily be right.
I wonder if Anne knows the real answer, or if she merely has a strong opinion like many of us???
I think Anne Hathaway can't know the real answer, in the sense of objective truth, because there is no such thing. She might have a very strong opinion, like many of us, like you said.
And I think she was heavily influenced by Ang Lee. I think Ang Lee personally is sure it was murder. I think he managed to (almost) not favor the murder version in his movie, as the movie is ambigious. But from what he said in interviews I think he himself believes in the murder scenario.
-
Deep within my heart of hearts, I have no doubt, and firmly believe most sincerely, that Jack was brutally murdered in a vile and callous, frenzied attack. He was brutalised by a pack of homophobic thugs and left to drown in his own blood, all alone with no-one to comfort him, on the side of some godforsaken, miserable, dusty country road. This is my belief. My reality. I feel it in my gut. I know it in my heart. I saw it happen with my own eyes, through the sweet, pure, nightmare vision of blessed Ennis' worst fears. I wish to God it wasn't true. But it is true and it is impossible for me to progress beyond that fact. It's what Ennis believed and that's good enough for me.
-
No matter how Jack died, Ennis may have been able to do something if he had been there. That's the tragedy.
Agreed.
"He didn't know which way it was, the tire iron or a real accident, blood choking down Jack's throat and nobody to turn him over."
I think this is a great part of Ennis's tragedy summarized in one sentence. He has to live with uncertainty and guilt. I think the second part of the sentence is sometimes a overlooked tragedy in itself. Nobody was there. Jack drowned in his own blood because nobody was there to help him.
If Ennis had been there, he might have been able to save Jack.
-
Gosh, all the posts are great, and all could be correct.
Reading all of that, I thought ... this segment really reinforces the movie's ability to make us think, and ponder, and each in our own way get something valuable from it, no matter how each person sees the story as a whole, and regardless of how Jack died.
Whether we see it as a brutal murder (as I do), or an accident, or a mystery that Ennis was left to agonise over for a long time , it is still cruel.
I think one of the amazing things about the story of BBM is the way our interpretation can change each time we see it, read it, or even just think about it, and how differently everyone sees this part of it really shows that.
This segment is truly a 'catalyst for change'. Even for a straight male who thought he knew how gay people felt.
-
It's been pointed out many times in many places that BBM is about the destructive effects of rural homophobia.
If Jack were murdered, the 'villain' of the piece, as it were, would be the homophobia felt by other people toward gays.
If Jack were killed by accident then the focus shifts to Ennis's own homophobia and how it kept him from happiness.
By leaving it enigmatic, both types are targeted. The focus is on homophobia as whole.
I think this was Annie P's intention, and I prefer looking at it this way.
-
IMO,Jack was murdered,bearing in mind the environment in which both of them and their relationship had developed.Of course,story is deliberately ambiguous,or better said,open enough as that everyone of us has their own opinion,and surely everyone is real and good...-remember the case of the "Jack,I swear..."-,In this sense,it could be seen as a result of Ennis paranoia;but we can't forget that Jack in the last times had lowered his guard a lot...It's tragically curious and ironic to see as Ennis had spent half his life protecting themselves against this possibility,up to the point of a constant self-denial,to arrive at the end at the same result he had been trying to avoid...or,at least,with a lot of possibilities of being so.
What's more,I tend to believe that Lureen knew the truth,she was involved in the tragic result;her way of explaining what had happenned seems to cold for a woman who has just lost her husband,the man is supposed she loved.Her father hated Jack and probably she did too,because he was at the point of leaving her-we don't know if for being with Randall-and during all their living together,she surely guessed his tendencies.There's nothing worst that a person who feels deceived and humiliated to turn suddenly all this love into hate.She only cried a little,then,when she guessed-or better said,she knew-who was really Ennis and that BBM existed and was her husband and him "love nest".I think it's clear.
And it was easy,because as I said before,Jack was more reckless than ever in the exhibition of his same sex companies;surely because,as Lureen said,he was drinking a lot and thinking even in death-his wish to have his ashes in BBM...-.Because he didn't have in same way a reason for living,the idea of a "sweet life together" has been broken into pieces;for this,he was bolder because he didn't mind what could happen.And in this sense,I dare to say that Ennis was the "intellectual",or "moral" author of his death,because he had killed long time ago the Jack he had met,the lively,glad and dreamer Jack,to turn him into a shadow-and not only for year's passing,it's sure...-.
-
Annie used the word "accident", and then showed how Ennis thought and then knew that Jack had been beaten by a tire iron. Ennis knew it was murder after John Twist told Ennis that Jack had moved on to another man. It was easier to face that Jack had been murdered than to face that he, Ennis, had killed their sweet life together.
Reading this well informed and thought-out discussion, I feel like we are talking about whether Jesus Christ lived, died, was the son of god, or just plain fiction. It boils down to a discussion about a belief structure, and that is probably what all good literature is about.
Now to the movie - or at least the shooting script for the movie.
The scene below was written to be included in the movie, and would have been inserted between the goodbye-Cassie scene and the deceased-postcard scene:
EXT. GAS STATION -- ROAD OUTSIDE CHILDRESS -- DAY -- 1982
Jack's truck pulls up to the dirt lot next to the gas station. A mechanic, tire jack in hand, fiddling with a car, takes a beer from his buddy, who sits on a tire nearby. They both watch as Randall gets out of the truck and walks to his own truck parked in the lot, waving back at Jack.
The mechanic trades glances with his friend.
Their pov:
Randall's truck pulls out of the lot, goes in one direction.
Jack's pulls out after him, going in the opposite direction. wide:
We hold on Jack's truck, as it drives off into the distance.
[2004 screenplay]
The scene seems to have been shot since a killer mechanic (and his 'buddies') is listed in the credits.
Gary Lauder .... Killer Mechanic
Christian Fraser .... Grease Monkey
Cam Sutherland .... Assailant
(http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l173/nltoast/XXclusively.jpg)
[scene from Brokeback Mountain trailer]
The film cannot show Ennis's thought processes like the novella can, but it is a progression in the other direction to identify the killers, when Annie Proulx links the tire iron to the death only in Ennis's paranoid imagination.
-
Annie says, “the reader finishes it through his or her life experience, prejudices, world view and thoughts”. This is the answer to the question!
Ennis believes that Jack was murdered because that is what he believes would have been the outcome of their relationship.
And Jack would think that it was an accident because he was willing to get out there and live.
Me? I think he was because some people are just downright evil. Randall was too close to home and Lureen? She knew.
-
The scene seems to have been shot since a killer mechanic (and his 'buddies') is listed in the credits.
Gary Lauder .... Killer Mechanic
Christian Fraser .... Grease Monkey
Cam Sutherland .... Assailant
(http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l173/nltoast/XXclusively.jpg)
[scene from Brokeback Mountain trailer]
This scene was indeed shot. Here's an excerpt regarding this scene from the FindingBrokeback.com (http://FindingBrokeback.com) website:
“It was removed to add ambiguity; Lee believes that the harder the audience must work, the better the result,” says a reliable source. There are at least three other excellent arguments for deletion of the Sneering Mechanics scene.
1. It elevates “I wish I knew how to quit you,” and the Dozy Embrace, to their rightful place as Jack’s valediction. Absent the Sneering Mechanics scene, we remember Jack as a man deeply in love, who spent his unhappy life struggling to overcome the consequences of hatred and fear. Could there be a higher honor?
2. It has given rise to literally thousands of hours of vigorous discussion and debate about Jack’s fidelity, and the issue of monogamy in general. Fan websites are awash in lengthy arguments over Jack and his “ranch neighbor friend.” Ennis never knew the truth with certainty, and neither will we.
3. Jack’s fate becomes the film’s much-celebrated mystery. Is Lureen telling the truth? When we witness the murder are we seeing what actually happened or is it Ennis’ imagination at work? Perhaps most intriguing of all, why does it matter to us so?
If you'd like more information about this scene (or 9 other deleted scenes), check out the "Deleted Scenes" section at FindingBrokeback.com (http://FindingBrokeback.com).
-
I think that if that scene were included in the release film, it would be an easier question to answer, but I think that removing that scene brought it back more to the realm of the book.
-
And I also think it's possible that the screenwriters and Ang Lee are "wrong" -- that is, have a different idea about it than Annie Proulx did. I use that word ironically, because of course they have every right to interpret the story and make the film however they'd like. But I do think that, for me, the story more clearly points toward accident, while the film leaves it more ambiguous, with the deleted mechanics scene suggesting murder and the final product leaving the question open (obviously) to debate.
Diana Ossana, in an interview, once said that if you ask Annie Proulx how Jack died, she'll tell you that she doesn't know. I assume this is true, because I would think it would have come up in their conversations about the story. So probably Annie didn't come right out and tell her, one way or another.
But I think that could be disingenuous on Annie's part. Literary authors are often skittish about explaining too much about their stories, especially about things that they kept subtle deliberately. And there's no doubt that, whatever Annie had in mind, she kept it deliberately subtle. If she'd wanted to make it more obvious, she could have.
But subtlety, in literary fiction, is not the same thing as providing no answer at all.
It was easier to face that Jack had been murdered than to face that he, Ennis, had killed their sweet life together.
Good point, Toast. And it suggests one possible interpretation of "There was some open space between what he knew and what he tried to believe, but nothing could be done about it, and if you can't fix it you've got to stand it."
That is: He knew that Jack had died accidentally, and that Ennis had killed their sweet life. But he tried to believe that Jack had been murdered, because it was easier to face.
-
3. Jack’s fate becomes the film’s much-celebrated mystery. Is Lureen telling the truth? When we witness the murder are we seeing what actually happened or is it Ennis’ imagination at work? Perhaps most intriguing of all, why does it matter to us so?
Isn't that the truth?
I think that if that scene were included in the release film, it would be an easier question to answer, but I think that removing that scene brought it back more to the realm of the book.
I agree, Louise.
Diana Ossana, in an interview, once said that if you ask Annie Proulx how Jack died, she'll tell you that she doesn't know. I assume this is true, because I would think it would have come up in their conversations about the story. So probably Annie didn't come right out and tell her, one way or another.
But I think that could be disingenuous on Annie's part. Literary authors are often skittish about explaining too much about their stories, especially about things that they kept subtle deliberately. And there's no doubt that, whatever Annie had in mind, she kept it deliberately subtle. If she'd wanted to make it more obvious, she could have.
It would have been self-defeating of her purpose for Annie to come out and say, one way or the other. Ennis is left with his conviction of what happened, and so are we, each left with our own conviction.
-
Back to story only for a moment. Something mentioned here by Paul triggered me to look up every single mention of the tire iron. I then posted the following on the mettle-of-man-thread, but repost here on request, since it also belongs to this topic:
Do you know how often the tire iron is mentioned in the story? No less than six times. :o Six, that's a whole lot for such a short story.
- They'd took a tire iron to him [Earl], spurred him up, drug him around by his dick until it pulled off...
- If he [Ennis's father] was alive and was to put his head in that door now you bet he'd go get his tire iron
- No, he thought, they got him with the tire iron.
- He didn't know which way it was, the tire iron or a real accident...
- So he knew it had been the tire iron.
- The spoon handle was the kind that could be used as a tire iron.
,
The first two are from the motel scene. The next two are from the phone call with Lureen, # 5 is from the Lightning Flat scene and the last one is from Ennis's dream after Jack's death.
The first two are spoken by Ennis. The next three are thoughts of Ennis and the last one is from Ennis's dreams.
All six mentions of the tire iron come from Ennis. No other reference to tire irons than from him.
Katherine's comment on this:
I think you should post it there, too, Chrissi. Because as you've listed them here, you can see Ennis' thoughts developing and firming up. Which to me suggests they were in his mind in the first place.
And the last image, of the spoon and the tire iron, "in a cartoon shape and lurid colors that gave the dreams a flavor of comic obscenity" seems -- in my mind -- to really underscore the idea that the idea of Jack's murder is a product of Ennis' paranoia.
-
Thanks garycottle!
Gary, you say: The tragedy still remains even if Jack was killed by gay bashers. Ennis pushed Jack away because he thought by doing so he was saving Jack. But, if Jack was gay bashed, what Ennis did was make him face the enemy alone. Which is the tragedy of the closet. In hiding from our haters, we also hide from one another, so when trouble comes, we stand alone. If Jack was intentionally killed, Ennis was not right in refusing that sweet life, because if Ennis had been there, he may have been able to save Jack. No matter how Jack died, Ennis may have been able to do something if he had been there. That's the tragedy.
Gay people face real dangers. And so gay people are afraid. Both of these things are awful, but the tragedy lies in how we let these things keep us from banding together.
...
Gary and to all too, I could not have said it better!! That is what I have been trying to say all along too!! But I got negatives from some, when it comes from protecting oursellves from gay bashing!! Why? Why?
Hugs!!
...
-
All six mentions of the tire iron come from Ennis.
Great point, Chrissi. (Isn't it great to be able to search the story?)
I'm reminded of one of my favorite IMDb discussions: Ennis's Maledictions with CaseyCornelius. Briefly, there are three:
1) "You probably deserve it" in response to Jack's statement that he feared getting shot by Lureen or "the husband" every time he slips off to see the ranchman's wife.
2) Most importantly, the Mexico response, "All them things I don't know could get you killed if I should come to know them".
3) "Why don't you" (quit me).
I would add 4) "I can't stand this anymore, Jack" at the end of the Lake Scene, just before the dozy embrace.
In my opinion, Ennis psychologically kills Jack. Why? Because Jack has broken their pact that they're not "queer". Notice their last night together, they're talking about their "women", Ennis's Cassie and Jack's rancher's wife. But, Jack ventures the "truth" with "...sometimes I miss you so much I can hardly stand it." Awfully close to "I love you".
The closer Jack gets to "queer", the more distressed Ennis gets. Thus, Mexico is the last straw. If Jack is queer, so is Ennis, and he can't stand that.
Ennis is predetermined to believe queer = violent death, because of Earl (and his expectation his father would have come into the motel with the tire iron).
In the story, the sequence goes from: Lureen's call--->believing tire iron--->end of call--->didn't know if it were tire iron or real accident--->OMT mentions the other fella--->now he knew it was the tire iron.
So, as Chrissi points out, all the tire iron references come from Ennis. I think the murder is a projection on his part.
-
1) "You probably deserve it" in response to Jack's statement that he feared getting shot by Lureen or "the husband" every time he slips off to see the ranchman's wife.
Interesting point, Paul! I either didn't notice or didn't remember Casey's comment on this. I've always seen Jack's prediction of getting shot as a foreshadowing of him getting killed (by whatever means), but for some reason I'd never thought hard enough about "You probably deserve it."
In one way, Ennis really DID think Jack deserved it -- well, deserved it might be too strong a word. But Ennis felt that what he and Jack were doing was wrong. And by stepping out with the ranchman's wife, whom we really know was a man, Jack was doing something that, if it didn't deserve killing, at the very least could easily lead to killing.
-
In one way, Ennis really DID think Jack deserved it -- well, deserved it might be too strong a word. But Ennis felt that what he and Jack were doing was wrong. And by stepping out with the ranchman's wife, whom we really know was a man, Jack was doing something that, if it didn't deserve killing, at the very least could easily lead to killing.
Hmm. I wonder if Ennis could have been projecting onto Jack his own feelings that he, himself, deserves it? :-\ :(
-
In my opinion, Ennis psychologically kills Jack. Why? Because Jack has broken their pact that they're not "queer". Notice their last night together, they're talking about their "women", Ennis's Cassie and Jack's rancher's wife. But, Jack ventures the "truth" with "...sometimes I miss you so much I can hardly stand it." Awfully close to "I love you".
The closer Jack gets to "queer", the more distressed Ennis gets. Thus, Mexico is the last straw. If Jack is queer, so is Ennis, and he can't stand that.
Ennis is predetermined to believe queer = violent death, because of Earl (and his expectation his father would have come into the motel with the tire iron).
In the story, the sequence goes from: Lureen's call--->believing tire iron--->end of call--->didn't know if it were tire iron or real accident--->OMT mentions the other fella--->now he knew it was the tire iron.
So, as Chrissi points out, all the tire iron references come from Ennis. I think the murder is a projection on his part.
This is very elegant, Paul. And I agree about Jack breaking their pact that they're really not queer, this is just a one-shot thing, nobody's business but theirs.
-
Hmm. I wonder if Ennis could have been projecting onto Jack his own feelings that he, himself, deserves it? :-\ :(
Another good thought, Jeff!
Geez, there really aren't any throwaway lines in this, are there? (Said for the 14,529th time.)
-
In one way, Ennis really DID think Jack deserved it -- well, deserved it might be too strong a word. But Ennis felt that what he and Jack were doing was wrong. And by stepping out with the ranchman's wife, whom we really know was a man, Jack was doing something that, if it didn't deserve killing, at the very least could easily lead to killing.
Yes, Katherine, certainly in Ennis's mind.
Hmm. I wonder if Ennis could have been projecting onto Jack his own feelings that he, himself, deserves it? :-\ :(
Yeah, Jeff, that's exactly what a projection is. Ennis is projecting his own fears, self-loathing, homophobia.
-
Hmm. I wonder if Ennis could have been projecting onto Jack his own feelings that he, himself, deserves it? :-\ :(
Ennis threatened to kill Jack himself upon discovering the trips to Mexico, and their intimations of Jack's true queerness. From Ennis's point of view at that time in his life, queers deserved killing; if Ennis came to see or admit his own queerness, then logically he must have felt deserving of such a fate too. Certainly, Ennis's threats and maledictions would have haunted him after Jack's death; in some way or other, Ennis must have felt responsible for it.
It's interesting to consider that Jack's death may alone have freed Ennis from his violent impulses towards queer men, when he reflected that the love of his life may have been torn from him by an act of gay bashing. This would further bolster the sense that Jack's death was a sacrifice.
-
Ennis threatened to kill Jack himself upon discovering the trips to Mexico, and their intimations of Jack's true queerness. From Ennis's point of view at that time in his life, queers deserved killing; if Ennis came to see or admit his own queerness, then logically he must have felt deserving of such a fate too. Certainly, Ennis's threats and maledictions would have haunted him after Jack's death; in some way or other, Ennis must have felt responsible for it.
It's interesting to consider that Jack's death may alone have freed Ennis from his violent impulses towards queer men, when he reflected that the love of his life may have been torn from him by an act of gay bashing. This would further bolster the sense that Jack's death was a sacrifice.
Beautifully expressed. :'( :'( :'(
-
The tragedy still remains even if Jack was killed by gay bashers. Ennis pushed Jack away because he thought by doing so he was saving Jack. But, if Jack was gay bashed, what Ennis did was make him face the enemy alone. Which is the tragedy of the closet. In hiding from our haters, we also hide from one another, so when trouble comes, we stand alone. If Jack was intentionally killed, Ennis was not right in refusing that sweet life, because if Ennis had been there, he may have been able to save Jack. No matter how Jack died, Ennis may have been able to do something if he had been there. That's the tragedy.
Gay people face real dangers. And so gay people are afraid. Both of these things are awful, but the tragedy lies in how we let these things keep us from banding together.
Even today, in 2008, you can go onto any online gay dating site, and you will find profiles of men who don't show their face, or have no photo. The fear is still very much out there.
-
I'd also like to resserect this topic again as well, as there may be some folks who missed it. I myself am truly facinated by this topic.
http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,14647.0.html
Also, pictures from the Alberta board:
http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,12084.0.html
-
Even today, in 2008, you can go onto any online gay dating site, and you will find profiles of men who don't show their face, or have no photo. The fear is still very much out there.
Can't say as I blame them. Once something is out there on the Internet, who knows who will find it, and how they will make use of it? :-\
Sorry, not meaning to turn the topic here.
-
Moremojo, why is this so even to-day by some in our democratic countries since as you say some thought this then in the 60's...:
point of view at that time in his life, queers deserved (being killed); if Ennis came to see or admit his own queerness, then logically he must have felt deserving of such a fate too.
....
Moremorjo and to all too: how did this come about in our democratic countries?? The bible(s)? Certains religions? Or? Invented this? Why? Doesn't every person on Earth deserve to live?? - I say!!
Some First Nations regarded a homosexual man highly!! And yet many in our democratic countries disregard to-day those First Nations (we wrongfully named even to-day Indians - shame on ignorant such persons)!!
It is obvious that murder of Jack and other(s) in the BM movie is /are subjects!!
Those murdered because they were gay men, need to stand up and be counted!! - I say!! To prevent such dangers!! But nobody places the accent on prevention and education - not even on Bettermost, unfortunately, rarely so, too rarely so!!
Murder is severe, is that why, no one wants to talk about it?? Scared or scarring?? Or we think that will not happen to me. I see this as a very important issue. Do you?
Awaiting your continued courage Moremojo, and that of others,
hugs!! Let us all show support for gay lives and others to live in freedom on Earth!!
-
Good point, Toast. And it suggests one possible interpretation of "There was some open space between what he knew and what he tried to believe, but nothing could be done about it, and if you can't fix it you've got to stand it."
That is: He knew that Jack had died accidentally, and that Ennis had killed their sweet life. But he tried to believe that Jack had been murdered, because it was easier to face.
Well said Crayons.
Not to be a party pooper, but to comment on some postings that say "If Ennis had been there - opened himself up - he would have been able to save Jack."
Would he have? In a situation where both were suspect in in a dangerous, confrontational situation, would Ennis have risen to the occasion? Or would he have been paralyzed by fear? Or not wanting to align himself with Jack in front of others - so as to be considered a 'boy like him'? We hear about Rich and Earl. Earl got killed. Where was his lover? Did he stand up for his lover? Or not? Would Ennis have been another Rich?
-
Ennis threatened to kill Jack himself upon discovering the trips to Mexico, and their intimations of Jack's true queerness. From Ennis's point of view... queers deserved killing; if Ennis came to see or admit his own queerness, then logically he must have felt deserving of such a fate too. Certainly, Ennis's threats and maledictions would have haunted him after Jack's death; in some way or other, Ennis must have felt responsible for it.
What's interesting here is the wording: "All them things that I don't know could get you killed if I come to know them."
Awfully flowery language from a Wyoming ranch hand (although luckily it's delivered so well that it works).
Ennis is obviously in a jealous rage and speaking off the cuff, but a parallel implication is that this behavior can get you killed if it gets out.
-
Would he have? In a situation where both were suspect in in a dangerous, confrontational situation, would Ennis have risen to the occasion? Or would he have been paralyzed by fear? Or not wanting to align himself with Jack in front of others - so as to be considered a 'boy like him'? We hear about Rich and Earl. Earl got killed. Where was his lover? Did he stand up for his lover? Or not? Would Ennis have been another Rich?
Would Ennis had defended Jack if he were with him? Absolutely.
The way that deleted scene played out though, the attackers waited until Jack was alone. What would Randall (or Rich, or Ennis) be able to do at that point? Standing out on Main Street after the fact yelling, "I'm here, I'm queer!" would accomplish nothing.
-
Well said Crayons.
Not to be a party pooper, but to comment on some postings that say "If Ennis had been there - opened himself up - he would have been able to save Jack."
Would he have? In a situation where both were suspect in in a dangerous, confrontational situation, would Ennis have risen to the occasion? Or would he have been paralyzed by fear? Or not wanting to align himself with Jack in front of others - so as to be considered a 'boy like him'? We hear about Rich and Earl. Earl got killed. Where was his lover? Did he stand up for his lover? Or not? Would Ennis have been another Rich?
You know del, I think they would have both been killed. Ennis had no power or control over Jack's death, whether he was there or not. If Jack was murdered by the men with the tire irons, then they maybe would have murder him too. Or left him lonely llikke he ended up anyway having loved adn lost
-
What's interesting here is the wording: "All them things that I don't know could get you killed if I come to know them."
Awfully flowery language from a Wyoming ranch hand (although luckily it's delivered so well that it works).
My favorite thing about Ennis's big threat about Mexico in that fight is how totally and completely un-intimidated Jack is by Ennis's bluster. Jack just pushes right back with his own issues and complaints. I love that.
-
My favorite thing about Ennis's big threat about Mexico in that fight is how totally and completely un-intimidated Jack is by Ennis's bluster. Jack just pushes right back with his own issues and complaints. I love that.
Thats a very good point. Ennis wasnt gonna get over on Jack with his threats or jealousies.. Jack was not loyal to Ennis, but Ennis was too ashamed of himself to find out if there was something or somebody else to keep him happy. And we all know it wasnt Cassie.
-
What's interesting here is the wording: "All them things that I don't know could get you killed if I come to know them."
Awfully flowery language from a Wyoming ranch hand (although luckily it's delivered so well that it works).
Flowery? :laugh: Personally, I thought it was pretty ignorant and phrased so awkwardly as to be unbelievable had Heath not been as good an actor as he is to pull that out of his teeth and make it seem real.
-
I think Jack's lack of fear of (1) Ennis and (2) the threat of violence is significant on a couple of levels.
My sense is that we're supposed to understand that Ennis has a reputation as a pretty tough and intimidating guy. And, Jack's reaction here just shows that he, perhaps uniquely, can see right through Ennis's tough-guy armor or exterior. He can probably see that Ennis's threats and macho response here are covering up some serious insecurities. I wonder if Jack may actually be flattered to see this amount of jealously and possessiveness come out of Ennis.
And, in terms of Jack not being scared of the threat of violence (as a general concept here)... I think shows that Jacks fears and worries are totally different than Ennis's. Ennis will spend his whole life obsessing about the threat of violence... and Jack can pretty much just blow that fear off (because for some reason it doesn't appear to be anywhere near as acute for him). His biggest fears are about continuing disappointment. I think. And, of course the fear of losing Ennis.
-
Some people seem to think this is the point where Ennis loses Jack. Of course we all know this is their last time together because Jack was indeed killed. How do feel about that Amanda?
-
And, Jack's reaction here just shows that he, perhaps uniquely, can see right through Ennis's tough-guy armor or exterior...
And, in terms of Jack not being scared of the threat of violence (as a general concept here)... I think shows that Jacks fears and worries are totally different than Ennis's.
IMO, Jack's worst fears and worries had already come true: his dream of a sweet life = gone. He was essentially a broken man long before he died.
(It's particularly striking to me in this shot:
(http://www.divshare.com/img/626714-222.jpg)
Ennis had taken a terrible physical beating in just the previous scene, but Jack is the focus of concern here – from both Ennis and the filmmakers, it seems to me.)
Anyway, I think Jack was less afraid of a violent end (and thus may have gotten more careless) because his spirit was already essentially broken.
-
Anyway, I think Jack was less afraid of a violent end (and thus may have gotten more careless) because his spirit was already essentially broken.
Awe thats so said Laura
-
What's interesting here is the wording: "All them things that I don't know could get you killed if I come to know them."
Awfully flowery language from a Wyoming ranch hand (although luckily it's delivered so well that it works).
Flowery? :laugh: Personally, I thought it was pretty ignorant and phrased so awkwardly as to be unbelievable had Heath not been as good an actor as he is to pull that out of his teeth and make it seem real.
The dialogue line as published in Story to Screenplay is "What I don't know, all them things I don't know ... could get you killed if I should come to know them." It's a direct quote from the story text.
-
My opinion is based solely on what I saw in the movie, not really on the short story at all.
As Lureen is talking to Ennis on the phone, she seems to be looking at someone, someone in the room with her that we don't see. Maybe a parent, maybe someone else, maybe Bobby. She is maintaining eye contact with them as she goes thru an obviously rehearsed and oft repeated story. She is concealing something for sure. Anne Hathaway even spoke to this on Oprah saying "its pretty obvious" or something like that.
My feeling is that Jacks death did not occure in the way she was portraying it.
-
Thanks Shakestheground!
Interesting is your puzzling comment!
So you think that someone or persons did try to murder Jack and nearly succeeded, and his Jack's wife knows about that??
Hugs!!
-
My opinion is based solely on what I saw in the movie, not really on the short story at all.
As Lureen is talking to Ennis on the phone, she seems to be looking at someone, someone in the room with her that we don't see. Maybe a parent, maybe someone else, maybe Bobby. She is maintaining eye contact with them as she goes thru an obviously rehearsed and oft repeated story. She is concealing something for sure. Anne Hathaway even spoke to this on Oprah saying "its pretty obvious" or something like that.
My feeling is that Jacks death did not occure in the way she was portraying it.
Hey Bud!
Amazing! This observation that Lureen may have been maintaining eye-contact with someone while she was on the phone is a new one to me. But, it's a really fascinating idea. And, I can certainly understand where that interpretation could come from... now that you describe it.
I've always thought her description sounded rehearsed. Definitely... but I'd always thought it was just fatigue at re-telling the story of Jack's death (which she probably had to do over and over again for friends and family, etc.). Or if not fatigue... as a way of just getting through having to describe something very difficult.
That phone scene is just so brilliant. I still think Lureen really treats Ennis very well on the phone. I think it's a huge kindness on her part to prod Ennis to go visit Jack's parents, etc.
-
That phone scene is just so brilliant. I still think Lureen really treats Ennis very well on the phone. I think it's a huge kindness on her part to prod Ennis to go visit Jack's parents, etc.
I agree. Lureen really did care about Jack. She wants his last wishes to be fulfilled. And all this after she just found out (or her suspicions were confirmed) that Ennis was so much more the 'the fishing buddy'.
-
Not to be a party pooper, but to comment on some postings that say "If Ennis had been there - opened himself up - he would have been able to save Jack."
Would he have? In a situation where both were suspect in in a dangerous, confrontational situation, would Ennis have risen to the occasion? Or would he have been paralyzed by fear? Or not wanting to align himself with Jack in front of others - so as to be considered a 'boy like him'? We hear about Rich and Earl. Earl got killed. Where was his lover? Did he stand up for his lover? Or not? Would Ennis have been another Rich?
Not one person in this thread has said that Ennis would have been able to save Jack. Some (I 'm among them) said he might have been able to save him. Big difference.
You and I may be able to weigh the chances logically: even people living a sweet life together aren't together for every minute of the day; in the accident case Jack may have died from his severe injuries even if someone had turned him around; in the murder case they may both have been murdered; and so on. We can even get downright philosophically about the question and ask if Jack's time was simply up, no matter how the circumstances were.
We can argue about logical versimilitudes (which chances were higher?) as much as we want, it doesn't matter to Ennis. Because for Ennis, it boils down to "blood choking down Jack's throat and nobody there to turn him over."
If Ennis had said yes to the sweet life, he may have been able to save Jack, and that chance is enough to feel not only regret, but also guilt (btw a common phenomenon among survivors).
-
Chrissi,
I couldn't get that line you quoted from the short story out of my head. So I went back to the story and this line almost immediately follows 'Ennis wanted to curse her for letting Jack die on the dirt road.' Ennis feels guilty for not being there to save Jack and feels that if he couldn't be there, at least Lureen should have been. More projection from Ennis as Paul pointed out.
-
Chrissi,
I couldn't get that line you quoted from the short story out of my head. So I went back to the story and this line almost immediately follows 'Ennis wanted to curse her for letting Jack die on the dirt road.' Ennis feels guilty for not being there to save Jack and feels that if he couldn't be there, at least Lureen should have been. More projection from Ennis as Paul pointed out.
Hi Fabienne,
I just went back to edit my post to add the exact same thing. The quote about Lureen letting Jack die and the fact that this is another projection by Ennis. But then I saw you post in the preview. Great minds think alike ;D
-
Hi Fabienne,
I just went back to edit my post to add the exact same thing. The quote about Lureen letting Jack die and the fact that this is another projection by Ennis. But then I saw you post in the preview. Great minds think alike ;D
Agreed! ;) :)
And Ennis's guilt shows us that he believed he could have saved Jack. :(
-
That phone scene is just so brilliant. I still think Lureen really treats Ennis very well on the phone. I think it's a huge kindness on her part to prod Ennis to go visit Jack's parents, etc.
This is such a fascinating thread and even more so for me to read how different scenes are interpreted entirely differently by different people.
I have now seen BbM on more occasions than I care to count and on every one of those occasions I thought Lureen was cold, aloof and patronising to Ennis on the phone. And I won't even mention the way she summarily hung-up the phone on Ennis' ear, without so much as a civil "Good-bye."
IMHO Lureen sometimes even seemed to almost be sneering. "We put a stone up," she says, as her top lip curls up.
Just my view, for what it's worth. In the novella, Ms Proulx says, "No doubt about it, she was polite but the little voice was cold as snow."
I'm gaining so many fascinating insights here. :)
-
Ennis must have felt responsible for it.
I agree. I think that this is expressed during his conversation with John Twist. He says, "I can't begin to tell you how bad I feel". Is this him expressing his guilt or his grief? I think guilt.
My favorite thing about Ennis's big threat about Mexico in that fight is how totally and completely un-intimidated Jack is by Ennis's bluster. Jack just pushes right back with his own issues and complaints. I love that.
Me too! There have been posts elsewhere about the fact that they only spent time together sporadically, it was not a relationship where they learnt about each other 'warts and all' by living together. Ennis is a tough cookie and the fact that Jack wasn't scared for his safety shows the strength of their relationship.
As Lureen is talking to Ennis on the phone, she seems to be looking at someone, someone in the room with her that we don't see.
I had never even thought about that, but watching the film certainly doesn't rule it out-thank you for bringing it to my attention! I've always been fascinated by the noise she made in the back of her throat, as if she is stopping herself from saying what she really thinks. To me, she is being cold, and wants to yell at Ennis, but is holding back either out of respect or Jack or simply that she could her the despair in Ennis and didn't want to hurt him further. But then, maybe she wants to say more but can't because of the other person in the room...
-
Not one person in this thread has said that Ennis would have been able to save Jack. Some (I 'm among them) said he might have been able to save him. Big difference.
You and I may be able to weigh the chances logically: even people living a sweet life together aren't together for every minute of the day; in the accident case Jack may have died from his severe injuries even if someone had turned him around; in the murder case they may both have been murdered; and so on. We can even get downright philosophically about the question and ask if Jack's time was simply up, no matter how the circumstances were.
We can argue about logical versimilitudes (which chances were higher?) as much as we want, it doesn't matter to Ennis. Because for Ennis, it boils down to "blood choking down Jack's throat and nobody there to turn him over."
If Ennis had said yes to the sweet life, he may have been able to save Jack, and that chance is enough to feel not only regret, but also guilt (btw a common phenomenon among survivors).
Chrissi,
I think the situation is too abstract as you say. It's a woulda coulda mighta thing. If they did have the 'sweet life' together, whether Ennis was there to turn him over or not is a situation where the variables would have to be considered. You would have to consider such things as 'Well, why was Jack on that back road alone? Was this part of his travels as a salesman?' If he's with Ennis in their cow and calf operation, he's no longer trolling for men or traveling, so some grease monkey strangers in a different town would have no reason to beat him in the first place. Unless of course, the town they live close to suspects them, then we're back to the Earl and Rich situation. Jack goes off to buy feed and some thugs catch him alone. You can bleed to death/drown in your own blood in a few minutes. Ennis is back on the ranch with the cows. How long would he wait for Jack to come back from shopping or whatnot before he went to find him? Probably a lot longer than a few minutes, probably longer than that to actually find him, etc. Ennis thoughts were very abstract about Jack's death. He was thinking of someone dying alone, with no one to turn him over. That's pretty much the wistful wishful thinking of someone, wishing someone else were still alive, not a scenario that might have been actually real.
Kinda like when people blurt out "If I was there I could have done something [to save a life]!" and someone else responds, "No, there was nothing you could have done."
[shrug]
-
I think Anne Hathaway's performance in the phone scene is nothing short of brilliant.
Despite having to wear all those ridiculous wigs, she portrays Lureen as hardened over time. There's the initial exasperation on answering the phone (before she even knows who it is), as if to say, "oh, not another one". We can imagine she's received many, many calls asking for information.
Thus, her very rehearsed explanation (whether or not it's true; it's the "family" or "public" version).
I love the squeak or break in her voice when Ennis corrects her about what Brokeback Mountain was. It's a transformation: I think this is when she realizes who Ennis really is ; simultaneously, she is realizing who she isn't and what she has lost or even never had with Jack.
Another squeak of recognition when Ennis says "we was good friends" seals it.
I forgive Lureen for her coldness. To paraphrase Annie, she learned some hard lessons about life by being with Jack. Plus, she's suddenly a widow and can't be much more than 39 herself. Now, whatever suspicions she may have had about Jack are confirmed, so she's discovering someone else was Jack's priority.
-
Thus, her very rehearsed explanation (whether or not it's true; it's the "family" or "public" version).
I love the squeak or break in her voice when Ennis corrects her about what Brokeback Mountain was. It's a transformation: I think this is when she realizes who Ennis really is ; simultaneously, she is realizing who she isn't and what she has lost or even never had with Jack.
Well said, Paul. I agree totally.
Ennis thoughts were very abstract about Jack's death. He was thinking of someone dying alone, with no one to turn him over. That's pretty much the wistful wishful thinking of someone, wishing someone else were still alive, not a scenario that might have been actually real.
I agree, Ennis is not thinking logically at this point. I'd go a step further and say he's also thinking in larger, vaguer terms, probably somewhat subconsciously, about Jack being alone, not only at the moment of his death, but in all the years leading up to it. "No one there to turn him over" suggests something about Jack having died without being near the person he loved and who loved him most. No one was there = Ennis was not there. To turn him over = to love him and be with him.
-
I forgive Lureen for her coldness. To paraphrase Annie, she learned some hard lessons about life by being with Jack. Plus, she's suddenly a widow and can't be much more than 39 herself. Now, whatever suspicions she may have had about Jack are confirmed, so she's discovering someone else was Jack's priority.
Lureen is in an awkward position, especially if Jack was murdered. Childress isn't that big of a place. She still has to hold up her head and raise her child. If her husband was murdered for being queer, there must have been rumors about his sexuality before the murder, and some people--the murderers--will know the real story, regardless of what is put out for "public consumption," and word of the truth is bound to get out eventually.
Even if Jack died in an accident, we have the "pissant" sequence to tell us that Jack wasn't respected by the local bigwigs--and who knows what rumors may have circulated about him?
-
Even though L.D. died before Jack, I feel that, if Jack was murdered, L.D. had something to do with it. Or else Randall got ticked off when Jack broke it off with him. Other than that, I don't believe that he actually died. There was no actual concrete proof in the form of a body. I mean, anyone can get ashes anywhere and you can always put up a headstone to throw off suspicion and all, but without a body there can be no murder.
Plus, queer or not, even in that day and age gays were making headway in their fight for their rights and someone would have investigated it. I'm pretty sure that not everyone in the Sheriff's Dept. were bigots and hatemongers. Some of them, sure but not everyone. Plus, Jack also had quite a few friends that would have wondered what really happened.
Not trying to start a debate here. It's just my opinion. Besides, it really gives most of us impetus for writing some wonderful stories. ;D
EnnisJack
-
Heya Kerry,
I can certainly understand why some folks would see Lureen in a negative light here. But, I'm a pretty big fan of Lureen actually. And, I don't hold her "coldness" against her at all or even her relatively brusk way of speaking in this phone conversation. Her life has involved immense disappointments and repressions (Ennis and Jack aren't the only ones dealing with disappointments for sure) and to me her voice and appearance are the sad visual effects of symptoms of these disappointments and stress for her (in my interpretation). She's been reduced from her "red flame" (red color symbol)/ sassy younger self to this washed out, cold (now ash colored) woman. And, it's very sad to me. The discussion of Lureen in general, is pretty complex I think and probably best left to the threads that are specifically about her.
In this particular phone call conversation... I really do think that what she actually tells Ennis (leaving asider her mannerisms) is very kind. She even tells Ennis that Brokeback was Jack's favorite place. She didn't need to do that. And, just think about how important hearing that probably was to Ennis in his grief. If she hadn't really encouraged him to go to Lightning Flat he never would have found the shirts. The fact that she doesn't freak out (at all) when she realizes who Ennis really is... I think speaks volumes about Lureen. I think this phone call only confirms what Lureen already suspects (perhaps subconsciously). The little hitch in Lureen's voice when she realizes is just so subtle and brilliant.
This is such a fascinating thread and even more so for me to read how different scenes are interpreted entirely differently by different people.
I have now seen BbM on more occasions than I care to count and on every one of those occasions I thought Lureen was cold, aloof and patronising to Ennis on the phone. And I won't even mention the way she summarily hung-up the phone on Ennis' ear, without so much as a civil "Good-bye."
IMHO Lureen sometimes even seemed to almost be sneering. "We put a stone up," she says, as her top lip curls up.
Just my view, for what it's worth. In the novella, Ms Proulx says, "No doubt about it, she was polite but the little voice was cold as snow."
I'm gaining so many fascinating insights here. :)
-
Moremorjo and to all too: how did this come about in our democratic countries?? The bible(s)? Certains religions? Or? Invented this? Why? Doesn't every person on Earth deserve to live?? - I say!!
I see the root of homophobic violence stemming from certain religions, including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. All three of these major Western religions are fundamentally homophobic, and collectively command the allegiance of billions of people worldwide. The anti-sodomy laws which prevailed in much of the United States until quite recently had their foundation in Christian bias. When sodomites were seen (are seen) as worthy of damnation and death by God, the followers of that God felt (feel) they had (have) legitimate grounds to treat such people in a comparable manner.
An even more fundamental component of this issue is the perennial, problematic phenomenon of scapegoating. Human beings throughout history seem to display a need to regard certain other members of their species as not only different but as less than human, deserving of opprobrium, abuse, and even death. Jungian psychology suggests that this need stems from an inability to confront and integrate the "shadow self", the bundle of darker impulses and feelings which is nonetheless an integral part of the collective human inheritance. Seen from this perspective, the rejection and killing of the dehumanized Other is an attempt to conceal and kill off a part of the Self that the individual or society cannot bear to countenance in themselves. Homosexuals have been but one of many categories that have been deemed, and continue to be deemed, as evil, other, and worthy of eradication.
-
Even though L.D. died before Jack, I feel that, if Jack was murdered, L.D. had something to do with it. Or else Randall got ticked off when Jack broke it off with him. Other than that, I don't believe that he actually died. There was no actual concrete proof in the form of a body. I mean, anyone can get ashes anywhere and you can always put up a headstone to throw off suspicion and all, but without a body there can be no murder.
Plus, queer or not, even in that day and age gays were making headway in their fight for their rights and someone would have investigated it. I'm pretty sure that not everyone in the Sheriff's Dept. were bigots and hatemongers. Some of them, sure but not everyone. Plus, Jack also had quite a few friends that would have wondered what really happened.
Not trying to start a debate here. It's just my opinion. Besides, it really gives most of us impetus for writing some wonderful stories. ;D
EnnisJack
One theory I have developed, which could be answered by the realease of the deleated scenes, is that he did have a flat, and maybe Randall gave him a ride to the garage. In the clips we see in the trailer to the movie the mechanics are witnessing something going on they don;t like. Perhaps some effection passing betwixt Jack and Randall.
-
I think this is when she realizes who Ennis really is ; simultaneously, she is realizing who she isn't and what she has lost or even never had with Jack.
Another squeak of recognition when Ennis says "we was good friends" seals it.
You have hit the nail on the head!
-
One theory I have developed, which could be answered by the realease of the deleated scenes, is that he did have a flat, and maybe Randall gave him a ride to the garage. In the clips we see in the trailer to the movie the mechanics are witnessing something going on they don;t like. Perhaps some effection passing betwixt Jack and Randall.
This raises the potent critical question of how much validity we should give to the deleted scenes in relation to the finished, released film. I don't think we should necessarily give any credence to any deleted scene in terms of arriving at an interpretation of the film as it now stands. It is clear, though, that many others will choose otherwise, which may be one reason that Lee and/or Schamus (and others?) have chosen not to include them on any of the approved DVD releases.
-
This raises the potent critical question of how much validity we should give to the deleted scenes in relation to the finished, released film. I don't think we should necessarily give any credence to any deleted scene in terms of arriving at an interpretation of the film as it now stands. It is clear, though, that many others will choose otherwise, which may be one reason that Lee and/or Schamus (and others?) have chosen not to include them on any of the approved DVD releases.
I quite agree with you namesake. The deleted scenes can only be taken into consideration when discussing how their inclusion would have changed the film that we know. To actually base critical thinking on them does the actual finished work of art a disservice IMO.
-
"Sure enough." The movie is the movie is. You cant really add other parts and truthfully claim it is legitimate, IMO.
I always thougth the real knowledge came to Lureen when Ennis told her, they were herding sheep up on Brokeback one summer...She put two and two together. That was where Jack's saying it was his favorite place, came
from, and why he wanted to be buried there...What gave him his need to drink...I think that told her all she needed to know..Thus the tiny squeek and the tears welling in her eyes....poor thing. She lost him yet again. This time
completely, with no doubts to hold onto.
-
Thanks moremojo!
I see how certain religions are anti-gay unfortunately! As you say... and stated some.
Last night, I watched again for the second time on TV, the singer Freddie Mercury's life (born Bulsara)! Again, it said that in his youth in India, the religion of his parents or of his area was anti-homosexual!! So he studied in a Catholic or another religious private school? Even his straight pal did not know that Mercury as gay... and to-day wonders how Mercury could have stood those times in a straight religious school as a boarder. Bulsara went to England... after, and formed Queen as a group. Popular, he went to live in New York City, where I did meet him I think (because I had my art studio since I create my own paintings) near Gay and Christopher Streets... and he was always happy. He always refused publically to say that he was gay... to news media. I remember that his concert in Toronto was cancelled since I was outside there when many of the spectators refused to leave and started nearly a riot... so police was called from all over the city!! Guess he was with AIDS then in the 80's. He did an AIDS concert then on the 80's. From his perspective, I think he was afraid to mention his was gay because of religion(s). It was only before the last day of his death, that he mentioned that he was dying to his sister. Since I see that he tried to make his life (and by that others) happy, yes gay, religion(s) I guess do not want that?? !! Religion(s) want people sad, so to overpower them, so to make money, etc.??
There are some persons who uses such religion thought (as to murder gay men beceause they are gay). Which (such murders) is wrong, since it is against humanity! I say!
There are also other persons who are non-religious who are good persons, but some are bad too being anti-gay!!
Of course, some religious persons are also against murdering gay men!!
Why is this (such murders or thoughts of violence against gay men) in the BM movie or Annie's story??
Why? Is it because gay men are somewhat cutting-edge for love, as for humanity?? Being a gay man, I loved life!!
Jack murder (and of another gay man) is accented in the BM movie, why?
Hugs!!
-
My first interpretation of the film was Jack died in a accident.
Jack was allways a fuck up, i mean he never could do anything right. He could rodeo, he couldn't please his father, he couldn't work out how to pee when he was younger. He couldn't make a marriage work, he couldn't get another guy. Most importantly he couldn't have Ennis the way he wanted him. They only thing Jack Succeeded in was bringing Ennis from the dark. To only lose him again.....
His explained the accident like she was telling a story of someones death, at first no emotion.
How can blame her for being bitter, cold and harsh. She married a fuck up. A men that loved another man. Which she never found put about. So all she has in the world was business, a son that was a fuck up like his dad.
She was telling a men she had heard a lot about the way her husband dies. A men that was selfish enough to take her husband away, a men that never came to Jack. She would have loathed this men. But.......
She realises that Ennis Del Mar is more than a friend. She realises this by the way he talks, The emotion he shares with her over the phone. If you listen to just Ennis talking. Its amazing what you hear? :-\
The accident it self is hard to believe, Impossible No way
Than theres the Murder scenario
Ennis feared his whole life, He lived in fear. Fear drove him. It controlled. The news of Jack brings on these images because thats what happens to country gay men. Ennis leaned this at a young age. Thats when the fear began.
So first, Ennis hearing this unbelievable story with Jack's wife being so cold. This causes Ennis to have these first images. Why?
Thats what he believes, Thats all he knows happens to Gay men. The tire iron.........
Then when Ennis sees Jacks "Life" this unravels a side to Jack, Ennis feared. He wasn't Jealous as much of he feared Jack sleeping with Mexico boys.
But when he hears about this new fella, he realises that Jack had made a stupid mistake that Ennis tried to warn him about. Ennis knew this and so did we.
As much as i wish it was a accident,
I think Jack was murdered
-
I am terribly sorry Artiste. But I dont think everything that happens in your life or mine either for that
matter, is based on the gayness or anti gayness quotient...Some things are just the unfortunate way that things
happen or play out...No harm or insult or pain is intended toward gays or anyone specifically...Its just life...Unfortunately
bad things happen to good people...Its not always a conspiracy of hate or violence pointed toward anyone.
-
Thanks ifyoucantfixit, thanks melb_boy88!!
Ifyoucanfixit, I will answer you later, OK? Mel answer was first.
Melb_boy88, you say this:
I think Jack was muted !
......
Melb: I think that you might be right!! Even murdered... but still alive. But I will come back to that later.
What do you mean by muted?? Please detail...
hugs!!
-
sorry, had to edit, Murdered
-
Thanks ifyoucantfixit!
You say: Its not always a conspiracy of hate or violence pointed toward anyone.
..
Ifyoucantfixit, may I disagree with you?? One reason is then why such a religion such as islam murder gay men, don't you know that homosexual men are lined up by muslims who kill them in a row since their government requested those murders? Another example: why was it not only Germany that murdered in death gaz camps over one million gays, since many countries sent homosexual men there to those deaths??
Are those two examples not conspiracies against gay men, such actions as it was for jews and other unwanted persons like retarded or with different facial/body features?? Such conspiracies even included to murder children, even a baby!!
..
So ifyoucantfixit, please explain your thoughts by details??
Hugs!!
-
Melb... are you replacing your word muted by murdered?
Did you ever think that maybe Jack was muted by his wife and/or by other(s)?
Some do.
Hugs!
-
Thanks ifyoucantfixit!
You say: Its not always a conspiracy of hate or violence pointed toward anyone.
..
Ifyoucantfixit, may I disagree with you?? One reason is then why such a religion such as islam murder gay men, don't you know that homosexual men are lined up by muslims who kill them in a row since their government requested those murders? Another example: why was it not only Germany that murdered in death gaz camps over one million gays, since many countries sent homosexual men there to those deaths??
Are those two examples not conspiracies against gay men, such actions as it was for jews and other unwanted persons like retarded or with different facial/body features?? Such conspiracies even included to murder children, even a baby!!
..
So ifyoucantfixit, please explain your thoughts by details??
Hugs!!
Artiste, any factional group can claim that they are the object of hate crimes and murder. No one disputes that the homosexual population has been subjected to many cruelties, and I certainly could never say that having been the victim of it myself.
That being said, your comments about Islam etc. are off topic to say the least for this particular thread.
-
Scott, how can you say that?
Proof is there. Facts are facts. Check it out! One such islamic country did it to hundreths of gay men.
Why be blind?
And how can the subject be off topic, when Annie and the BM story talk about murder of a gay man or gay men??
Hugs!
-
I never said that those type things never happened. I said its not always a conspiracy of
hate and violence when bad things happen....You surely dont think every time a gay man is
not the winner of a lottery, say: its because something was conspired against them to prevent
them from thus being the winner...That is kind of how life is. You just dont always get to be the
winner. Believe me when I tell you I know this as well as anyone. I have had things happen to
me, in the past, that have impacted my life in a very negative way..But it was not a conspiracy that caused this to happen. It was just one of lifes happenings. Yes there has been bad people that have done bad things. But there are other people besides gays that those bad people impact as well. Just as fiercely. Its just how people are.. You surely dont think everyone that doesnt agree with you is anti gay do you...Because you could not be further from the truth.
We all care about you. We care about what happens to you. HOWEVER there is only so much
impact that others have on anothers life...good or bad. We wish you well in every way...But its
not possible to fix everything that you take issue with. Would that it was so simple. I would
also like some of the things that I would prefer to be fix, were fixed...That is just a slow and\
for the most part long and rutted road. But I dont seek people or religions to blame it on..it is
as i said. Part of being human, in a difficult world.. So I guess what i am saying is try to be
more patient, and accepting of friendship and kindness, and you will probablly receive those in
an equal proportion coming back...However if you are at all a believer in Karma, you then will
see that the hate you send out, will then come back to you as well.....janice
-
That being said, your comments about Islam etc. are off topic to say the least for this particular thread.
Yes, I was going to switch into moderator mode and say that, while this subject of homophobia and religion is very interesting (I'd love to see a thread on this, if there isn't one already) let's be careful not to detour too far from the topic.
:)
Artiste, your post came in while I was writing this. Yes, BBM involves murder of gay men. But to get into a larger discussion of religion and gay bashing in general would be to shortchange both the subject of Jack's death in particular and the interesting larger topic. Each deserves its own thread.
-
Scott, how can you say that?
Proof is there. Facts are facts. Check it out! One such islamic country did it to hundreths of gay men.
Why be blind?
And how can the subject be off topic, when Annie and the BM story talk about murder of a gay man or gay men??
Hugs!
Neither the Holocaust nor the state of Islam have anything to do with the American rural west, and the prevalence of homophobia in that region in the 1980's. Your views on Islam and the Muslim faith are well known, and I respect your right to hold those views, however, they were no more responsable for the death of Jack Twist than you or I. If in fact, you hold the belief that Jack was murdered, then he was murderred by Americans, probably Christian Americans at that.
-
Thank you Scott for getting this back to topic...uuuhh
-
Hey, TV mentions that the murderers of gay men in Germany were christians - likely protestants, right? As in the BM movie right?
So I am on topic!
Awaiting your reply to that one,
hugs, hugs, ifyoucantfixit and Scott!!
-
Hey, TV mentions that the murderers of gay men in Germany were christians - likely protestants, right? As in the BM movie right?
So I am on topic!
No, as a reminder: the topic is not which religions are most likely to murder gay men. The topic is about the death of one particular (fictional) gay man.
-
I agree that all topics raised here are interesting and relevant in themselves, while recognizing the importance of not veering too far from the topic of this particular thread (my apologies for having contributed to that). I just thought I'd note, in light of my own comments, that Ennis doesn't seem to be particularly religious, if at all (his mouthing of the Lord's Prayer at his wedding would seem to be the strongest support for any religious feeling), yet he's just as capable of virulent anti-queer violence as anyone. I'd argue that the cultural roots of Ennis's homophobia are religious, but no homophobe or gay basher need be actively or consciously religious (in fact, many are not).
-
I agree that all topics raised here are interesting and relevant in themselves, while recognizing the importance of not veering too far from the topic of this particular thread (my apologies for having contributed to that). I just thought I'd note, in light of my own comments, that Ennis doesn't seem to be particularly religious, if at all (his mouthing of the Lord's Prayer at his wedding would seem to be the strongest support for any religious feeling), yet he's just as capable of virulent anti-queer violence as anyone. I'd argue that the cultural roots of Ennis's homophobia are religious, but no homophobe or gay basher need be actively or consciously religious (in fact, many are not).
I never gave that a thought before now. Maybe that would make a good discusion for another thread. "Do you think Ennis would have been capable of violence against gays?"
-
I agree that all topics raised here are interesting and relevant in themselves, while recognizing the importance of not veering too far from the topic of this particular thread (my apologies for having contributed to that). I just thought I'd note, in light of my own comments, that Ennis doesn't seem to be particularly religious, if at all (his mouthing of the Lord's Prayer at his wedding would seem to be the strongest support for any religious feeling), yet he's just as capable of virulent anti-queer violence as anyone. I'd argue that the cultural roots of Ennis's homophobia are religious, but no homophobe or gay basher need be actively or consciously religious (in fact, many are not).
Indeed. I think serious involvement in any of the traditional mainline Protestant churches--not the Fred Phelps fringe but the old mainline denominations--would work against someone's becoming a gay basher. While certain of these denominations are struggling over the full inclusion of gays in the life of the church, I think they all would condemn anti-gay violence. I guess even the Roman Catholic church would be against anti-gay violence, but that's not my tradition, so I don't much pay attention to the Roman church.
-
I never gave that a thought before now. Maybe that would make a good discusion for another thread. "Do you think Ennis would have been capable of violence against gays?"
That would be a good thread, one you could open now in Open Forum, or perhaps suggest for a future TOTW. I think people would have some interesting and different views on this.
Indeed. I think serious involvement in any of the traditional mainline Protestant churches--not the Fred Phelps fringe but the old mainline denominations--would work against someone's becoming a gay basher. While certain of these denominations are struggling over the full inclusion of gays in the life of the church, I think they all would condemn anti-gay violence. I guess even the Roman Catholic church would be against anti-gay violence, but that's not my tradition, so I don't much pay attention to the Roman church.
And this would be a great topic for Anything Goes or Safe Haven.
Seriously, I'm not trying to a rigid topic enforcer. I think both those subjects are very interesting and would like to say something about them myself, but am avoiding doing so out of fear that some might object to detouring too far from the subject of Jack's death.
The subject of religion and anti-gay violence is particularly interesting. It's hard to imagine any Christian church condoning it (I specify Christian because I'm less familiar with other faiths). And yet obviously lots of people feel that homosexuality is at odds with Christian beliefs, which probably tacitly encourages some of the violence.
OK, that's all I'll say for now!
:-X
-
OK, that's all I'll say for now!
:-X
You go right ahead and say all you want about anything, Little Darlin'! ;D
-
Ineedcrayons, I feel that you are not correct in trying to correct me (if I may use that term), while you let others and yourself do so... as just glanced some numerous after my last one.
Anyone can see that murdering gays in that movie is of great importance, like it or not! It's there as a main subject! I do not like it, but it is there as an issue!! Re-see the movie and the book!!
You or another else saying otherwise arewrong, just murder of one is Ok? - not,it is not as far as I am concern, and surely you would not say that!
Besides the subjects of this BMmovie is not only the murders of only one] man... as you or others say!!
You would never say: murdering of a gay man is OK -orof many gay men, that is OK too because they are gay men!!
I show my support for lives to live in peace for all and that to me is the aim of Annie!!
The subject of this thread is murder: Do you think that Jack was murdered or was it an accident? - I stick to my points!!
Hugs!
-
The subject of this thread is murder: Do you think that Jack was murdered or was it an accident? - I stick to my points!!
Hugs!
No, the subject of this thread is 'Do you think Jack was murdered OR was it an accident?' Not 'gay men are murdered and it was based on religious bigotry/anti-gay conspiracy'. Some of us on this thread don't believe a murder took place at all. You tend to go off on tangents, Artiste that derail threads. As the mods suggested, it would be a good idea to open new threads on your tangents - they are interesting - as they take away from this thread.
-
You or another else saying otherwise arewrong, just murder of one is Ok? - not,it is not as far as I am concern, and surely you would not say that!
Surely I would not.
Besides the subjects of this BMmovie is not only the murders of only one] man... as you or others say!!
You would never say: murdering of a gay man is OK -orof many gay men, that is OK too because they are gay men!!
No.
The subject of this thread is murder: Do you think that Jack was murdered or was it an accident? - I stick to my points!
Me too. The subject of the thread is "Do you think Jack was murdered or was it an accident?" Thus, the thread is about murders and accidents. But in general, up to a point, they must connect to Jack.
Artiste, maybe you have seen this poll. If not, please check it out. BetterMost members are currently discussing their views about OT posts. Most seem to feel that moderately OT posts are fine, but there's a limit to how much they want to diverge from the topic. So we have to find that happy medium.
http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,16136.0.html (http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,16136.0.html)
-
I think the author--and the film maker--left it intentionally ambiguous, but I think it is natural for people to form opinions, one way or the other. My opinion is: it was an accident. My stories say: it was murder. Go figure...
-
Wow JudgeHolden, what an essay.
I especially appreciate all your details relating to local culture, the historical context of the situation, and all the mechanical issues.
-
You can argue all day on the percentages of gay men that experience anti-gay violence. Those who are identifiably gay and do not fit gender norms are sadly lightning rods for such aggression, starting when they are very young, and likely to see danger as evr-present based on their experiences. However, Jack Twist is not one of those.
Gaybashing is rarely a crime of conspiracy, as any cop will tell you, its almost always a case of opportunity and group intoxication. Its like the old fire triangle, fuel, heat and oxygen, you need bigotry, booze, and opportunity.
It's my perception Ms. Proulxs story is about Ennis, not Jack. The movie goes into much about Jacks life that wasn't contained in her work. It's not so much about what happened to Jack or what I think happened to Jack, but what Ennis thinks happened to Jack.
JH, you are correct here. Jack did not fit any stereotype of those generally targeted with bigotry, hate, and violence or teasing for that matter. I suspect (only for this discussion because I have been happy with the 'it is about what Ennis though' theroy and can't bring myself to read slash of any kind cause I want the story to be as is) if Jack was killed because he was queer, it may have been that Randalls big mouthed wife picked up on what was going on and put someone up to it for her personal reasons.
Blatant, violent acts of physical injury toward gay men for no other reason other than they are gay--out steretypes or not--is very rare in this country. I know. I am in the field and I am very aware of national crime statistics. Most of the violence I have seen is what JudgeHolden describes in his fire tetrahedron theory is correct. Usually it has to do with a younger tweaker homosexual inner city hustler assaulting a gay man over a money dispute. The victim rarely tells the entire story, but one in my profession can sure read between the lines. In a lot of these cases, they are reported at gay bashings by the media and not the police. Groups take this, usually lock-step with the media cause it sells add space, as random killings of gay men. Aditionally, lots of attacks have been reported in parks or rest stops late at night. Always a story not reported in these cases. These attacks aren't as common today as 10 years ago. It's safer to hook up with a hustler without drugs/alcohol through Craigslist and such, so these meetings, usually in bars or on the street have dramatically decreased. Cruising rest stops and parks had dropped way off for the same reason. Guys don't need those places so much for sex anymore. I don't know of any conspiracies of guys getting together, hunting, and killing a gay man. And as JH pointed out, this was not the case with Matthew Shepard
Ultimately, I lean toward the random murder explanation, for a series of small reasons, all technical:
It was not clear who's tire and on what he was changing. Not 'he was changing his tire' but 'he was changin' a tire...'
While Lureen was describing the details in an almost scripted mono tone which would lead me to believe she got the story and she really didn't understand what happened, I think that it was a murder. Just because he was a gay man like Earl? I don't think so. Could he, drunked up, got frisky with some guy in a truck stop or parkinglot (usually guys who are violent toward guys like Jack in these circumstances are homosexual and very homophobic)? Perhaps.
I still like to stay with I don't know and I don't care what happened to Jack. Ennis thought he was tire ironed by a group of bigoted homophobes, so be it.
Thanks for the great and in depth essay JudgeHolden. It took lots of time to put it together and it is very thought provoking.
Brad
-
JH, you are correct here. Jack did not fit any stereotype of those generally targeted with bigotry, hate, and violence or teasing for that matter.
Tell you what, I'm not questioning anybody here, but reading this suddenly reminded me/made me think that Earl and Rich probably didn't fit any common stereotype either. Remember, they ran a ranch, and Ennis describes them as "tough old birds," yet they were still "the joke of town." And look what happened to Earl. ...
-
Thanks Jeff! Thanks also to all others!! Interesting!!
Jack was certainly a target for straights or others to murder him because he was a gay man or bi-man!! Right?
Yes, and look what happened to Earl! As you say Jeff... you said well too!! I ask: Why was Earl murdered?
What I dislike about the BM movie is that in the trailer Earl is shown in an negative light!!
Awaiting your replies, etc.,
hugs!! May gay men be safe in the whole world!! Straights be safe too!!
-
Tell you what, I'm not questioning anybody here, but reading this suddenly reminded me/made me think that Earl and Rich probably didn't fit any common stereotype either. Remember, they ran a ranch, and Ennis describes them as "tough old birds," yet they were still "the joke of town." And look what happened to Earl. ...
Ennis was a little boy when this happened. There isn't anything in Proulx story that talks about Rich and Earl other than what Ennis described. What is important is that Ennis thought Earl was killed only because he was living with Rich. Again, it's about what Ennis thought.
Brad
-
Ennis was a little boy when this happened. There isn't anything in Proulx story that talks about Rich and Earl other than what Ennis described. What is important is that Ennis thought Earl was killed only because he was living with Rich. Again, it's about what Ennis thought.
Brad
Sure enough, what Ennis thinks about it is important. But the implication from the story is pretty clear that Ennis had the right idea. He didn't imagine his father laughing about what happened to Earl. No, Annie doesn't tell us anything more about Earl and Rich, but I still find it hard to believe they fit any sort of gay stereotype.
From the story:
"Whoa, whoa, whoa. It ain't goin a be that way. We can't. I'm stuck with what I got,
caught in my own loop. Can't get out of it. Jack, I don't want a be like them guys you
see around sometimes. And I don't want a be dead. There was these two old guys
ranched together down home, Earl and Rich -- Dad would pass a remark when he
seen them. They was a joke even though they was pretty tough old birds. I was what,
nine years old and they found Earl dead in a irrigation ditch. They'd took a tire iron to
him, spurred him up, drug him around by his dick until it pulled off, just bloody pulp.
What the tire iron done looked like pieces a burned tomatoes all over him, nose tore
down from skiddin on gravel."
"You seen that?"
"Dad made sure I seen it. Took me to see it. Me and K.E. Dad laughed about it. Hell,
for all I know he done the job. If he was alive and was to put his head in that door
right now you bet he'd go get his tire iron. Two guys livin together? No. All I can see is
we get together once in a while way the hell out in the back a nowhere -- "
-
JudgeHolden, you say: [ there's far more folks with guns in their truck than without and no that dont mean we're all in training to be the Dalton Gang, its just a way of life that goes way back. So Jack would not of been an obvious target of gaybashers.
Gaybashing is rarely a crime of conspiracy, as any cop will tell you, its almost always a case of opportunity and group intoxication. Its like the old fire triangle, fuel, heat and oxygen, you need bigotry, booze, and opportunity. Look at the notorious Matt Shepherd case: he was little, by himself, and way too trusting of these tweakers he met in a bar. That case is held up as the standard of what gay youth face, the statistics show that though gay youth are more likely to be victims of hate crimes than straight ones, the odds are still overwhelming that if they are going to meet an early end, it'll be the same way most staright kids do: in an auto-related accident.
/i]
...
JudgeHolden, may I reply to you and to all too!
1- My gay friend in the Grand Tetons which is in Brokenback area (as in the BM story and Annie's), had guns, since he helped men hunt - he a guide-, but he was murdered !! So even if you have a rifle in your truck, as you said, gay men do get murdered because they are gay, I say !! I think that Jack got murdered, really, because he was a gay or bi man!! Even if he had maybe a rifle or many or guns, how can a gay man not be murdered by a group of anti-gay?? That is similar to my own life, and surely of others who are now deceased or luckily survived such atrocities!!
2- As far as gay bashing is rare, that is bull. Since cops did not even asked details how dressed, the facial features, etc., about my four attackers who beat me up and left me for dead!! Most cops do not care if a gay man got murdered... and I have not only my own life, experience, to show about that. That leads me again to think that Jack was indeed murdered by gay bashers!!
So, I do not understand you ineedcrayons!! Any more comments from you and from others??
...
Awaiting your news,
hugs to all!! May all gay men be safe on Earth!!
-
Most cops do not care if a gay man got murdered...
I understand what you're saying, Artiste. I think BradInBlue's point is that the townspeople and cops didn't necessarily know Jack was gay.
The film and book give no information on how Jack's death was handled by the local law enforcement. *If* Jack had been murdered, there may have been a full, thorough and serious investigation by the police. We just don't know.
-
Most cops do not care if a gay man got murdered...
Sorry Artiste, this is simply bull crap. Cops see so much of what is ill society and it's problems. What drugs do to people. How lots of adults behave like children--fight, domestic violence, road rage. Gangs--Bloods Crips 18th Streeters, shooting at each other. Tweakers racing down the street at 90 miles an hour in a stolen Toyota, stealing everything in sight and ruining so many lives. Black, white, Asian, hispanic, native American, young, old, hetro, homo, tranny...... It's not about what or who someone is, it is about what they did and their behavior.
Cops don't have time to dwell on someones sexual orientation or race for that matter. In fact, after 20 years in the field, I have come to the conclusion--as a homosexual (and there are many cops that are) that a majority of cops are more tolerant and accepting than most average joe's out there. Hey, try to find a homo cop or an Afican American cop, for that matter, that will tell you we are a bunch of racists and homophobes. For us, it's nice to see people, regardless of what they are, live good and happy lives. People that are respectful of others and solve problems/conflicts in a civil and adult manner.
Brad
-
Ennis definitely is paranoid, but he had good reason to be. This is something that a lot of folks who dislike Ennis for not being more courageous and taking Jack up on his offer for that sweet life seem to overlook. Ennis had actually seen homophobia at its most brutal and vicious--his own father may have been a homophobic torturer and murderer. Homophobic violence was not some hypothetical maybe in Ennis's future, but a reality in his past and a frightening possibility in his present. Ennis was paranoid, but crazy he was not.
-
Ennis definitely is paranoid, but he had good reason to be. This is something that a lot of folks who dislike Ennis for not being more courageous and taking Jack up on his offer for that sweet life seem to overlook. Ennis had actually seen homophobia at its most brutal and vicious--his own father may have been a homophobic torturer and murderer. Homophobic violence was not some hypothetical maybe in Ennis's future, but a reality in his past and a frightening possibility in his present. Ennis was paranoid, but crazy he was not.
No he certainly was crazy atall, he was frightened. In one scene in the film he asked Jack if ever thought that people "knew", like they could tell when you walked down the street or went into a shop. It wasn,t just paranoia that kept him from living with Jack, it was fear.
-
No he certainly was crazy atall, he was frightened. In one scene in the film he asked Jack if ever thought that people "knew", like they could tell when you walked down the street or went into a shop. It wasn,t just paranoia that kept him from living with Jack, it was fear.
That scene has always puzzled me, and I've never really given it much thought. It's also OT for this thread, but maybe Chrissi would consider making that film scene a Topic of the Week some time?
Oh, Chrissi! You listenin', Little Darlin'! ;D :-*
-
Simply put, Ennis thought if people knew he could be killed. He didn't think two guys could 'ranch up' and he wasn't about to move to Denver or Sanfransisco and be like 'those guys you see around'. Call him paranoid or crazy, but it is the story of Brokeback Mountain.
Today, if Jack and Ennis road up to an inner city gay bar in their truck, dressed like they are and acting/talking like they are, guys would get all hot and bothered, but once they saw that J & E wasn't a butch act they would probably make fun of em. It wouldn't take long for Jack and Ennis to know they didn't fit in and weren't welcome there.
Brad
-
Simply put, Ennis thought if people knew he could be killed. He didn't think two guys could 'ranch up' and he wasn't about to move to Denver or Sanfransisco and be like 'those guys you see around'. Call him paranoid or crazy, but it is the story of Brokeback Mountain.
Today, if Jack and Ennis road up to an inner city gay bar in their truck, dressed like they are and acting/talking like they are, guys would get all hot and bothered, but once they saw that J & E wasn't a butch act they would probably make fun of em. It wouldn't take long for Jack and Ennis to know they didn't fit in and weren't welcome there.
Brad
That, unfortuantely is a very true statement.
-
I can't imagine anyone seeing Brokeback Mountain as a story of a man who was a crazy paranoid. I believe Jack died by accident, as I said in that debate at IMDb. But I see BBM as being, in part, a story about the damaging effects of rural homophobia, in the oft-repeated words of another participant in that IMDb debate. (It's not just about homophobia; it's also a love story.)
But to the extent it is about homophobia, it is about how that societal prejudice corroded a man's life and mind and soul to the point that he couldn't be with the one he loved and ruined both their lives. The homophobia was very real -- Ennis encountered, at a very young age, about as brutal example of it as you can imagine. And Ennis' reaction to that experience, as well as to the experience of growing up with a dad who was a possibly murderous homophobe, was not at all irrational. His reaction makes perfect sense under the circumstances.
But it forever damaged the way he saw life. And in the end, it also affected the way he saw death.
To stress: People who argue that Jack died by accident are not saying homophobia doesn't exist, in life or in BBM. They're saying that this movie shows how homophobia leads to violence, both physical and emotional.
-
I think there are some very bad apples who are cops, and I think they give cops as a group a bad reputation. And maybe things have changed in the last 25 years. Maybe cops are more tolerant of gay people than they were then, just like the general public. In any event, I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that the authorities in a small Texas town in the early 80's may have been unsympathetic to a gay man like Jack. The story doesn't tell us one way or another, but it's not so far-fetched to wonder along those lines.
I think this is a good point, Gary. When we look at this story, I think we have to be careful to keep time and place in mind, and not project backward from today. We may also need to distinguish between law enforcement officers as individuals and law enforcement as an institution of society.
At least here in the East, there is a long history of antagonism between law enforcement and the gay community. A former cheif of police and later mayor of Philadelphia, Frank Rizzo, once led a raid to bust up a gay club dressed in a tuxedo with a nightstick tucked in his cummerbund. Consider, too, that the Stonewall Riots began with a police raid on a gay bar. To tie this together, the individual officers involved in those raids may not have cared a bit that the patrons of those clubs were gay, but they had orders to carry out, and that was their job. Nevertheless there are good historical reasons for gays to be wary of the police. On the other hand, times do change. In the early 1990s the Philadelphia police were very helpful and supportive of starting a town watch in our gayborhood.
You got to do the nasty with a police officer? That's so ... hot. ;D ;)
-
That scene has always puzzled me, and I've never really given it much thought. It's also OT for this thread, but maybe Chrissi would consider making that film scene a Topic of the Week some time?
Oh, Chrissi! You listenin', Little Darlin'! ;D :-*
I,ve gone off topic?? ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, I,m gonna be shot!!! ;) :laugh:
-
I,ve gone off topic?? ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, I,m gonna be shot!!! ;) :laugh:
I wouldn't worry, with all the dumbass missin' around here. ;D :laugh:
I'm sorry, I should have said, For me to discuss that scene further here would be off topic. :(
-
I can't imagine anyone seeing Brokeback Mountain as a story of a man who was a crazy paranoid. I believe Jack died by accident, as I said in that debate at IMDb. But I see BBM as being, in part, a story about the damaging effects of rural homophobia, in the oft-repeated words of another participant in that IMDb debate. (It's not just about homophobia; it's also a love story.)
But to the extent it is about homophobia, it is about how that societal prejudice corroded a man's life and mind and soul to the point that he couldn't be with the one he loved and ruined both their lives. The homophobia was very real -- Ennis encountered, at a very young age, about as brutal example of it as you can imagine. And Ennis' reaction to that experience, as well as to the experience of growing up with a dad who was a possibly murderous homophobe, was not at all irrational. His reaction makes perfect sense under the circumstances.
But it forever damaged the way he saw life. And in the end, it also affected the way he saw death.
To stress: People who argue that Jack died by accident are not saying homophobia doesn't exist, in life or in BBM. They're saying that this movie shows how homophobia leads to violence, both physical and emotional.
Yes, I very much agree with this. When it comes to Ennis and his fears... I think BBM is a lot about the issue of internalized homophobia and the impact of this phenomenon on a person's life and the lives of those he loves- both his lover and his family, etc. (in a nutshell)
-
In the accident scenario, Jack's truck trouble early in the movie could be seen as foreshadowing his death. When they leave the mountain, Ennis helps him with it, but in the end, Ennis isn't there to help him.
And in between, Jack helps Randall with HIS truck trouble.
("Truck trouble" is starting to take on a sexual subtext! ;))
-
It occurs to me that if Jack did indeed die by gaybashing, it wouldn't necessarily have involved Randall (or the unnamed ranch foreman in the original story) at all, in terms of the two being seen together and others in the community speculating on their relationship. We know that Jack made trips to Mexico for sexual purposes, and it is quite possible that he continued this pattern even after meeting Randall (assuming that theirs became a sexual liaison). A profile of sexual impulsiveness and risk emerges on Jack's part. Jack may have placed himself in a knowingly sexual situation that turned ugly and deadly, and if so, he would not be the first gay man to whom this has happened. This hypothetical scenario would have rendered Jack as the vulnerable prey that JudgeHolden describes as the likely target of gaybashers.
-
It occurs to me that if Jack did indeed die by gaybashing, it wouldn't necessarily have involved Randall (or the unnamed ranch foreman in the original story) at all, in terms of the two being seen together and others in the community speculating on their relationship. We know that Jack made trips to Mexico for sexual purposes, and it is quite possible that he continued this pattern even after meeting Randall (assuming that theirs became a sexual liaison). A profile of sexual impulsiveness and risk emerges on Jack's part. Jack may have placed himself in a knowingly sexual situation that turned ugly and deadly, and if so, he would not be the first gay man to whom this has happened. This hypothetical scenario would have rendered Jack as the vulnerable prey that JudgeHolden describes as the likely target of gaybashers.
Randall is the 'unnamed ranch foreman'. I'm more likely to agree at your perspective if Jack's death wasn't an accident.
Brad
-
I always assumed that if other cops he worked with found out they might have beat the crap out of him.
Having been in his shoes at one time, it wasn't about getting beat up by fellow cops, it was about what they might think. I would drive 120 miles to the big city north of me to go to gay bars. I remember being petrified about a fellow cop seeing me go into a gay bar. Course, once I was comfortable with myself, I realized no one at work cared/cares. Most of it was in my head. Yeah, the Ennis stuff (although I was never afraid of being killed or beat up) and I was a cop in the 80's.
Brad
sorry to be off topic
-
I discussed the general topic of gaybashing and hate crimes with a female deputy sheriff in the very kind of small red-state town where Jack Twist might of met his theoretical end, a gal of the age to have been on the job at that time, 1983.
Judge, thank you for contributing a great post (not just because you sort of complimented me ;) ). I won't take up the space to quote the whole thing here, just the first paragraph so readers will know to which I'm referring.
I'd particularly like to mention that I've thought about the prominence of the Newsomes in the community possibly also being a factor in any hypothetical "cover-up," so I'm glad you mentioned that.
What I want to say here is that I think it's possible that even if Jack's death occurred just the way Ennis envisions it, it still might, in a way, have been a crime of opportunity. If there were rumors about Jack circulating in the Childress area, and some low-life types had heard them, perhaps they just accidentally came on Jack, all by himself alone, changing a tire on some deserted back road, and decided to have a little "fun" with the alleged "queer."
Jack could have been having trouble with that tire, and the mechanics just happen by and offer to "help." There's Jack, all by himself, outside the truck (thus away from any firearm that he might have had inside the truck). Conceivably, he might even have handed the instrument of his own death--the tire iron--to his murderer.
-
Thank you for expounding on your views, ineedcrayons. I saw in an earlier post you revealed that you had been called a homophobe over at IMDb for expressing your views about this issue. I'd like to say that I don't think you're a homophobe, and I don't think you should have been called that.
Thanks, Gary. Well, as you know, there were only four people actively participating in that debate at IMDb, two on each "side," and the two on the accident side were straight and the two on the murder side were gay. One person (not Gary) equated calling Jack's fictional death an accident with denying the existence of anti-gay hate crimes in real life, so when things got heated the word "homophobe" was just waiting to be drawn into the conversation.
People here are so much more polite! But also, I was wondering whether here, with more people posting, there'd be any correlation between the accident people and the straight people, and the murder people and the gay people. I think I perceive a slight trend that way, but it's more complex and varied. There are also gay-accident folks and straight-murder folks.
Here's a case, though, where one's life experiences may affect the way one interprets BBM (as they do, to some extent, with any story).
-
In the accident scenario, Jack's truck trouble early in the movie could be seen as foreshadowing his death. When they leave the mountain, Ennis helps him with it, but in the end, Ennis isn't there to help him.
And in between, Jack helps Randall with HIS truck trouble.
OOooooooooooo, this is quite excellent Crayons! I've always thought LaShawn's comments to Jack during their dance was foreshadowing of his death... I love these observations about his even earlier truck troubles and Ennis's involvment.
-
Randall is the 'unnamed ranch foreman'.
That is certainly the name that McMurtry and Ossana assigned him, but this tenuous character remains unnamed in Proulx's story.
-
I've noticed that many people who feel Jack may have been murdered say it is their impression that Lureen is lying to Ennis when she speaks to him on the phone. I've never interpreted that scene in that way. I've always assumed that Lureen believed what she told Ennis, but of course she may not have known what really happened.
I'm missing some pages of the discussion, will catch up with the whole thing later. I just wanted to say that these perception by many Brokies is probably assured by Ang Lee's comments. He repeatedly said in interviews Lureen is clearly lying on the phone with Ennis.
-
Just for the record I'd like to say that I don't know what to think about Jack's death. I don't know what to believe. When I read the story or watch the film I'm always left puzzled by Jack's death. I don't feel I was given an answer. In other words, I'm one of those people who think "if you're not confused here, then you really don't know what's going on." (If anyone knows the origin of that quote please tell me because I use it all the time.)
Oh, that's right, Gary. Sorry for oversimplifying your position in that IMDb debate. :) There were two accident people, one murder person, and you were arguing primarily for ambiguity, right?
-
I just wanted to say that these perception by many Brokies is probably assured by Ang Lee's comments. He repeatedly said in interviews Lureen is clearly lying on the phone with Ennis.
With all due respect to Lee, I don't think his repeated assertions necessarily confirm the accuracy of his point of view, or narrow the field of interpretation for others who might think differently. Lee as director was interpreting a screenplay written by two others who in turn were adapting a significantly and intentionally ambiguous story by yet another. Hathaway's performance likewise was that actress's attempt to translate Lee's direction through her own understanding of the character and her range and skill as a thespian.
Even if Lureen's story were false, she may not have been deliberately lying, but rather may have been repeating what she truly believed at that time to have been the case. If so, it's possible that, following Ennis's revelations, she may have begun to have her own doubts about Jack's death.
-
With all due respect to Lee, I don't think his repeated assertions necessarily confirm the accuracy of his point of view, or narrow the field of interpretation for others who might think differently. Lee as director was interpreting a screenplay written by two others who in turn were adapting a significantly and intentionally ambiguous story by yet another.
I agree with you.
I didn't mean to refer to Ang Lee as the one who knows, the one who has the answers. In fact, earlier in this thread I've already stated my opinion and it's quite contradictory to what Lee says.
It was only an explatation to Garry, why the believe that Lureen is lying might be widespread among Brokies.
-
It just occured to me that Jack went to the mexican, because in Jack's area (and previous areas) he could not pick up another gay or bi guy because murderers awaited him!! Murderers had an eye on him to bash him!!
See that in the movie more than once!
Hugs!!
-
If Laureen was lying, does it necessarily mean she was covering up his murder......
She may have been covering up his suicide.......
-
Even if Lureen's story were false, she may not have been deliberately lying, but rather may have been repeating what she truly believed at that time to have been the case. If so, it's possible that, following Ennis's revelations, she may have begun to have her own doubts about Jack's death.
That's a really interesting thought, Moremojo.
And Katie, the suicide thought is an interesting one as well.
People refer a lot to Jack's expression as he watches Ennis drive off after their last fight, saying, "he's had it". Again, I think his broken dreams and disappointments were such that a part of him stopped caring, and he got careless -- possibly exposing his homosexuality in the 'wrong place, wrong time'. Kind of suicide-by-proxy.
-
Wow!
Suicide?
More please. Any details or proofs???
Hugs!
-
I've patiently read the several posts in this thread that sing the praises of the modern-day, homo-hugging police force. I've deliberately held my tongue until now (a) because I think this side issue is OT and doesn't have much to do with the subject of this thread, "Do you think Jack was murdered or was it an accident?" and (b) I am personally of the belief that it is impossible for a leopard to change its spots.
I can only speak for the New South Wales Police Force in Sydney and not for any other constabulary in other countries.
I have personally been on the receiving end of police brutality and abuse here in Sydney. Long story. Don't ask.
In my experience, if they are not overtly brutalising gays, the police are deliberately ignoring the gay-bashings and falsely categorising them under the generic heading of "alcohol fuelled violence."
Sydney's gay ghetto is routinely raided by thugs from the outer suburbs. They drive along Oxford Street, shouting abuse at the gay men and women on the street and if you dare look in their direction, they jump from their cars and kick the living shit out of you. I have personally seen this happen. These bashers come into the city deliberately and intentionally to do this.
Click on this hyperlink for an article which appeared in this morning's Sunday Telegraph. Before you do so, however, I should warn you that it contains graphic imagery that some may find disturbing:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23043307-5006009,00.html
My apologies for contributing to the already established sub-thread within this thread. For justice sake, I felt compelled to respond.
-
I've patiently read the several posts in this thread that sing the praises of the modern-day, homo-hugging police force. I've deliberately held my tongue until now (a) because I think this side issue is OT and doesn't have much to do with the subject of this thread, "Do you think Jack was murdered or was it an accident?" and (b) I am personally of the belief that it is impossible for a leopard to change its spots.
I can only speak for the New South Wales Police Force in Sydney and not for any other constabulary in other countries.
I have personally been on the receiving end of police brutality and abuse here in Sydney. Long story. Don't ask.
In my experience, if they are not overtly brutalising gays, the police are deliberately ignoring the gay-bashings and falsely categorising them under the generic heading of "alcohol fuelled violence."
If I thought this, I wouldn't work in the field. I'm a HOMO and a COP and there is a lot of us here. I guess WE don't know what we're talking about. I'm glad you have such insight. I appreciate you not holding your tongue.
If you've been assaulted by the police cause' you are gay (which I doubt), there are avenues to pursue. Hell, in this day and age, even in Australia, you can get a bunch of money if you can prove your claim. BTW, don't wanna hear your long story so don't bother to tell it.
Brad
-
Recently a U.S. congressman was busted in a men's room for soliciting sex. The congressman is a conservative Republican, and he has a history of voting against gay rights, so there isn't much sympathy out there for him. But I strongly question the practice of sending undercover officers into men's rooms for the purpose of nailing the fags who show an interest in them. I'm only human, and if an attractive man gives me some indication that he might be open to playing around, I might take him up on it, and I am painfully shy. Imagine the reception attractive female officers would get from heterosexual men if they made advances in admittedly inappropriate settings. But are heterosexual men ever targeted in these stings? No.
A public mens room isn't for sex. In this case, many complaints were recieved by airport security and that is why the cops were there. Do you really think the undercover cop liked his assignment?
Hetro men aren't targeted in these stings cause they don't cruise bathrooms for sex. They are targeted for soliciiting prostitution on the streets, however.
Jack could have gotten killed for soliciting sex in a Childress truck stop (by a trucker or a cop if you listen to Kerry) but I doubt it.
Brad
-
My point about the men's room is that a gay guy can go into a men's room with the intention of urinating and get hit on by a police officer, the fact remains gay men are targeted, and not all of them are necessarily inclined to commit that type of crime until they are enticed by law enforcement.
Gary
Enticed by law enforcement officers? Craig was peeking through the cracks of stalls--repeatedley. He wasn't standing at a urinal taking a piss and minding his own business. If some guy repeatedly peeked through the cracks of a stall at Costco while I was taking a dump, I'd tell the guy to get the fuck away. Course some would percieve this as me being homophobic, and I'd tell them to grow up.
Brad
-
I think it was murder. But even if it wasn't, that doesn't mean that he could not have been murdered the very next day. The threat was real, still is real.
And I think what haunted Ennis was not only the fact that he didn't know which way his lover died, but that either way his refusal to live with Jack did not save his life, was therefor in vain. Had he lived with Jack, they would have been somewhere else the moment the rim exploded (in case you assume it was an accident), but maybe they would both have gotten gay-bashed earlier.......or later.....or never. The tragedy is, you can alway ask "what if", equally concerning the future or the past, and you never know for sure, but Ennis made the "what if" the basis for his decision not to live with Jack.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not a very courageous person myself, and I guess I would have been equally frightened as Ennis, I don't blame him at all. Afterwards you always know better what you should have done.
Many think Annie Proulx doesn't want us to know which way Jack died. IMHO the way she told us speaks volumes: There is an "official" version for both the persons in the story and the reader, but the reader is supposed to read between the lines, unmask the accident-story as a lie, made up in order to protect the murderers from consequences, and see the truth behind it.
I hope what I wrote makes any sense, I'm not very concentrated today, sorry.
Dagi
-
Violence against gay men by homophobes is real and it still exists in today's world. A good friend of mine who I went to college with was beaten to death in the parking lot of an X Rated book store with baseball bats in Houston back 1982. Who were the perps? A gang of affluent suburban teenage boys who thought it would be cool to harass some fags. Have things changed since? Some, but there is still an undercurrent of homophobic violence against gays. Circumstances can bring this hate to the surface in unexpected ways. Perhaps the Shepperd case is an example. I watched "The Laramie Project" for the first time the other night with D.L., his choice of movie by the way. I was deeply moved at how that murder lead to changes in awareness in the Laramie community.
I don't for one minute think homophobia is as predominant in law enforcement as it used to be. Back when I was growing up and Frank Short was Houston police chief, they found two types of bodies floating in the bayous who were presumed to be killed by the police : illegals and gay men. Now, mostly everywhere, all of the time, cops are the good guys trying to protect the rest of us against the violent and the lawless.
Did Jack bring on his own murder? Of course not, the character Jack was a victim of the closet. He was compelled to look for the affection he couldn't get from Ennis in the only venues available to him. He ran into the wrong people and couldn't get away. So did my friend in Houston 25 years ago.
-
One thing I'd like to point out is that you can be fully aware of the real-world threat of anti-gay violence and yet fully believe Jack died by accident. Fictional plots generally aren't based on the likelihood that something or other would happen in real life (or, at least, not primarily on that), but on what best expresses the author's themes and imagination and the needs of the story. So whether it's more statistically likely that someone would die at the hands of a murderous homophobe versus a freak accident involving an exploding tire rim is pretty much irrelevant.
Note to those debating the prevalence of anti-gay hate crimes and homophobia on police forces: you might want to start a whole new thread. There are probably plenty of people at BetterMost who would like to comment on that -- some of whom may have personal experience with gay bashing, police work, etc., -- who will not see this discussion because they are not interested in reading 18 pages into a thread about Jack's death.
-
Note to those debating the prevalence of anti-gay hate crimes and homophobia on police forces: you might want to start a whole new thread. There are probably plenty of people at BetterMost who would like to comment on that -- some of whom may have personal experience with gay bashing, police work, etc., -- who will not see this discussion because they are not interested in reading 18 pages into a thread about Jack's death.
Thats a good idea.....I am sick of the violence in our streets and maybe a discussion will help us understand why it is happening and what we might be able to do to stop it.....not only gay bashings, but violence in general.....none of us are really imune from it.....enough is enough...what can we do???
-
Ineedcrayons, be assured that I am glad of your comment as suggestion! BUT will that work??
Katie77, when I mention gay-bashing and other such subjects, not many want to hear it! Neither on Bettermost!
So any suggestions from you both and from others?? You know that Jack being murdered or not, violence on BM, such killlings in our own yards and democratic countries is a great concern for me, not only for my betterment, as for all persons on Earth too!!
To me Jack was murdered... and not many seem to care about that!!
Awaiting your news from you and from all,
hugs!!
-
I am waiting... with hugs too!!
Let us all be frank now. Continue to do so.
This thread is far from finished. Why be blind to not let it continue?
Hugs!! Be safe all gay men in this World!!
-
Katie77, when I mention gay-bashing and other such subjects, not many want to hear it! Neither on Bettermost!
To me Jack was murdered... and not many seem to care about that!!
Awaiting your news from you and from all,
hugs!!
I dont know what thread you are reading then Artiste, if you think the subject of gay bashing is being ignored, or that no one seems to care about the fact that Jack could have been murdered.......
There has been a lot of discussion (some a bit heated)....with opinions on the law enforcement procedures.....I am sure though, that everyone is of the same opinion about the epidemic of bashngs that is occurring throughout the world, none are tolerated whether they are gay bashings, wife bashings, child bashings or straight bashings.
These bashings are occurring, not because someone is gay, or straight,but because the perpetrators of these crimes are under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and that mixed with the group mentality, which often causes individuals to follow someone else's bad decisions, we are left with a cocktail of frenzied attacks on innocent people.
I sympathise with you gay guys who are afraid of being the victim of a gay bashing, but I assure you, straight guys or women are just as afraid, and with good reason....as a mother of two straight sons, I worry like hell when they go into the city, it is something that affects us all.
I am not comparing gay bashing to straight bashing, or making out either one is less tragic or sinister than the other, it is all bad, all non-acceptable.....
-
Thanks Katie!
Of course bashing is bad. No females, no children, no males should be murdered in my book, but it does happen, and too much, and more and more it seems. These are facts!!
Murderings of gay men because they are gay... are facts!! So, that is a reality, since gay-bashing by straights or others happen. Some straight(s) will kill, by that I mean murder, gay men, because they do NOT want anyone else on earth besides straight men!!
One example is I, since 4 beat me up and left me for dead! I have broken bones... hard to sleep, etc., and why? These killers yelled we will kill you and burn you in your house; is that nice of them straights or others to do that?
Another example is a friend in Vancouver, whom I visited and I found out daily that he kept complaining about his new face, which is not the same at all since he was gay-bashed and left for dead too!! You would not want a gay person to defaced your sons, neither would I, be assured, and I figure that they have less chances of getting not beaten because they are straights? Surely so, I figure, unless you prove to me otherwise. Thanks, in advance.
If we do not talk really frank with real stories, then murderers of Ennis and Jacks will continue and florish!! Did Jack murder a straight, a gay, a bi- or other, because of their sexual identity or preference, I doubt it! Right! But he got surely murdered for being gay... I say!
Awaiting your news,
hugs!! (May gay men be safe in this World!!)
-
One thing I'd like to point out is that you can be fully aware of the real-world threat of anti-gay violence and yet fully believe Jack died by accident. Fictional plots generally aren't based on the likelihood that something or other would happen in real life (or, at least, not primarily on that), but on what best expresses the author's themes and imagination and the needs of the story.
I agree with what you have just said. This particular fictional plot lends itself to ambiguity, especially in the scene where Ennis learns the news of Jack's death. My statement above was not meant to be taken that I believed that one MUST believe that Jack was murdered or one is insensitive to gay bashings. Far from it.
What I have stated is simply my own personal take on both the short story and the film.
-
How many gay bashing in this movie??
Anyone dare to count??
Will that prove Jack was murdered??
Hugs!!
-
Will that prove Jack was murdered??
Hugs!!
I don't think there's any way to prove whether Jack died in an accident or whether he was murdered. That's why this question is so endlessly fascinating. We only know what we think, what Ennis believes and what Lureen says. Neither the film nor the story gives us enough evidence to prove anything.
-
Thanks atz75!
I think that we know more than what we think... surely.
And that (as extentions) become a story to be more full-filled!!
More detective works needed... too with what we have now even with the present Annie book and BM movie!!
Hugs!!
-
I agree with what you have just said. This particular fictional plot lends itself to ambiguity, especially in the scene where Ennis learns the news of Jack's death. My statement above was not meant to be taken that I believed that one MUST believe that Jack was murdered or one is insensitive to gay bashings. Far from it.
Thanks, brokeplex. My statement wasn't a direct response to your post. But I do think generally there is a tendency to argue this issue on the basis of whether or not anti-gay violence is common in real life ... and, conversely, whether tire-blow-up accidents are common. Those are both interesting springboards for discussion, but I don't think either is evidence of what Annie Proulx had in mind.
-
Some intermediate poll results after this topic has been in the focus for a week:
. 50 people voted, that's a lot. Thank you!
. I divided the votes in three groups:- 23 people believe (to a higher or lesser extent) that Jack was murdered. That's almost half of the voters.
- 15 people believe (to a higher or lesser extent) that Jack died in an accident. That's 28%, less than a third.
- 7 people don't know (due to different reasons). That's 14%
. 21 people believe we are not supposed to know. That's the single answer with the most votes and of course it overlaps with other groups.
Since I don't claim this to be any serious science, I think it's fair to generalize that half of the BetterMost Brokies believe Jack was murdered, and the other half believes something else.
Although this question is no longer the TOTW, you're welcome to continue the discussion or pick it up again sometime later.
The poll also stays open to new voters or to people who want to change their vote at a later date.
-
Now, mostly everywhere, all of the time, cops are the good guys trying to protect the rest of us against the violent and the lawless.
Cops are not always the good guys, and racism, sexism, and homophobia do persist in various police forces around the country. Police entrapment in public parks and men's rooms still goes on--the Larry Craig incident has some flavor of entrapment (though that doesn't excuse Craig's behavior).
A good friend of mine was entrapped in a sting operation in a public park in Austin, where the undercover police officer approached him and initiated a sexually suggestive conversation. When my friend indicated verbal interest (no profanity, no exposure, not even the shaking of hands), other uniformed officers who had been hiding in the bush jumped out, tackled and tasered my friend, and arrested him on charges of public lewdness. The charges against my friend were eventually dropped, but in the meantime his face and name had been exposed on the local TV news and he was forced to tender his resignation from his job. I for one am still angry at the Austin Police Department for this egregious abuse of power.
-
Thanks very much moremojo, brokeplex, Penthesilea, ineedcrayons, atz75, Katie 77, and to all others too!!
Since I find this thread very interesting, I desire it to continue. I appreciate that it can Penthesilea and ineedcrayons, and others too!! And other such threads too!!
Much need to be said still!! Surely!
I wish to know your sexual orientation by all who voted?? Is that possible?? Dare we say?? To respect gays, straights, bi-s, others and Annie's story and the BM movie?? I figure. Or another such thread to be started for that?
Moremojo, I appreciate very much the example you give about some police!! I hope and pray that that negativity towards gays is not general in all the police forces in our democratic countries!! And more such facts are needed here!! Start a thread for that, or add to mine, or please continue here?? Did you know that the 4 anti-gays who bashed me had left many finger prints, but when I call the police I saw that two policemen who came and when I mentioned (to reply to the policemen which words used?) to them the anti-gay words that those 4 who tried to murder me because I am a gay masculine man, then I got the impression that these cops did not want to hear any further details about the clothes those murderers had, etc.; -no need to lock the door behind us, you are safe since we are here- they said as they entered my home, such bull since they never came back for even the fingerprints on the glass, wood, etc., which I left there for many days for them, nor back for any details as to the clothes, the faces, the killers had!! I locked my door anyway even with them those 2 cops inside!! And I escaped later on to sleep in my truck for many days, weeks... in various towns and cities, since criminals followed me!! Did police help?
Like brokeplex says, I pray that he is right. But it is more and more evident that in our democratic countries, the police are more corrupt or are afraid of crimnals?? !!
Jack was certainly murdered and the police would have likely done nothing at all, but cover up Jack dead body!! ?? Some cops would have left Jack mutilated body for all to see like Ennis' father did show a dead gay corpse to him?? Likely!! I would be surprise Jack's body left there for day(s) uncovered by cops, but not that surprised!!
I wonder if straights, bi-s, others, even gays differ on answering this thread question??
Dare I ask how can we, gays, be safer, and not be murdered as Jack was likely??
Hugs!! Gays be safe always!!
-
In answer to your question about the sexual orientation of those who have voted, Artiste, I can say that I am a gay man.
-
I know, and thanks moremojo.
Moi aussi!
Hope others will say too!!
May I ask you if you are afraid being a gay man, that possibly you will be murdered like maybe Jack was?
Hugs!!
-
Cops are not always the good guys, and racism, sexism, and homophobia do persist in various police forces around the country. Police entrapment in public parks and men's rooms still goes on--the Larry Craig incident has some flavor of entrapment (though that doesn't excuse Craig's behavior).
My only issue with this statement Namesake, is that regardless as to your opinion of the law enforcement behavior, the behavior of those who seeks anonymous sex in public bathrooms, parks, rest areas, etc, is equally egregious. At this point in our individual and mutual quest for equality, we have to be the first to say that irresponsible behavior can't continue to part of what identifies us as people.
-
To Artiste--yes, I do feel vulnerable to potential homophobic violence, and exercise caution in my public behavior.
To Scott--I understand where you're coming from in regard to public sex acts (though personally I would like to see society evolve to regard such acts as licit forms of expression), but it's important to make a distinction between attempts to hook-up in public and actually engaging in sexual acts in public. My friend did nothing more than essentially reveal an interest in hooking up, yet was treated just the same as someone who had exposed himself or more. I definitely see the actions of the police in this instance as homophobic.
-
Then since you ask someone if he is gay or hint that of you, when you are say in line for a theatre or cinema, then police should arrest you?
Is that to become a standard for cops too, Scott?
May I dare ask you and to all others too??
Hugs!!
-
To Scott--I understand where you're coming from in regard to public sex acts (though personally I would like to see society evolve to regard such acts as licit forms of expression), but it's important to make a distinction between attempts to hook-up in public and actually engaging in sexual acts in public. My friend did nothing more than essentially reveal an interest in hooking up, yet was treated just the same as someone who had exposed himself or more. I definitely see the actions of the police in this instance as homophobic.
That's why I didn't include that portion of your post. The fact that these types of behaviors are still happening (and believe me they are), makes me madder than a NY Yankees Fan in Fenway Park. How are we going to gain the respect of society when this still occurs? No, not the random public come on line, or the wink and a nod. Everyone, gay, straight or whichever sexual strip you wear engage in that.
-
To Scott--I understand where you're coming from in regard to public sex acts (though personally I would like to see society evolve to regard such acts as licit forms of expression).
I'd love to see some elaboration on this point. You're saying you'd like to see society "evolve" to where sex in public places is legal?
You mean--to put it crudely--you'd like to see it legal for people to screw in public where others can see them, even if they'd rather not?
I'm not trying to argue here, just to understand exactly what you mean. ???
-
I'm not trying to argue here, just to understand exactly what you mean. ???
Yes, I would like to see public consensual displays of sexuality (including intercourse) decriminalized and rendered socially licit. Essentially, I'm envisioning a world where the sight of coition would arouse no more opprobrium than seeing two lovers holding hands on the street does now.
-
Yes, I would like to see public consensual displays of sexuality (including intercourse) decriminalized and rendered socially licit. Essentially, I'm envisioning a world where the sight of coition would arouse no more opprobrium than seeing two lovers holding hands on the street does now.
Scott, could you elaborate still further? Why do you feel that would be a good thing?
(Note: I'm reluctant to encourage further off-topic posts. But my entreaties so far to start new threads don't seem to have been effective, the murder vs. accident debate seems to be winding down, we have a new TOTW, and I'm curious.)
-
I know we're veering way off-topic here, but as long as no one complains, I don't mind elaborating further.
I see sex as a very natural and inherently beautiful component of life. American culture (among many others) is heir to life-destroying notions of shame regarding the body and its natural functions, including sexuality. Part of the legacy of this shameful impulse is to push sexuality into the shadows, to render it as something fit for only the most private sphere of life. Even openly discussing sexuality was, until quite recently in American culture, something quite taboo.
Eros is an extremely powerful force, and all recorded human societies have sought ways to control and channel it. I think this is probably an unavoidable part of being human, and living in a collective human setting. But other primates evince behavior in which sexuality is an openly celebrated and frequently used tool for cohesion and mutual pleasure. I'm thinking specifically of the bonobos, which, like chimpanzees, share some 98 percent of their genome with human beings. Bonobos use sexuality as means to resolve conflict and tension, in greeting and sharing resources, and in solidifying bonds between members of one community and even those of others. Apart from humans (with their culturally conditioned shame), bonobos are probably the sexiest apes around.
Why can we not foster a culture that looks more like bonobo society? I think it would be lovely to see people resolve tension through the pleasures of the flesh rather than fighting and vituperation. This is the basis of my argument in a nutshell. Time constraints prevent my adding on at the present moment, but hopefully this may serve as some guide to my thoughts on this matter.
-
Do straight people hook-up in public places. Of course they do. They do it all the time. And straight people have sex in public places, too. Every hear of The Mile High Club? Straight people brag about belonging to that all the time. Is there any shame attatched to it? No. At least not a lot. There is some residual prudery that might apply. But that prudery comes down heavy on gay men.
In John Irving's book The Hotel New Hampshire an American couple takes their young daughter to a hotel room down the hall when they hear a woman screaming. They think the woman is being murdered. When they find out that the woman is merely having sex with a man they're horrified and they make a big scene, and complain about the innocence of their child being violated. Irving observes that only Americans would take their child to see a murder, and be shocked when all she sees is sex.
Irving's point about American attitudes toward sex compared to American attitudes toward violence is valid--but I don't see it as support for legalizing consensual sex in public places.
I'm an almost-50-year-old childless gay man, but if I had a child with me on an airplane, that child needed to use the restroom, and I opened the door to find a couple--gay or straight--having sex, you bet I'd complain. Discreetly, but I'd complain. If that makes me a prude, so be it, I guess.
-
Very well said all of you!!
May I relate the latest news to that of the thread: murder of Jack or not... by another example which relates to these last comment(s) by you, somehow. I will try to connect this thread!! As I often did connect... it seems evident to me!!
Murders in parks happen often. Too often in some. Even for gays who got murdered there in known parks... that police know about!! But straights have sex there too?? Yes!! What is the difference? Jack would have went to such a park? Yes! In a way, Jack and Ennis had sex in a park called Brokeback Mountain, which was heaven, but it became brokenback to both after that descending into so-called civilisation!!
In the last city I lived in, a gay man was murdered, no question about that from even the murderers who said so!! But the police did nothing to find out about it - said secretly a policeman to my friend. The police detectives did nothing: not even follow the blood trail from inside the building to outside along the sidewalk; neither did they check with taxis drivers since the murderers had taken eventually a cab went the blood stopped; plus other things they could have investigated, but did not; why, because the murdered man was likely known as a gay man born there?? You want to know further, that even even one of the two murderers got away with it, unfortunately to us gays??
That murder was in a huge bar, which was formerly a grocery store chain one. So after that murder, people went more to that bar and filled it!! - Why?? It was not a gay bar. So why would straights go now? Because a gay man got murdered there? Why? For comfort, a straight or straights can think to be... or for domination of gays, or for what reasons?? Usually in the past, if there is a murder, no one goes and that bussiness fails!!
Unsual? For Jack to be murdered... no!!
Much can be said still about this thread...
hugs!! May gay be safe!!
-
Jeff, I didn't mean to put you on the defensive or to label you, or anyone.
Don't worry, I don't feel that you did.
-
Do straight people hook-up in public places. Of course they do. They do it all the time. And straight people have sex in public places, too. Every hear of The Mile High Club? Straight people brag about belonging to that all the time. Is there any shame attatched to it? No. At least not a lot. There is some residual prudery that might apply. But that prudery comes down heavy on gay men.
Well, I'm just speculating here. But I would guess that this discrepancy isn't purely the result of homophobia. It might also involve the differences between typical straight public sex and cases, such as Larry Craig's, that involve soliciting sex with strangers.
Straight people -- or gay people -- who belong to the Mile High Club usually aren't just fellow passengers who happened to be seated together, strike up a conversation, and decide to head back to the restroom. They're usually couples. Same thing when straight people have sex in parks or cars. Couples can be discrete and careful and avoid being seen. They can't be entrapped by plain-clothes officers.
Straight sex is much less likely to involve total strangers for one big reason: women are much less willing to have sex with strangers. I'm sure it happens sometimes, in nightclubs perhaps, but rarely if ever in parks or planes or airport restrooms. The one exception is prostitution. And as someone said, in prostitution cases, straight men and women ARE arrested, shamed, entrapped, etc.
Otherwise, straight women almost never solicit sex from strangers. I don't know firsthand, but I would guess the same is true of lesbians. That's just how women tend to be, probably for obvious evolutionary reasons.
So perhaps this double standard isn't entirely a matter of gay vs. straight. It's also a matter of couple vs. stranger, and men vs. women, and under what circumstances they'll choose to have sex.
-
That isn't criminal. That's human.
We are living in a time and place where powerful people are trying to render the human criminal. We must remind ourselves in the face of this onslaught against our human dignity that we are existentially free, and that no earthly power can cleave this fundamental freedom from our souls.
-
Thanks moremojo!
Please explain: We are living in a time and place where powerful people are trying to render the human criminal. We must remind ourselves in the face of this onslaught against our human dignity that we are existentially free...
......
I would appreciate samples, more!!
Your samples can be anything... so I can understand, please. Any can put possibly more of a light on this thread; You think Jack was murdered or was it an accident? - Somehow, in or by your detail story/stories!!
Hugs!!
-
Good points, ineedcrayons. I would add that perhaps one of the reasons that women are less likely to engage in this type of casual sex is because they tend to be physically less strong then men, and they're reluctant to put themselves into situations were they might be mistreated. But I have heard of cases of straight strangers joining The Mile High Club. Maybe women are more apt to do it with a stranger on a plane because they know help is right outside the door if they need it.
That could be one reason. But I think another powerful reason has to do with human reproduction and evolution. Men theoretically can father endless numbers of babies simultaneously. For men, successful reproduction can be achieved in a matter of minutes. Women can only have one child at a time. They're pregnant for nine months, nursing after that, then looking after the child until it's mature. So successful reproduction means devoting many years. And since their ability to provide for a child is enhanced if they have a man's help, women are best off if they can find a man who's a good provider. In the Pleistocene Era, that might mean a good hunter. In more modern times, it might mean someone affluent. But throughout history, the best provider is one who is committed and responsible and loving.
Therefore, women have evolved to be much more careful and selective about their sex partners than men. That requires being at least somewhat familiar with the person they're having sex with. For this reason, they're highly unlikely to do it with the total stranger sitting next to them on a plane.
Also, I would guess I speak for a lot of women in saying that knowing that if my sex partner got violent in the airplane restroom I could always call a flight attendant for help would not be a huge reassurance.
-
Artiste,
In the United States, we are living under a reactionary political regime that discounts the worth and beauty of our bodies and of our sexuality. There are powerful forces, often linked to fundamentalist Christianity, that seek to turn the clock back and nullify the social and political advances that began to take root and flower from the 1960's on, and not only in regard to sexual issues. Pornography and nude photography seem to me to be especially volatile arenas of contention, ironically so given the unprecedented infiltration of erotic imagery into mainstream American culture. The specter of real or potential exploitation of children has been used as a means to discredit the methods and goals of producers of sexually oriented media, and to limit the access to such material by adults who legitimately seek it out. In invoking the admittedly laudable interests of protecting children, some have sweepingly sought to render all citizens as the mental and emotional equivalent of children who must be forbidden the pleasures and pursuits that are the due of mature adults (comedian and commentator Bill Maher has addressed this issue often). In the same spirit, we also have seen serious artists such as Robert Mapplethorpe, Jock Sturges, and Sally Mann accused, defamed, and even harassed by the authorities.
It seems that for every step forward there is often at least two steps back. When the sodomy laws were overturned by the Supreme Court, I predicted an upsurge in police-entrapment efforts against gay men in public places, like the very stories we have been sharing in this thread. I predicted this because I saw how the homophobia which I saw as still very much alive in the agencies of power would now have one basis for legal persecution closed, and would reinforce still existing laws to give vent to hatred and oppression. I have no statistics to back this up, but I do know that my friend was entrapped and persecuted some time after the Supreme Court's decision.
Human beings are sexual beings. But to many in our world, whether they consciously admit it or not, being sexual is tantamount to being criminal. This is where my invocation of existential freedom comes into play, for each and every human being is born intrinsically free. There is no law or agency that can nullify this freedom; it is an inextricable part of being alive and human. This is the freedom of thought and of feeling that no number of Hitlers, Stalins, prisons, or concentration camps can destroy....even as our very bodies are destroyed.
-
Thanks mormojo!
You say in part: In invoking the admittedly laudable interests of protecting children, some have sweepingly sought to render all citizens as the mental and emotional equivalent of children...
..
Moremojo and to others: I think that there are more and more samples of that in our democratic countries: laws forbidding sex with children, as an example. But some go too far; as another example: when I was at my lawyer's cabinet two years ago, I was in the hall waiting to see him, and heard his utmostly loud yelling behind closed doors my advocate yell at a mother who had taken photos of her baby/infant naked and that was a no, no or she would be charged furtherly by existing laws; and so, the parents came out baffled, as I was too!! I never wanted sex nor will with a child, and most do not neither!! Are pedophiles or child murderers getting help in prison or when out, no!! But a naked child is often seen in ads on TV?? !!
There is a now a list that police forces (throughout the country) have listing those adults who child molested... OK, and so when Iachild-molester is not murdered by so-called-honest-other-prisoners, when he or she gets out back into the society at large, police notify that community where that former molester will live!! But what I do not understand is that there is no such list for murderers, so such killers get out free and room our streets and enter our homes freely without us getting notices!! So, I think that Jack was indeed murdered and the cops would maybe not say so to his wife!!
What do you think... is this a possibility?
Hugs!!
-
Before I start, I want everyone to know it is not my goal to be antagonistic. My experiences and perspectives are unique to most here and often collide with perceptions folks have of people like me (cops) and cop culture. I admit I have trouble ‘biting my tongue’ when reading generalities which cast me and my profession in a negative light. Perhaps it is easier to roll my eyes and go away, but at the end of the day, I feel compelled to defend me, my profession, and the wonderful people I work with. Yeah, as someone pointed out, there are bad apples everywhere. Luckily, where I work, most get weeded out and sent on their way. I also work for a major police agency on the west coast. Certainly we are more liberal then other parts of the country, but I also have the opportunity to interact with law enforcement professionals in other departments, so I’m not just talking about how ‘things’ are here on the left coast. And trust me, I know everyone has stories. I put weight in what one shares from first-hand experience, yet I am very weary when I hear stories of encounters/things that happened to friends or others.
Without going into details about me (my story is in Beyond Brokeback or if anyone is interested, I can PM it), I live in a very rural part of the pacific northwest. I am a police officer in a large, urban department (I’m commutin’ 3 hours a day…) I’ve been there for 24 years. For the first few years on the job, I was married. I have been living happily, and out, with the same man for the past 19 years.
Plainclothes missions are targeted at specific locations based on citizen complaints. The are almost always based on narcotics, transient problem, and public sexual conduct (vice & prostitution). Like most cities, there are several parks that attract gay men. We know those parks, but unless we have complaints, we don’t seek those locations to do sting or ‘entrapment’ missions. A few years ago, one of the parks got so bad (blatant sex acts on hiking trails, public restrooms, picnic areas) the park wasn’t usable and citizens were outraged. Yes, the problems were gay men, but they were problems and, regardless of rather one thinks public sex should be legal, it’s not. A very liberal city hall wanted something done. Most of our missions were uniformed—bicycles and such, but when city hall and the public wants statistics, they get arrests. It solved the problem. Same goes for street drug dealing. It got so bad in China Town, we had to do something. Cops dressed up like dope buyers, and made arrests. Most of those selling drugs were black. Street prostitution (people finding filled condoms in the gutters in front of their houses cause’ tricks are done in cars)? Same thing. What I’m saying is that gays weren’t being targeted for arrest cause’ they were gay. African Americans weren’t being targeted cause’ they were black. That, friends, is how it works. No conspiracies. No hate towards anyone cause of their lifestyle or race. Yeah, people will argue with me, but I won’t waiver, because it is what it is.
Most police agencies are very transparent. We are scrutinized from every angle. The media. Police review boards. Attorneys. There are groups within our ranks, one of which is the Gay and Lesbian Police Officers association. We have civilian over site to our Internal Affairs Division—the Independent Police Review. Any one of you could walk into a precinct and ask to go on a ride along with an officer, and would be welcome. Most female officers are lesbian, and there are a handful of male officers which are gay. After several years, it was clear I had nothing to hide or be ashamed of because I was homosexual. Everyone knows about me, and there isn’t a hint of hate or bad treatment. In fact, like I said in a prior post, I’ve never seen disparate treatment toward gays. If it existed, anywhere, the media and attorneys would be having a field day. A code of silence? No.
The discussion of Jack being murdered or killed accidentally spawned these passionate responses and discussions. A lot of times the focus is turned on the police and what is thought to be cover up or the ignorance of the truth. Has this happened? Can’t say no because it probably has, especially in the post war, very racially charged 50’s & 60’s. I can say, first hand, I’ve seen nothing like that in my 24 years. Yeah, cops go afoul, but it’s the act of an individual, and not institutional. Cops get indicted for everything from child pornography to homicide, but so do doctors and attorneys and plumbers and waiters.
The other aspect I’m passionate about, that resulted from my experience with Brokeback Mountain, is what example the gay community sets for not only young men just coming to terms with their sexuality but for those we are trying to convince to vote (politicians & rank-in-file straight folk) for equal rights for us and the right to serve our country. Times are changing. The ills of the gay ghetto are closing up shop, and more and more gays feel they can move to a place like Signal, WY and live a happy life, free of beatings. OUT magazine has many articles about this, and the Boston Globe (I think) had a long article about how gays are mainstreaming to rural America from the inner cities. Two men (or women) can and do walk down the street hand in hand in the city I work without the least bit of fear. Don’t know about you folks, but I feel pretty damn good about it.
I know people around here have had a tough life. Especially those over 40. I have no use for people that make fun of other people because of who they are. As for people who physically hurt other people because of their race or sexual orientation, there is one place for them. An 8x10 room, and a hot fuckin’ afterlife. I know I, and my fellow comrades in blue, will oblige them with at least the lodging.
Thanks for letting me say my part. We are all in this together to a common end.
Brad
-
Brad
Thank you for your post. I agree with pretty much all of your comments and if I may I would like to respond (noting however that this may be considered to be OT).
Plainclothes missions are targeted at specific locations based on citizen complaints.
Some of our members believe that gay people are targeted for certain actions, and you have kindly advised us of similar actions taken by the police in response to complaints made by the public about the actions of certain individuals rather than a community as a whole.
Most police agencies are very transparent.
Positive discrimination is a major problem where I live, particularly so with the Islamic, sikh and gay community. Major organisations (both private and public sector) are terrified of being accused of discrimination and accordingly (on some occasions) people belonging to these communities are offered more of a chance to flourish than other citizens. I refer specifically to the employment of people belonging to a minority group in order to fulfil a quota. Having worked in the public sector in the past, I am speaking from first hand experience. We offered interviews to pretty much all applicants who were obviously part of a minority community even when they were not perhaps the most qualified.
I cannot see any reason why another citizen should receive preferential treatment because of their gender/sexuality etc. This BREEDS contempt and intolerance. The checks are in place (two stage C.V. review process, interviews conducted by a panel of staff etc). If there is any hint of discrimination, then of course, this should be dealt with.
I have epilepsy and am banned from driving by the DVLA. This prohibited my application to a couple of firms, and I understood the reasons why this was so (without going into detail). I do not believe that I am being discriminated against, I understand the reasons why.
I would however like to point out that positive discrimination is an insult. For a company or organisation to offer preferential treatment to a member of a minority community on the basis of faith etc is demeaning to the application. They should feel confident that they have been offered promotion etc on the basis of their ability and to suggest otherwise is surely of embarrassment to them.
I have no use for people that make fun of other people because of who they are. As for people who physically hurt other people because of their race or sexual orientation, there is one place for them. An 8x10 room, and a hot fuckin’ afterlife.
Although I have been discussing job opportunities, I simply wanted to show how discrimination takes many forms, and I do not want anyone to think, even for a second, that my post in any way downplays the fact that discrimination exists. I live in a diverse community and there have been many incidents involving gangs of white youths beating up people of colour. I think that it is appalling and I have faith in my police force that these incidents are afforded the same time and dedication as any other assault.
-
There still exists, and I have personally seen it, a certain discrimination against effeminate males in the gay community simply because they are effeminate. This happens both from within the gay community and from without.
I'd like to point out to the more macho members here that our effeminate brethren may be the bravest of our lot. Simply because they are able to endure and survive more crap from the world at large than the rest of us and they still remain true to themselves.
-
I hear what you're saying, ineedcrayons, and I agree for the most part. But we all know that there are women out there that are not so discriminating. And they catch a lot of crap for being who they are, from both men and women. I find it especially ludicrous when a striaght man takes advantage of a woman like that, and then blames her for it after.
I find it ludicrous when women like that catch crap, too. It's a milder equivalent of cultures that punish women for getting raped (including our own, until relatively recently). However, for a woman having sex with a total stranger is a bad idea, in most cases, unless you're a prostitute. I don't mean someone you met at the bar and spent the evening with and hit it off and wound up going home together. That happens a lot, obviously, and isn't that big a deal these days. I mean someone you literally just met. It's dangerous, and IMO rarely happens unless the woman is very drunk or otherwise impaired (note, Gary, that you phrased it "when a straight man takes advantage of a woman like that" -- that's just the problem). And it's rare to the point of almost nonexistent to have a woman sitting on a park bench minding her own business, a man coming up and saying, "Wanna have sex?" and her saying "Sure" and off into the bushes they go. Because, frankly, most women aren't THAT desperate for sex. They're a bit more discriminating, and need to know their partner as a person before they do it. Straight men, knowing that, aren't generally that bold unless they're rapists. So any straight man who considers instant sex a viable option with a straight woman is suspect, IMO.
It seems to me that straight women tend to go for bigger, beefer men. And I certainly wouldn't want to go into the bushes with a man like that right after I met him.
I think straight women's tastes probably range about as much as gay men's do.
-
.
Without going into details about me (my story is in Beyond Brokeback or if anyone is interested, I can PM it), I live in a very rural part of the pacific northwest. I am a police officer in a large, urban department (I’m commutin’ 3 hours a day…) I’ve been there for 24 years. For the first few years on the job, I was married. I have been living happily, and out, with the same man for the past 19 years.
Thanks for letting me say my part. We are all in this together to a common end.
Brad
Brad, I read your story a few months ago in "Beyond Brokeback" and was moved. Thank you for sharing it with us.
Bill
-
Brad, I read your story a few months ago in "Beyond Brokeback" and was moved. Thank you for sharing it with us.
Bill
Ditto what Bill said. It took courage to put it out there in print that way.
Jeff
-
Ineedcrayons, I'd like to point out that the situation you just described isn't that common among gay men either.
No. My only point was that soliciting for or engaging in any kind of sex -- public or otherwise -- with a total stranger is next to unheard of for straight women, aside from prostitutes. Which is at least one big reason straight couples don't get stigmatized for this.
Of course it does happen like that, but it seems many of the men who do things like that are attracted to the danger, or they have compartmentalized their homosexual desires. They go and take care of it as the need arises, or when they just can't stand not having sex with a man any more, and then they go on about their usually closeted existence. So it is in some way apt that these men would go to a restroom to "take care of business."
Right. So, indirectly, societal homophobia has forced at least some gay men into having to engage in restroom sex more often -- where else is Larry Craig going to do it?
-
So, indirectly, societal homophobia has forced at least some gay men into having to engage in restroom sex more often -- where else is Larry Craig going to do it?
He could hire a "masseur" like Ted Haggard. ... ;D
-
News: straights (females and males too) go also to public washrooms to have sex!! Females have asked or tired to force that!!
Also news maybe to some: there are some public parks where sex is OK, like is there in the open either in a known area for gay and/or straight sex!! The public knows and prefers that that continues!!
Of course if Jack used either a park or public washroom, he took a chance to get murdered after or before having been stolen... if stolen, but killed because he tried or wanted sex there... even if not burglarized because some like to bash such in action or pre-action!!
Hugs!!
-
I just wanted to chime in, for what it's worth, on your latest point, Artiste, about putative sexual activity on the part of women in public facilities. I was acquainted with a young woman back in circa 1990, who identified as bisexual, and who claimed that, while rare, female-on-female sex in public restrooms had been known to happen. I have not heard or read any evidence of such activity since. Also, in light of Katherine's assertions regarding the rarity of women engaging in sex with strangers, a close friend of mine who is a straight man once opined, several years ago, that, while rare, such women could probably be found. He guessed that if he were to proposition one woman after another in public settings, probably one in about one hundred would agree to a tryst. This all came up in conversation because I had expressed disbelief that any woman would ever enter into such a scenario.
I also wish to commend Brad for his thoughtful and ample explication on his background and perceptions regarding law enforcement and its position towards lesbigay people. You speak from a position of experience, Brad, and I welcome your informative input into this subject. I tend to be distrustful of authority, so often have not thought highly of law enforcement regarding the sensitivity and awareness of its officers towards oppressed groups of people, but your words remind me that I should give these men and women (who are, after all, necessary and valued public servants) the benefit of the doubt. I do persist in my belief that what the local police did to my friend was wrong and misguided (if not necessarily homophobic at root), but concede that this one incident should not be used to make sweeping generalizations of an entire profession.
-
Thanks very much moremojo!!
I agree with you that sex is by women too, woman with woman, in public washrooms. In my case, at least twice, I remember by for now, that a female entered the washroom and wanted it; the second time, was another female. I, a male, (gay male), have been cruised also by males at times, in public washrooms; maybe most gay males have - I do not know if most straight males have!! ?? But such cruising I think is rare now?? I refrain from that as I would likely or probably be murdered or beaten or stolen there too by such a cruiser!! Some murders do happen there!!
Concerning public parks and sex there, I do not see anything wrong with that in SOME parks, that the whole public knows about - since even straights have sex there: female with male!! It would be more OK I guess and hope that signs are put there to say so!! And so far I have seen discreet sex in many parks - nothing else- no shown cheeks to ones passing by!! I do not go for sex in parks these days!! I have... years ago, but rarely and discreetly and went to his residence!!
Like you, I think that your friend did not merit at all that to him!!
I think sex outdoors is wonderful!!
At not too far from my art studio near San Francisco where I created paintings, the daily newspaper had partly headlined about a world famous (gay I presume) man having sex privately with another in a car at night!! But it did not mention about another world famous singer, a straight, who murdered in a hotel and got away with it, even if many witnesses were there - that killer was a friend of the cowboy president who was not president then when this happened!!
I applaud too Brad, and asks that he starts a thread to anwser our questions or cases, if he would like. It remains that some cops and some forces are bad or very bad!! - you have read some of my experiences, and I have other bad ones too, plus rare good ones!! Brad is obvious working great and happy to be in such a gay, etc., welcoming force; he is lucky too with his relationship with his gay partner!! I wish that he will answer some cases of ours!!
What do you think? And to all of you? Would Jack have went to a park and got murdered there?
Hugs!!
-
He guessed that if he were to proposition one woman after another in public settings, probably one in about one hundred would agree to a tryst.
And the other 99 would call the cops! :laugh:
Unless, of course, your friend was George Clooney or Brad Pitt, in which case the odds might be higher. Actually, I'm sure that for attractive celebrities, it's the women (and men) who are doing the propositioning. A friend of a friend of Sam Shepherd once told me that on a casual night out he'd constantly get approached by women saying "Will you fuck me, Sam?" and the like. No doubt George and Brad and their ilk are pretty used to that.
(Then again, people feel like they already know celebrities -- they certainly know some things about them -- so it's still not quite the equivalent of sex with a total stranger.)
But your friend had better be pretty damn attractive or rich or famous to hope that he'd get even 1 percent of women to go along with it. I'm skeptical that an average guy could score anywhere near that.
It would be more OK I guess and hope that signs are put there to say so!!
Yes, putting up some PUBLIC SEX ALLOWED signs would certainly be helpful. :laugh:
-
Boy, you are funny garrycottle.
You say about Lureen: Since we've moved on to the topic of how fast women are willing to go from introduction to hanky-panky, I thought it would be interesting to note that in BBM Lureen moves very, very fast. Jack describes her as being "in a hurry," and she is pretty much in the driver's seat from start to finish. (Jack is such a bottom boy. ) Her randy insouciance may be unusual, but it never once occurred to me that it was unlikely. Of course she did have a chance to observe him during the rodeo and at the bar before she practically lassoed him and drug him out to her car.
God, that Lureen... Such a cavewoman
...
You made my day!I also think Lureen hides the fact that Jack was murdered!! And so well like she did with sex! Check out about Lureen if she was pregnant before meeting Jack?
Hugs!!
-
You made my day!I also think Lureen hides the fact that Jack was murdered!! And so well like she did with sex! Check out about Lureen if she was pregnant before meeting Jack?
Artiste, that is a very good topic for discussion. start a new thread to discuss whether or not Lureen knew that Jack had been murdered and why?
-
You made my day!I also think Lureen hides the fact that Jack was murdered!! And so well like she did with sex! Check out about Lureen if she was pregnant before meeting Jack?
Artiste, you sure seem to hate Lureen. Why?
-
Thanks everyone for your nice words (and yes Gary, I do remember and appreciate your welcome here).
Brad (doing my part on a daily basis)
-
We are not supposed to actually KNOW how Jack died. Annie has said on numerous occasions that---as with so much in the entire story--she wants the reader to come to his or her own conclusions.
We are meant to think, to flesh out the bare bones of what she tells us from our own experience. For some, an accident is more tragic, for others the essence of Brokeback Mountain's tragic finale lies in the murder of Jack Twist.
It depends upon who and what WE are.
Me, I believe he was killed. I actually said that to Annie Proulx one day, and she asked ME what I had learned, asked ME how that conclusion had affected ME, asked ME how my perception of Jack's death as a murder had changed ME.
There is no right or wrong answer here.
See what I mean about making us think??
The answer lies within each of us. That is one reason her story is so brilliant.
-
Artiste, you sure seem to hate Lureen. Why?
Some people hate that woman. I don't. I think she is a pretty decent person, ravaged by years with a man who could not love her the way she needed to be loved.
Describing Jack's 'accidental death' to Ennis, realising during that telephone call exactly whom and what Ennis had been to her husband, her mask slipped. She could have been a vicious virago to Ennis...instead she was remarkably generous.
Her tragedy is the tragedy of Brokeback Mountain, which destroyed everyone involved.
-
Yeah, she's a nice lady.
-
It is not fair to hate Lureen. It was clear to me she didn't know Ennis and Jack had anything going until the telephone conversation with Ennis, then the pieces to the puzzle fell in place. Perhaps more pieces than that of Jacks relationship with Ennis. Who knows.
Lureen thought she met the man of her dreams. Despite her overbearing father, I think she loved Jack (being proud of Jack after dressing down her father at Thanksgiving). No, there is no blame here on Lureen. Even if she knew he was queer, she was the one to get hurt. I can kinda see this, cause I was married to a pretty little gal who could have very well been Lureen. It was me, not her, that was the problem, and I will carry a certain amount of guilt with me to the day I die.
Brad
-
It is not fair to hate Lureen. It was clear to me she didn't know Ennis and Jack had anything going until the telephone conversation with Ennis, then the pieces to the puzzle fell in place. Perhaps more pieces than that of Jacks relationship with Ennis. Who knows.
I agree with you about Lureen. And I love watching Anne Hathaway's reactions in the Thanksgiving scene.
-
I agree. I'm always a little surprised by hatred for Lureen. What did she do that was so wrong?
So she went after Jack, then was "in a hurry" in the car. People who point to that seem to be objecting to women who are sexually and romantically assertive.
Then, when Jack didn't prove to be the husband she'd hoped for, she threw herself into her work as a distraction. People who point to that seem to be objecting to women who are committed to their careers.
Some people point to the fact that she didn't call Bobby's teacher. They seem to be expecting the mother to be in charge of the child care, even though she probably also spends more time at work. Or perhaps they just blame her for forgetting to make the call. If they fault a busy working mother for occasionally letting something slip through the cracks, they're pretty much faulting every mother.
And some people actually blame Lureen for not being a good wife to Jack, or not being there for him when he "needed" her. When did he ever need her? And where was he when SHE needed HIM?
-
Thanks all of you!!
To all too, please answer my puzzle... p.l.e.a.s.e.
Brad you say: It is not fair to hate Lureen. It was clear to me she didn't know Ennis and Jack had anything going until the telephone conversation with Ennis, then the pieces to the puzzle fell in place. Perhaps more pieces than that of Jacks relationship with Ennis. Who knows.
Lureen thought she met the man of her dreams. Despite her overbearing father, I think she loved Jack (being proud of Jack after dressing down her father at Thanksgiving). No, there is no blame here on Lureen. Even if she knew he was queer, she was the one to get hurt. I can kinda see this, cause I was married to a pretty little gal who could have very well been Lureen. It was me, not her, that was the problem, and I will carry a certain amount of guilt with me to the day I die.
Brad
....
Brad and to all: I do not think that anybodyhates Lureen. We are puzzled by her, at least I am. By her actions, and pleased by some of them like you mentioned. Why did she marry so quickly - that sex scene (so quickly taking her clothers off) and the bar one - you wanting for a mating call are puzzling, right?? Were Lureen and Jack engaged for one year?? It certainly seems not!! Maybe for only one week or less- may I dare?- and I wonder now if Jack parents, therefore, were even invited by Lureen's parents or by Lureen, yes her??
It could very well be that that after sex with Jack, she married him the same day or the next day??-And not even invited her parents nor his, since both Jack and Lureen are away on rodeo circuit??
Too, Lurren knew of Jack's murder... I say. Tell me detective Brad? And all of you are too like detectives you are on Bettermost?? !! Tell... me!!
Hugs!! May all Ennis' and Jacks and gays be safe in the whole world!!
-
I agree. I'm always a little surprised by hatred for Lureen. What did she do that was so wrong?
...
Some people point to the fact that she didn't call Bobby's teacher. They seem to be expecting the mother to be in charge of the child care, even though she probably also spends more time at work. Or perhaps they just blame her for forgetting to make the call. If they fault a busy working mother for occasionally letting something slip through the cracks, they're pretty much faulting every mother.
I think she actually comes off rather better in the film than in the story. In the film she doesn't seem to disagree that Bobby needs extra help with his schoolwork, she just forgot to call the school. In the story Jack makes it sound like she willfully blinds herself to their son's problems--and he can't do anything about it because she controls the money--the pursestrings (and maybe thereby "wears the pants in the family?").
-
Thanks Jeff, and thanks ineedcrayons, and thanks to all others!!
Jeff (and to all too), you seem to say that Lureen keeps herself busy mainly making money ( or trying to do that purse ). Why is she so in the film, - lless interested in her own life, her son's and Jack's who is her husband??
Is she only interested in money? Or mostly so? As an over-worked that way at her desk, adding figures, numbers, etc., as an accountant was it?
Oh may I wonder too how her relationship with her mother is, especially after her marriage to Jack (till his death or faith)?? I add the word faith since I think that maybe Jack is still alive... somehow.
I think that Lureen knows that Jack was murdered (or it was attempted murder) by someone, likely by more than one.
Awaiting your news from you and from all,
hugs!! May all persons on Earth be safe, including gays, and happy too!!
-
Lureen, Artiste, becomes increasingly bitter and disappointed due to her marriage with a man who just wants to be her buddy. She wants to be proud of Jack yet...remember the scene in the film where the young Lureen is at her desk and the 2 ranchers are there buying a tractor? They see Jack and mock him. She gives up something at that point.
Also Lureen's increasing sadness is shown by her HAIR. When jack meets her she is a spontaneous fun loving Texas Rodeo Queen. NO hair color. By the time of the scene I described, she has traces of blonde...she is becoming bitter, closing down. The blonder she gets,m the more dissapointed she is. The heavier her makeup, the heavier her MASK.
That mask slips during the telephone call and the REAL Lureen comes out, the spontaneous girl who loved Jack but was not loved in return.
She is as big a victim of rural homophobia as Jack and zEnnis
-
She is as big a victim of rural homophobia as Jack and zEnnis
exactly, the families, and loved ones of men and women forced into the closet by homophobia rural or otherwise are also victims.
-
Thanks brokeplex, thanks brokenbackjack!!
Brokeplex, quoting you: exactly, the families, and loved ones of men and women forced into the closet by homophobia rural or otherwise are also victims.
..
Brokeplex, so you think then that Jack was indeed in the closet with Lureen??
Do you consider Lureen too in the closet? How?? With or without Jack??
...
Brokebackjack, quoting you: Lureen, Artiste, becomes increasingly bitter and disappointed due to her marriage with a man who just wants to be her buddy. She wants to be proud of Jack yet...remember the scene in the film where the young Lureen is at her desk and the 2 ranchers are there buying a tractor? They see Jack and mock him. She gives up something at that point.
...
Brokebackjack, so you think what she gives up then??
...
Hugs, hugs!!
-
she gives up a young woman's hopes for the man she loves, and begins to die inside.
-
Brokeplex, so you think then that Jack was indeed in the closet with Lureen??
Well the smart thing would have been for Jack to let her know at some point in time. I am convinced now that Lureen was pregnant with someone elses baby when she married Jack. The marriage was shall we say arranged. But I don't think that the film or the ss support the notion that Jack told Lureen about his sexuality.
-
Really? I never felt she was already knocked up. What I got--offtopic though it may be, is there a Lureen thread???-- is that HE did the deed.
What Lureen wanted, Lureen got.
-
Really? I never felt she was already knocked up. What I got--offtopic though it may be, is there a Lureen thread???-- is that HE did the deed.
What Lureen wanted, Lureen got.
"open forum / was Lureen pregnant when she married Jack? "
-
is there a Lureen thread???--
Yes, the current TOTW certainly addresses the topic of Lureen.
But, there's also this older thread where some really great discussions have happened about not only Lureen but the other female characters as well.
Female Sexuality in BBM
http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,8654.0.html (http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,8654.0.html)
-
Thanks brokebackjack!
To quote you about Lureen when she heard those two men talk about her husband: she gives up a young woman's hopes for the man she loves, and begins to die inside.
.......
Brokebackjack, May I say that that, as you say may well be so, and is, but something can also be added to that!! Firstly, she does continue her marriage!! Also, her love for Jack begins to die, how?? Please explain.
I think that if she saved Jack's life since she knows that he was murdered, she keep that secret, and to whom?? -That remains to be proven, and also is likely connected to another secret about herself mainly!!
Brokebackjack and all others too, how is Lureen's love for Jack diminished or begins to die (if you think that is so as extinguishing),
hugs!
-
No Artiste, I don't think her love begins to die. I think her HOPES start to die and that is something very different.
-
Brokebackjack and all others too, how is Lureen's love for Jack diminished or begins to die (if you think that is so as extinguishing),
why do you believe that she ever loved him at all? couldn't their marriage been a cynical arrangement?
-
Thanks brokeplex!
Arrangement for Lureen, yes! For Jack, yes too! Since, I consider them both bisexuals, or gay and lesbian... at this time of my understanding!
But cynical, please explain.
Hugs!!
-
By cynical, I mean that the marriage of Lureen and Jack was not necessarily a marriage of two love birds.
I see it as more of a convenient arrangement for Jack. Jack had an interest in trying to conform to the heteronorming pressures of society, and Jack was also attracted to L.D.'s bank accounts.
For Lureen, since I believe that Bobby is not Jack's child, she needed a husband to legitimize the child and avoid censure for her and her family from a community that frowned on unwed mothers. I think that she also found Jack convenient because he was not in the mold of a domineering L.D. Newsome and unlikely to get any of L.D.'s favor or friendship.
So, Lureen held the reins on the whole operation, and Jack was just along for the "ride".
so to speak.
-
Wow, you make me smile brokeplex... very well said!!
I figure that Lureen was indeed pregnant when she captures Jack, she had analysed him maybe before seeing him where her hat falls?? I think so, do you or any of you?
I still too figure that Lureen knows that Jack was murdered but... she does something about that? What?
I figure that she is lesbian! SEE my thread on that... as there are token gestures about that too,
Hugs!
-
Wow, you make me smile brokeplex... very well said!!
I figure that Lureen was indeed pregnant when she captures Jack, she had analysed him maybe before seeing him where her hat falls?? I think so, do you or any of you?
I still too figure that Lureen knows that Jack was murdered but... she does something about that? What?
I figure that she is lesbian! SEE my thread on that... as there are token gestures about that too,
Hugs!
Why do you believe Lureen is a lesbian if you also believe that she has had sexual relationships with at least two men (Jack and whomever you believe impregnated her)? Those are contradictory things to believe about her character.
??? ???
-
Wow, you make me smile brokeplex... very well said!!
I figure that Lureen was indeed pregnant when she captures Jack, she had analysed him maybe before seeing him where her hat falls?? I think so, do you or any of you?
I still too figure that Lureen knows that Jack was murdered but... she does something about that? What?
I figure that she is lesbian! SEE my thread on that... as there are token gestures about that too,
Hugs!
Artiste, I am puzzled that you persist in believing that the character Lureen is a Lesbian. I am glad to know that you also see that she was likely pregnant when she met Jack. But what in the film makes you believe that she is a Lesbian?
Of course the short story gives us very few clues about Lureen. So, I watched some of the scenes in the movie that has Lureen in it. I can find nothing that tells me she is a Lesbian. Now I really look for small details! I found the details about the birthdate of Bobby and came to the conclusion that Lureen was already pregnant when she met Jack. But the Lesbian idea has stumped me. Tell me where in the film you see an indication that Lureen is a Lesbian?
-
Thanks brokeplex, and thanks atz!!
Atz, I will try to reply to brokeplex first, OK?
Atz, it seems that I am not allowed on here to answer you about Lureen being so an "L" anymore on here on Bettermost. So I guess that you will have to re-ask on my thread concerning that, and please often; since it will be incredibly hard for me to prove it to you... if I can at all, and be assured to me that I think more andmore that she was... is, and that I applaud her and all Lureens, and all Ennis' and all Jacks - plus many others!!
Brokeplex, same thing to you that you have only now the liberty to talk about Lureen that way or not but on my post... it seems!!
Brokeplex, may I quote you: Now I really look for small details! I found the details about the birthdate of Bobby and came to the conclusion that Lureen was already pregnant when she met Jack. But the Lesbian idea has stumped me. Tell me where in the film you see an indication that Lureen is a Lesbian?
...
Brokeplex, about that, I am only now allowed to answer you on think about your second sentence still? And since I can not prove that which I agree with you about her being pregnant then when she meets Jack, you did and I accept that! - But how that can relate to Jack being murdered or not, I would like to dare connect that, but will not... as I fear reprisals; I do not have your talent to compose such - wish I did!
Dare I ask now: was Jack murder an accident?? Or will I be boycotted for that too??
Hugs, hugs!! Let freedom ring on Bettermost!! - I say!!
-
Dare I ask now: was Jack murder an accident?? Or will I be boycotted for that too??
No one is being boycotted for anything. And you are free to discuss Lureen's sexuality in great depth on the thread you created for that purpose.
:)
-
why do you believe that she ever loved him at all? couldn't their marriage been a cynical arrangement?
Show me anything in that filmed scene of their meeting which shows in any way shape or form indications of such-highly-atypical-of-their-age cynicism, anything other then loneliness on the part of 21 year old Jack. To be flattered on his great day by the Rodeo Queens attentions would have been a JOY to such a young man. Her wealth would have made her even more glamourous to a dirt poor Wyoming farmboy. Do not even try to tell me you see it, it is not there roflmaoooo!!!!
Show me anything in that scene which does not depict a woman DAZZLED by this handsome gallant bullrider.
What Lureen wanted Lureen got.
And she wanted JACK!!!!
Smitten is the word, brokeplex, SMITTEN. Lureen was smitten!
When he got her pregnant, he had to marry her. I doubt he even considered NOT marrying her. She was dazzling. To Jack Twist from the poor hard ranch with a father harder then the drought-baked clay of his few brutal acres, Lureen was a gift thrown from Apollo's chariot as it raced across the sky. To Lureen, Jack was an Alpha hunk with STYLE and a big willie, a man she could guide, a man she could mold, a man to WHOM SHE COULD HAPPILY BE A WIFE. A man who could and would carry her from under the eaves of her pride-bloated daddy's roof.
A novel man, a NEW man in her small town, a man she had no trouble imaging being the envy of every woman she knew.
If this is cynicism rather then young, then all those who are young may be cynics.
Or maybe, just maybe, I'm just deeply in love myself.
Take your pick......I'll go with BOTH my alternatives!!!
roflmao
and this need, this fire of Lureen slowly burns out as she realises something is missing from her Jack. He cannot give her what she wanted, what she thought he could. he could be the friend, oh yes, but not the man she dreamed into being.
From these heights did Lureen plummet, bitterness closing in a bit more with every passing year.
From the dazzling texas Rodeo Queen, we come to the sad embittered shell who answered Ennis' telephone call. A very different gal from the woman who married Jack.
Accident or murder, she either refused to believe he had been killed in such a manner or it had been covered up and she really didn't know. She was a woman. That was a prominent family. It is no big stretch to see a small town sherif hiding a well known family's dirty scandal.
And if it WAS an accident, she told the truth AS SHE KNEW IT.
But by the time she hung up...either way, Lureen knew the truth.
-
Do not even try to tell me you see it, it is not there roflmaoooo!!!!
When he got her pregnant, he had to marry her. I doubt he even considered NOT marrying her.
A novel man, a NEW man in her small town, a man she had no trouble imaging being the envy of every woman she knew.
Or maybe, just maybe, I'm just deeply in love myself.
roflmao
Accident or murder, she either refused to believe he had been killed in such a manner or it had been covered up and she really didn't know. She was a woman. That was a prominent family. It is no big stretch to see a small town sherif hiding a well known family's dirty scandal.
But by the time she hung up...either way, Lureen knew the truth.
Well, I certainly won't try to tell you anything when you have warned me that you are not interested in seeing it.
Why would you assume that Jack got Lureen pregnant? If Bobby was 8 months old when Jack met Alma in Riverton in Sept 1967, and Jack and Lureen made whoopee in the T Bird in Aug 1966, then Lureen was about 3 months pregnant when she met Jack.
You have described Lureen as a member of a "prominent family" in Childress (well, lets just say that the Newsomes were newly prosperous at best) and then you offer the idea that marrying a drifter rodeo cowboy with no education or prospects would make Lureen the envy of her social set in Childress? Please! Lureen would have been the laughing stock of most of her peers. But if the alternative to marrying Jack is an "unwed mother" situation or an illegal abortion (this was 1966 pre-Roe times) ,then she would have married him.
I am truly delighted that you are in love, I am too. More so after this week than ever before! What does "roflmao" mean by the way?
I'll will partially agree with you that in perhaps in the early 1980's small town law enforcement could have kept evidence of a brutal murder covered up.
Lureen knew the truth about Ennis after the phone call ended. That is true. It is also probably true that Lureen knew the truth about Jack far earlier.
-
But if the alternative to marrying Jack is an "unwed mother" situation or an illegal abortion (this was 1966 pre-Roe times) ,then she would have married him.
Tell you what, this is something I've wondered about. If the Newsomes didn't have anything else, at least they had money, and my impression is that even in pre-Roe times, if a family had money, these situations could be "taken care of." On the other hand, we're also talking the Texas Panhandle here; what might be the cultural ethos even for a family with money in 1966?
How about it, Texans? What do you think?
-
Tell you what, this is something I've wondered about. If the Newsomes didn't have anything else, at least they had money, and my impression is that even in pre-Roe times, if a family had money, these situations could be "taken care of." On the other hand, we're also talking the Texas Panhandle here; what might be the cultural ethos even for a family with money in 1966?
How about it, Texans? What do you think?
Jeff, she could have gotten the abortion, but it would have been illegal in Texas up until the Roe decision in 1973. Sure the Newsomes could have afforded an abortion, but the alternative of her marrying Jack was a better one, and women who got abortions couldn't really have done it in total secret in a small town, she would have gotten talked about.
-
Jeff, she could have gotten the abortion, but it would have been illegal in Texas up until the Roe decision in 1973. Sure the Newsomes could have afforded an abortion, but the alternative of her marrying Jack was a better one, and women who got abortions couldn't really have done it in total secret in a small town, she would have gotten talked about.
Thanks, 'plex. :)
I suppose she could have "gone away for awhile" and given up the baby, too.
People in small towns do talk. They probably could not keep gossip about Jack's death from spreading, either.
-
If the Newsomes didn't have anything else, at least they had money, and my impression is that even in pre-Roe times, if a family had money, these situations could be "taken care of." On the other hand, we're also talking the Texas Panhandle here; what might be the cultural ethos even for a family with money in 1966?
How about it, Texans? What do you think?
Even without being particularly wealthy by mid- to late-60's Texas standards, it was possible for a woman living then in that state to travel to another state where abortion had been legalized (California, for example) and have the procedure performed. It would have been even easier for a woman of Lureen's position and wealth--though admittedly, religious and/or cultural scruples could have come into play in not opting for that route.
-
Even without being particularly wealthy by mid- to late-60's Texas standards, it was possible for a woman living then in that state to travel to another state where abortion had been legalized (California, for example) and have the procedure performed. It would have been even easier for a woman of Lureen's position and wealth--though admittedly, religious and/or cultural scruples could have come into play in not opting for that route.
Thanks, Scott! I did not know that abortion was legal anywhere in the U.S. before Roe.
-
I did not know that abortion was legal anywhere in the U.S. before Roe.
Here is a pertinent article from Wikipedia, which doesn't go into great depth on the pre-Roe era, but which makes it clear that a rather significant number of states allowed for abortion under at least some circumstances before 1973:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States)
-
Thanks brokenbackjack!
May I quote you: No Artiste, I don't think her love begins to die. I think her HOPES start to die and that is something very different.
[/i]
...
Brokenbackjack, I agree with you. That is a surprise to me? I will think. Am most happy that you say that!
Think mainly that it says a lot of different things baout Lureen and Jack!! Plus, and of others!!
What do you think? How? Do you think what, whne, how... is included?
Hugs!
-
People in small towns do talk. They probably could not keep gossip about Jack's death from spreading, either.
Yes, I'm quoting myself here. ;D
Why? Something occurred to me last night in the shower--where I do my best thinking. ;D
It occurred to me that this "people will talk" idea might also be used to argue against the the idea that Lureen was already pregnant with someone else's child when she met Jack. Someone posted, above, somewhere, that for the "eight months old" line to work when Ennis and Jack were reunited in September 1967, Lureen would have had to have been about three months along when she met Jack.
Well, if she were that far along, wouldn't she have been "showing" in July 1966? Lureen clearly wasn't. But here's my point. Even if they don't drink coffee ;D surely Texans can count to nine. Jack and Lureen and Mr. and Mrs. Newsome don't exist in a vacuum. When the baby was born, the whole town would have know that it couldn't possibly be Jack's. Think of the scandal. :o
-
Thanks Jeff!
Love your comment! I am so surprised (so much news in it) and pleased (delightful) that I must comment on it- may I?
May we go to shower with you, and would we all think about BM then?? Ha! Ha! EXCUSE MY SENSE OF HUMOUR... I loved yours!!
Much can be said about Lureen that has been said, and to me, much, much more has not been said yet!!
May I quote you: Think of the scandal! And to that plus all your comment, Jeff, you just made me think that it was indeed a scandal, but at the same time, it was not!! There seems to be two or three facts for that. I have to think further. I do not have all the answers... nor will, nor can express them to you; you and others will have to help me... if you please??
Here is some guidance, maybe:
It seems that Lureen was indeed up to 3 months pregnant; to my experience, some females do not show that while others do a bit, or much??
To me, Lureen was at least one month! That would not show, nearly on anyone, except her mother would have seen it and told Lureen if her daughter had not realized it. (???????)
I do not know if all pregnant women in those very early stages know... I think that they do!! ??
............
That is before. Early times. Then she meets Jack. WE know what happen then... too!! (And it's a shower... a different kind of one!!)
But what happened after the son is born?? There too seems to be proof(s) ??
Does that have something to do with the tiltle of this thread; it think that it may and does... and that remains to be started and detailed much, much furtherly.
I must go, you pose a great comment and much in it- did you know?
Hugs!!
-
Heya,
I have a comment for this thread on the topic of the murder/accident question that's quite unrelated to the subject of Lureen. So, I'm just going to forge ahead...
Forgive me if this has been discussed in this long thread.
When I watched the movie on Friday, I got to thinking a little bit about what exactly we see in the images of Jack being murdered. It's such an incredibly hard little scene to watch or even think about for long, so thinking about what the filmmakers are actually showing us is a very tough question to tackle. Since this scenario of Jack being killed is essentially the filmmakers showing us Ennis's imagination of what the scene might have been like... it's certainly complicated. I've seen folks say (here and there) that they think they see Jack mouthing the word "Ennis" and I've also seen folks talk about how significant it is that one of the murderers steps on Jack's groin.
:(
Anyway, what I'm wondering now... is what kind of direction do we suppose Jake was given in preparation for this scene? I wonder what kinds of information he was trying to convey? Do we think that he believed he was depicting Jack's actual death... or was he acting Ennis's imaginary scenario of Jack's death? I think this is a slight tweak on the original question. I'm sure there's no way to really know what kind of acting direction Ang Lee gave Jake here... but I think it's certainly curious to ponder the question.
:'(
-
Thanks atz!
You do pose great questions.
That scene, I find it massive, too violent, but such violence by a gang does occurr often... in many ways unfortunately. So to me, that murderous scene had to be realistic... in order to bring about change now, soonest, forever, in our our so-called civilisations and in other countries where that is current!!
Jake must have wanted it to be real for Jack!! ??
It is OK to live in a dream (gay or other), but one has to protect oneself; since even straights, females, lesbians, bisexuals, gays, others, need to protect themselves/ourselves, plus laws against such murderers need to ne increased and enforced, and that to my experience is too rare (as you probably heard of my cases, including my own life which I had to protect myself and others too often!!).
To me, your question are connected to this thread. But no one wants to talk about that scene, to my experience, why? I have been told not to even write the word murderers on Bettermost; strange isn't it? - May I use therefore use the word thugs to use Bush's word? And therefore lessen the scene?-As if it's Ok to murder an innocent person (gay especially and others)? To me, a murderer is a murderer; there is a strong diffrence between a murderer and a killer!! ??
May I ask you and to all: why do we seem to accept a murderer more than a gay man?? That seems so to me.
I still think that Jack was murdered!
Anyway, much can be said still, and I await your comment(s) if you like and that from others too,
keep care,
hugs!! May we always see what Heath and Jake present real as Ennis and Jack so we can be safe always and love another in the whole World - as we are all humble with their roles and acting, in order to find ways to help each other!!
-
Jake must have wanted it to be real for Jack!! ??
I think Jake most definitely wanted to portray this violent scene with a sense of the realism of the violence inherent in this scenario. But, on the other hand... it's a surreal scene... it's only what Ennis thinks (regardless of what we the viewers think). I'm not sure that we can know whether or not Jake "wanted" this murder scenario to be the correct scenario explaining Jack's death. It's very significant to me that the filmmakers did not film a similar visualization of the accident scenario. It seems that the accident explanation might carry more weight for the viewers of the film if there was an equivalent image.
In some ways it comes down to a question of whether a visual depiction (murder scenario) or a verbal description (accident scenario) carries more weight.
I'd be curious to hear more opinions specifically on the question of whether we believe Jack silently mouths the word "Ennis" in this difficult scene.
-
Yes, I'm quoting myself here. ;D
Why? Something occurred to me last night in the shower--where I do my best thinking. ;D
It occurred to me that this "people will talk" idea might also be used to argue against the the idea that Lureen was already pregnant with someone else's child when she met Jack. Someone posted, above, somewhere, that for the "eight months old" line to work when Ennis and Jack were reunited in September 1967, Lureen would have had to have been about three months along when she met Jack.
Well, if she were that far along, wouldn't she have been "showing" in July 1966? Lureen clearly wasn't. But here's my point. Even if they don't drink coffee ;D surely Texans can count to nine. Jack and Lureen and Mr. and Mrs. Newsome don't exist in a vacuum. When the baby was born, the whole town would have know that it couldn't possibly be Jack's. Think of the scandal. :o
yes, the towns folk in Childress certainly could count the months of Lureens pregnancy, but with her married to Jack the old "denial / hypocrisy" routine would swing in. If she were either unmarried and pregnant or she disappeared for a while to have an abortion that in a small town everyone would find out about, she and her family would be harshly condemned. ain't fair, but that is the way it was and to a degree still is in many locales.
-
yes, small towns will forgive SOME transgressions. I touched on this on another forum once. If you are popular or well known in the area, your sins are more likely to be overlooked...especially if it is seen you are trying to 'do the right thing'.
-
yes, the towns folk in Childress certainly could count the months of Lureens pregnancy, but with her married to Jack the old "denial / hypocrisy" routine would swing in. If she were either unmarried and pregnant or she disappeared for a while to have an abortion that in a small town everyone would find out about, she and her family would be harshly condemned. ain't fair, but that is the way it was and to a degree still is in many locales.
There's already a whole thread dedicated to the topic of speculation about Lureen's pregnancy.
http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,16269.0.html (http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,16269.0.html)
Can I suggest that we try to steer this thread back in the direction of the original question? If for no other reason than the sake of organization (and to help folks locate a specific topic when they go looking for a thread based on it's title or original premise).
thanks Friends
-
On the topic of the ambiguity of Jack's death... I thought I'd bring this quotation over here from the recently posted interview with Pierre Tremblay. His comments are very helpful here I think... they only really re-confirm the importance of the ambiguity, but are really fascinating. He's talking about the reason the mechanics scene was deliberately cut from the film.
The [deleted] Sneering Mechanics scene?
We shot that very quickly, but it did not make it into the film, which I thought was an interesting choice. It leaves Jack’s demise open to question. You are not sure if you see Ennis’ fears or what actually happened.
I guarantee you that Lee did that expressly, the superb filmmaker that he is, so that there would be questioning. If he had included this scene, you would have known immediately what happened, and why, but because he didn’t, you are not sure if Lureen is telling the real story. You’re left to wonder about the truth behind Jack’s death.
It was a way of making it less explicit, and leaving the story much more open to interpretation. I’m sure that was a big debate, a huge choice. It was a tiny thing, but a very important piece of the picture that he purposely left out.
(http://www.findingbrokeback.com/Interviews/Tremblay2/Tremblay31.jpg)
The full interview can be found here:
http://www.findingbrokeback.com/Interviews/Tremblay2/Tremblay1.html (http://www.findingbrokeback.com/Interviews/Tremblay2/Tremblay1.html)
And, of course the thread discussing this interview can be found over in the Chez Tremblay forum here:
http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,21675.0.html (http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,21675.0.html)
-
Merci atz !
He says that: you would have known what happened !
So Jack was murdered ? Or are those mechanics for another murder that had happened ?
Au revoir,
hugs!
-
He's saying that Ang Lee deliberately left the scene with the mechanics out of the film so that the audience would never really know how Jack died based on the film as a finished product. I think it's very important that we never really know how Jack dies. And, the idea that what we see of Jack's "murder" in the finshed film is only Ennis's imagination is really fascinating to me.
-
He is sure about that ! ??
The mechanics might have been for the other murdered gay man ?
-
Of course, Jack in the Brokeback Mountain movie was murdered because he was a gay man, and so easy for con artists to murder him since gays are friendly !
-
Of course, Jack in the Brokeback Mountain movie was murdered because he was a gay man, and so easy for con artists to murder him since gays are friendly !
Ennis is convinced that Jack was murdered. But, whether of not Jack was murdered or it was an accident, that is not the central tragedy of the story or the film.
-
It sure stops it ? Right ?