TOTW 01/08: Do you think Jack was murdered or was it an accident?

[Jeff Wrangler]

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?

[brokeplex]

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 Wrangler]

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.

[moremojo]

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.

[Jeff Wrangler]

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.

[moremojo]

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

[Artiste]

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!

[Jeff Wrangler]

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. 

Why? Something occurred to me last night in the shower--where I do my best thinking. 

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  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. 

[Artiste]

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!!

[Brown Eyes]

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.