Life and this movie are messy

[Front-Ranger]

This is all about sweat, tears, blood, rain, snow, hail, and runny noses. That's right, this is one messy movie. I'd like to start by talking about the early years of Ennis's marriage, when the bedroom and adjoining nursery were filled with the smells of milk and baby shit and Jenny had a runny nose. Jenny also had an asthmatic wheeze. Hmmm, runny watery nose and windy breath...could Jenny be reminding Ennis of Jack? It's true he tugged on her ear and called her an angel one time, and then she seemed to disappear, altho Alma Jr. mentioned that she would be singing at the wedding. And why was she named Jenny instead of Francine as in the story? Is it because Jenny starts with a J, like Jack? Let's untangle some of these messy parts of the story together!

[Jeff Wrangler]

And why was she named Jenny instead of Francine as in the story? Is it because Jenny starts with a J, like Jack?

Well, I'm not saying I necessarily agree with that, but it is the first explanation I've seen anyone come up with for the otherwise apparently pointless name change.

 

[Brown Eyes]

Yeah, that name change is a puzzler.  It's interesting how little we know about Jenny compared to Alma Jr. 

[Luvlylittlewing]

I agree with you - the movie is messy and gritty.  Annie P.  describes how Jack and Ennis' motel room smelled after they made love.  Damn!  And all the spitting that goes on.  The tent up on Brokeback smelled like cat piss, and certainly smelled worse after the boys got busy in it.  Yes, a messy movie.  This unpleasantness only adds to the authentic feel of the movie in my mind.  God, I love this movie, mess and all

[Front-Ranger]

Yes, but what do you suppose the spitting is all about? How does it advance the story? Whenever anybody spits it is very jarring but maybe I am making too much of it.

[serious crayons]

Yes, but what do you suppose the spitting is all about? How does it advance the story? Whenever anybody spits it is very jarring but maybe I am making too much of it.

Hi F-R, I've seen posts analyzing the spitting. I can't remember exactly what they say beyond the fact that spit expresses contempt or dismissal for the other person or whatever has just been said. There may be more to it than that. But I don't think you're making too much of it, in any case!

[Sheriff Roland]

I agree that a lot has been offered as explanation for the spitting - but what about the most simple explanation of all: that it provides us with a realistic view of the times & place.

First, most of the spitting occures outdoors. You telling me that even in today's world you don't occasionally see people spitting on the sidewalk? Well now imagine a world removed some 25 years (the last part of the movie) where smoking was more prevalent than it is today - plus we're dealing with the great outdoors - not really city and pavement surroundings. What's a guy suppose to do with all that mucus accumulating in his throat and mouth? And then there's the earlier generation - John Twist. I'm ten years younger than Ennis would be today, yet, when I was younger (early 1960's) there still was a functional spitoon in the barber's shop where I would get my hair cut, in northern Ontario (Canada). What I'm saying is that these people in their time & place would think nothing of spitting outdoors, and even John Twist, from a earlier generation would not think much about spitting in his own cup.

In short - the spitting is probably nothing more than a respect of the customs that we are no longer use to. the habit may seem jarring as part of our movie going experience but, I think it just represent the realities of the times.

[Luvlylittlewing]

The spitting does represent disgust.  I don't think anything in this movie is arbritrary.  Three instances I can think of:

1. Ennis spitting during the "fight scene." Here Ennis is showing his displeasure that Jack visited Mexico
2.  Jack spitting in Ennis' path as they bring the sheep down from the Mountain.  Jack was understandably angry that Ennis struck him.
3. Old Man Twist spitting into a cup when he discusses Jack bringing someone else up to lick the ranch into shape.

There are other instances, I'm sure, but I can't think of them right now.  I do believe all the spitting serves a purpose.  I read a thread awhile ago with a lot of analysis of what the spitting signifies, but I can't remember everything that was said.

[Sheriff Roland]

I do not deny that there have been meanings assigned to all that spitting, and I will admit that some of it could have been strategically placed to show "disgust",  but my post still stands for what it wished to convey - that not all spitting need to imply special meaning that the viewer has to interpret. Spitting was as normal a part of everyday life as eating, sleeping and working. I may not convince anyone of my view on this, but sometimes, I feel, we over-analyse things and I think that sometimes a spit is just a natural part of everyday life of those times.

[nakymaton]

Roland, I'm right there with you.

For me, the movie works first on a very intuitive emotional level. Sometimes people point out symbolism to me that adds to the sense I already had of a scene. But sometimes, the symbols that are apparent to another person conflict with what I saw going on. Maybe that means I'm wrong about what I feel about various scenes. I dunno. I prefer to go for the emotional resonance first.

I do know that I spit a lot when I'm working (or exercising) hard outdoors, especially when it's dry out or when my sinuses are acting up or when my mouth is full of dust.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Possiby it--the spitting--works differently in different situations.

Clearly John Twist spitting into his cup just at that point is intended to convey disgust or even contempt. But what are we to make of Jack spitting just before he introduces himself to Ennis? Possibly dislike for Joe Aguirre--they've just left his office--but that seems a little weak to me.

As the man said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and I would add--sometimes a spit is just a spit. 

[David]

Speaking of spitting...  Last month when I was at a classic car show, three young guys, all of 18 yrs old maybe were walking toward me.   Classic handsome farm bred boys, well fitting faded jeans, tight tee shirts, clean cut, and then two of them spit on the ground.   My smile sank.   Then as they passed me, I just happen to glance at their rears, and all of them had visable round cans of chewing tobacco in their rear pants pockets!    UGH!

It's bad enough young kids are starting smoking when they know how bad it is and worse, how hard it is to quit, but chewing Tobacco causes mouth cancer, gum and tooth loss.  A few baseball players have had parts of their tongue removed due to cancer.   Stupid kids.   

[serious crayons]

Regarding whether spit is just spit:

My opinion is that if there's anything in the movie that stands out enough for us to notice and comment on it, it most likely means something. And if an object (or, in this case, an action) is significant in one scene, then the object or action is also significant in another scene -- not necessarily in the exact same way, but in a way not unrelated to the first way.

Am I getting too convoluted?

Yes, in real life spit is sometimes -- pretty much always -- just spit. And snow is snow and buckets are buckets and bears are bears and moons are moons and beans are beans and fans are fans and cowboy hats are cowboy hats. Not in the movie. The filmmakers may occasionally let logs disappear and microphone cords show, but they are very very careful when it comes to symbolism and metaphors, and everything is worked out really thoroughly. So they wouldn't make a big deal of connecting a symbol to a meaning in one case and then in another scene -- oh well! -- just stick it in for the hell of it, or let it exist because, after all, people do spit and encounter bears and use fans and wear hats. (Note: OK, I guess I wouldn't try to argue that, say, every single cowboy hat on every single extra in the movie has some shattering resonance. But if a hat is prominent enough to be noticable, it's probably so for a reason. If in the last scene we see a huge fan propped on Ennis' bed, it's not just because the nights have been hot lately. And if someone conspicuously spits ...)

It's fun to figure out which symbols mean what, but I don't think they're there just as a fun puzzle, like a sudoku (sp?) game. They're supposed to deepen our understanding and appreciation of the movie, often on an intuitive level. So if a symbol conflicts with your intuitive or emotional reaction, Mel, then that means your reaction is wrong.  Just kidding!!!! It means that maybe the symbol is supposed to represent something in a different way than people are saying. For you, anyway. In other words, I think you should trust your emotional instincts first.

[Sheriff Roland]

Regarding whether spit is just spit:
 So if a symbol conflicts with your intuitive or emotional reaction, Mel, then that means your reaction is wrong.  Just kidding!!!!

Here's a fascinating observation: (and I might get in trouble for this) but of those who have expressed opinions on this thread, most of the people who are prone to accept that spitting is just spitting in a lot of this movie's various scenes, are ... men ... while of those who prefer to accept that every little bit of the movie (particularly if it seems out of place to their movie viewing experience) should have some additional meaning are ... women ... - So maybe spitting is more of a guy thing?!?!

Actually the point I wanted to make with this post is that, on this subject, it is likely that we will have to agree to disagree.

[YaadPyar]

Regarding whether spit is just spit:

My opinion is that if there's anything in the movie that stands out enough for us to notice and comment on it, it most likely means something. And if an object (or, in this case, an action) is significant in one scene, then the object or action is also significant in another scene -- not necessarily in the exact same way, but in a way not unrelated to the first way.

Just another thought on this.  In much the same way that one might decorate a room - put certain things in certain places in certain ways because it just looks or feels right, I think set designers and filmmakers do the same thing.  They design things a certain way not necessarily with a symbolic intent or conscious effort, but because it feels right. 

And maybe a character spits 'cause it's just what he would do in a scene.  And we can derive meaning from it - maybe it seems like the right thing because we're understanding something about this character and his motivations, etc., but it's likely happening 'cause it feel right.  I'm not arguing against the significance of things, but thinking instead about how they came about.

[Front-Ranger]

Roland, I don't know how to answer your question. It was a guy who made the movie but I don't think he directed them to spit just to reinforce the fact that they are guys.

I wanted to ask everyone, why was Ennis shown spitting (and rather violently at that) just when Jack is backing his truck out of the driveway (such as it is) in the post-divorce scene?

[Mikaela]

In other words, I think you should trust your emotional instincts first.

I agree. And I'm fine with agreeing to disagree too - I don't think it's ever possible to reach a consensus on any one discussion topic related to a film with such consistently high level of intentional ambiguity as BBM has.

That said, my first instinct was to see each instance of spitting as signs of contempt, frustration, and/or anger. Mainly contempt.  And that's how I still see it.

why was Ennis shown spitting (and rather violently at that) just when Jack is backing his truck out of the driveway (such as it is) in the post-divorce scene?

An expression of immense helpless frustration over the whole situation, IMO.


And when Jack spits on the way down the mountain, to me it's as if he's shouting "To hell with it!" in frustration and angry confusion.

And as for Ennis's spitting when he has it out with Jack over Mexico - yes, contempt. And Jack sees it that way too - it's part of the reason why he gets ticked off.

Of course the spitting habit may have been very common in that time and place, I'm not denying that - but it's not something the actors would just do because it was an ordinary thing to do IMO - it must be based on dicussions on how to best  portray their characters in these specific and (mostly) very emotional and crucial scenes. So personally I can't imagine the spitting not having a clear intention and message in those scenes above and beyond showing a cultural habit of the times.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Roland and Celeste,

Thank you for your posts.

Tell you what. The truth is, sometimes I feel that if someone sat down and deliberately planned everything in this film in which someone somewhere has seen symbolism or significance, we'd still be waiting for the film to be made.

 

[Bucky]

Roland and Celeste,

Thank you for your posts.

Tell you what. The truth is, sometimes I feel that if someone sat down and deliberately planned everything in this film in which someone somewhere has seen symbolism or significance, we'd still be waiting for the film to be made.

 

   

Jeff,

I completely agree with your post.  When Ennis and Jack were spitting in the movie I didn't read anything special into it.  I just thought that was what guys in the west in their time frame did.  I guess both of them had been brought up to believe that spitting made them look more manly or something.

[Mikaela]

The truth is, sometimes I feel that if someone sat down and deliberately planned everything in this film in which someone somewhere has seen symbolism or significance, we'd still be waiting for the film to be made.

I completely agree! I've thought so too, on more than one occasion.


Only......  There'll never be agreement among fans on *which* of all the possible symbols are actual intentional and deliberate symbols from the filmmakers' side.  Perhaps we'll get to know more about that and have some confirmation either way, concerning the spitting even, when commentary tracks are released with a special edition DVD.    (Please, please, please...there has to be one such, and I hope soon!)

[Brown Eyes]

I wanted to ask everyone, why was Ennis shown spitting (and rather violently at that) just when Jack is backing his truck out of the driveway (such as it is) in the post-divorce scene?

Heya Friend,

This is a good question.  I think, like Mikaela said that it's about frustration.  But, I think it's multi-leveled frustration. (Surprise, surprise).  First I think he's frustrated/ freaked out over being surprised.  I think he's frustrated with himself and feels awful about sending Jack off (his hung head... the concerned way he says "Jack" with that reall intense look in his eye).  And I think he's frustrated plain and simple that he can't hook up with Jack that weekend (even if he's not about to agree to live with Jack at the moment).  I'm sure he's sort of mad that he's got the girls that weekend (eventhough, at the same time, they provide a handy excuse for not running off into the sunset with Jack that very minute).

[Luvlylittlewing]

Great posts, everyone.  We mentioned all the spitting, I touched on the unpleasant smells.  I'm really interested - any other messy things can you think of in this beautiful movie?

[nakymaton]

I don't see any of the spitting (even John Twist's) as showing contempt or disgust. Within most of the scenes, I think they serve more as a sort of nonverbal punctuation than anything else. (Something a little more final than a period, less emphatic than an exclamation point.)

And I think the spitting serves to give a rhythm to scenes that, without dialogue, might otherwise seem static. (Maybe they spit because tap-dancing would seem out of place.)

The trouble with symbols (and non-verbal stuff) is that people read them very much based on their own experiences. So if spitting is considered rude or disgusting in your culture (and in this case, I would say that American women have a different culture than American men), it's easy to read it as a sign of disgust or contempt. (I keep thinking about the scene in Dune where the protagonists are ready to take offense when somebody spits in front of them, only to be told that in that culture, spitting symbolizes giving a gift of the body's water, and that it's a great honor for someone to spit in front of them.)

[Meryl]

By nakymaton
I don't see any of the spitting (even John Twist's) as showing contempt or disgust. Within most of the scenes, I think they serve more as a sort of nonverbal punctuation than anything else. (Something a little more final than a period, less emphatic than an exclamation point.)

I like that description of it.  Much of the time, the act of spitting adds emphasis to what has just been said.

We mentioned all the spitting, I touched on the unpleasant smells.  I'm really interested - any other messy things can you think of in this beautiful movie?

Blood gushing from a nosebleed onto two shirts. 

[serious crayons]

Tell you what, there have been so many times when I have initially dismissed something as not possibly having any symbolic significance. Front-Ranger's thread about buckets comes to mind, an observation about the meaning of buckets in various scenes corresponding to Ennis' situation at that point, that as the thread unfolded also entailed the symbolism of coffee pots, which represented Jack's situation, and I think eventually led to animals and maybe fans and ...

Anyway, I remember seeing the bucket thread title on the forum index for days and days and not reading it, thinking, "Yeah right ... buckets?! I think we're getting a little carried away here." And then I finally in a moment of boredome checked it out and ... oh. my. god. Every single example she mentioned worked perfectly as a metaphor for whatever it was in the  scene it was in -- all different but connected, all with undeniable significance -- waaaayyyy too much to be accidental. I think my first post on that thread started with the word, "Whoooeeeee." I couldn't believe it. But once I thought about it, it made perfect sense.

That was where I learned my lesson. I never dismiss an anything as just an anything until I really examine it closely. (Or, well, to be perfectly honest, I still do that sometimes -- and still usually realize later, once I look hard enough, that I was wrong.) Now, obviously there's plenty of room for argument. Nobody knows what the filmmakers' intentions were, and we can read all kinds of things all kinds of different ways. And it's even possible that sometimes it really does mean nothing, that something's just there because it's there.

So some people here say characters in the movie spit just because people spit in real life. So OK, as a test, can anyone think of a spitting instance in the movie in which the context of the scene demonstrably does NOT include contempt or dismissal or something pretty close? Anyone remember a time when someone spit when they were happy or cheerful, as they might easily do in real life?

In any case, no need to be evangelistic about this. Symbolism and metaphor is supposed to enhance your appreciation of the movie. If it doesn't work for you, that's perfectly fine ... obviously you enjoy the movie anyway or you wouldn't be here. But I would hesitate to discount what others see in them.

[Mikaela]

I'm really interested - any other messy things can you think of in this beautiful movie?

Those wet sheep that (especially) Jack keeps carrying in his arms, dragging around or holding on to on his horse in scene after scene on the mountain - I've been thinking to myself that they must give his clothes, his blue shirt in particular, a very distinct patina of greasy stains and harsh smell.

Not that the boys would notice it much, they'd be so used to it. Or if they did, they'd think it smelled of making honest money, I suppose. Just like the Del Mar bedroom's smells and noises, right after Junior is born, reminded Ennis of life's continuance. I've always loved that in the story. 

Jack did sure notice the cat piss smell, though.... 

And yes, I'm a city girl, I can't deny that.....

Anyone remember a time when someone spit when they were happy or cheerful, as they might easily do in real life?

It struck me that the counterargument to this one might be: Anyone remember a time when they were happy and cheerful? There are so relatively few of such scenes that it kind of makes sense that the infrequent spitting, even if completeyl non-symbolic, would happen in tense or unhappy scenes.
I've not changed my opinion - I still feel certain the spitting is there for entirely intentional reasons. But this discussion has nevertheless opened my eyes to there being no certainty in that. 

[nakymaton]

Truth is... I could never keep straight who was a bucket and who was a coffee pot; that symbolism never worked for me either. I think the bucket-kicking/coffee-pot-dropping was also more to give a sort of rhythm to scenes; many of the background actions in the movie (whether water flowing or people riding horses or wind blowing) have a continuous feel to them -- they are the sort of thing that could lull a person to sleep easily. Many of the themes in the score have a flowing sort of feel to them, as well. Things like kicking a bucket or help pull the audience's attention toward Ennis.

That's what they do for me, anyway. They set a time and place, and they give the characters things they can interact with.

As for dirt: I'm not going to get into a symbolic discussion of dirt. I happen to like dirt; to me, dirt = real.

[fernly]

Far as symbols go....I've heard more than one writer at readings or seminars respond to a question about a symbol by saying something like....no, in that particular case the symbol wasn't intentional, but sure it works that way and they wish they had thought of it consciously.
I'm in the camp of believing a lot of the symbols in the movie were intentional (Jack using the axe and Ennis the saw, for example). There are plenty that I don't think were (the water sloshing out of the buckets as Jack carries them, for instance) but they still make sense to me personally, and the analysis y'all have done on them has certainly enriched my experience of the film.

[Meryl]

Now, obviously there's plenty of room for argument. Nobody knows what the filmmakers' intentions were, and we can read all kinds of things all kinds of different ways. And it's even possible that sometimes it really does mean nothing, that something's just there because it's there.

When something is working and the juices are flowing, many, many things can fall into place that are just "right."  As Jeff Wrangler pointed out so tellingly a few posts above:

Tell you what. The truth is, sometimes I feel that if someone sat down and deliberately planned everything in this film in which someone somewhere has seen symbolism or significance, we'd still be waiting for the film to be made.

I tend to agree with this poster over at IMDb, nonon99 99, who wrote this in my "Brokeback and the Number 3" thread:

Often the creator himself doesn't know more about his work than us do. Artist who has sufficient traning just creates automatically in a way he feels comfortable with, as Ang Lee said 'I do it from my heart'. But that the artist isn't conscious doesn't mean systematic things in a work do not exist. This phenomena always happenes in classical music. Academic music analysist will figure out the structure, harmornic system, etc of a piece of music in a very meticulous way while the composer himself is more guided by his ears. This is a mystery of all great arts.

I'm sure the final product is a combination of Ang Lee's genius and meticulous attention to detail and what nonon said, that much of it is unconscious.  This film feels like it has bubbled up out of the mass psyche to speak to an infinite number of aspects of soul and heart.  It is a mystery, and I think that none of us are sorry about that.  It gives us so much to explore and discuss and wonder at!  Thousands and thousands of posts, and we're no closer to a consensus, other than that there's a whole lot there to love. 

[Front-Ranger]

I think we have to go back to the original story. Annie Proulx wrote that the story went through more than 60 edits! That's a lot of edits for a short story! Watching the movie, I noticed some things that looked like they might be symbolic: the colors, the pickup trucks, the star on the barn door, soup and beans, etc. When I went back to the story to see if they were there too, sure enough, I found almost all of them! Some motifs are more fully developed in the story than in the movie and vice versa. But you can definitely see the director's mind at work. He and his team (I'm thinking Diana Ossana was very much involved in this too) sat down with the story and diagrammed it out, with instructions to the wardrobe people, the props people, the set designer, etc. as to how the themes could be carried out in their respective areas. The script shows this process in evolution--it has some themes that are less developed than in the movie and other themes that were discarded later.

[serious crayons]

Far as symbols go....I've heard more than one writer at readings or seminars respond to a question about a symbol by saying something like....no, in that particular case the symbol wasn't intentional, but sure it works that way and they wish they had thought of it consciously.

Exactly! It's  possible to interpet a symbol differently than the artist intended. Or see a symbol the artist didn't intend at all. Or find a symbol not consciously intended by the artist, but maybe subconsciously. In my own writing, I sometimes go back over earlier drafts and think, wait a minute! There are lots of hotels and motels here, and they change over the years in much the way the family in the story changes over the years (real example). So in subsequent drafts I might try to emphasize that by tweaking the descriptions, strengthening the connections, using hotel-related analogy in places where I might otherwise use some other kind of analogy. In that case, maybe in many uses of symbolism, the idea started out in my subconscious -- and, because that particular piece happened to be a nonfiction essay, also in real life -- but was quite consciously developed afterward.

In doing this, I would try not to make the hotels stand out so obviously that the reader gets bonked in the head with A Symbol. And symbols probably shouldn't be things dragged in from outer space that wouldn't otherwise fit  naturally into the context. Like, in Brokeback, fountain pens or champagne glasses wouldn't be good symbols (I started to say "roses," but then -- oops! they are!). To work well, symbols should be subtle, ideally entering the audience's unconscious the same way they emerged from the creator's unconscious.

But you can consciously find symbols become often they keep reappearing, or because they appear in contexts that are just slightly ... unusual. So coffee pots: Ennis is washing a coffee pot when he looks up with concern at Jack riding across the mountain. Ennis bangs on a coffee pot while Jack sings Water Walkin Jesus. Ennis sees a coffee pot and bucket when he opens the tent the morning after TS1 and looks out at his new world. Ennis says all the traveling he's done is around a coffee pot looking for the handle (colorful phrase, but strange). In the flashback, the camera pauses momentarily on a coffee pot and bucket, resting cozily side by side over the fire. In Ennis' trailer,  a coffee pot is prominently set on his stove (sort of like the big fan on his bed).

Do any of these call attention to themselves? No (except, arguably, the traveling one). Do any seem artificially inserted in the movie to Mean Something? No. What to make of the scenes where Alma suggests Jack come in for coffee and when Mrs. Twist serves Ennis coffee and even when Ennis and Alma Jr. have coffee -- are those somehow related? Who knows. Maybe. Or maybe they're there just because Wyomingians drink coffee. Really good symbols, I think, are often a bit ambiguous and arguable and even abstract.

Could all of these coffee pot images be utterly coincidental and meaningless or just there to provide continuity? Not in my view. But if you prefer to see them that way, or if they don't work for you or enhance your appreciation of the movie, feel free to ignore them!

[Front-Ranger]

Hmm, I would love to read your hotel/motel piece. Is it fiction or nonfiction?

[Front-Ranger]

Continuing to look at the messier elements in this story and film... Jack first brings up the stink of rotting lightning struck sheep and we're off! On the mountain that first morning, "the cold air sweetened" when the sun came up. But as the sun goes down again, Jack is bitching about the smell of the pup tent. On another night, Ennis (who is a good singer in the story, but doesn't like to sing in the movie) knows the salty words to a song, but after TS1 they were "flying in the euphoric, bitter air." The coming storm from the Pacific brings a metallic smell to the mountain, and Aguirre has a sour look for them.

In the earlier days of his married life, Ennis found the smells of milk et al comforting. But he liked even more the "faint sweetness" like grass that Jack exuded during the reunion scene. Proulx cranks up the smells to their highest during the Motel Siesta scene, even bringing in sour hay. Ennis's reaction to Jack's return "scares the piss out of" him, and Jack thinks back to Aguirre's last envious words of sweet smelling roses. Then comes the sweetest moment, when Jack tells Ennis of "the sweet life" they could have with a little cow & calf operation. But Ennis responds by telling him the horrendous story of a man he had seen who had been killed and who had no nose.

Finally, Alma finds her words and labels Jack "Nasty." Jack and Ennis continued to meet in the mountains, where the bitter juniper is crushed under their horses' hooves. Jack is bitter too, his words "I did once" are bitter and accusatory. Later, Ma Twist offers Ennis a cup of coffee (bitter) and a piece of cherry cake (sweet). He takes the coffee and spurns the cake. He is left with just the memory of a scent when he finds the shirts, although he buries his nose in their fabric. Proulx uses all the senses available to her to bring the story to life, harnessing the sweet and the sour to color the personalities, the feelings, and the motivations of the characters. The movie enlarges this theme, adding a scene at the end where Ennis breathes in the scent of Alma Jr. as he folds his daughter's sweater that she leaves behind.

[Front-Ranger]

Jack is also the last to bring up olfactory issues in the movie as he wonders to Randall why a woman would want to powder her nose just before going home to go to bed. Then, Lureen's account of Jack''s death has his nose being broken by an exploding tire.

[malina]

In the short story, when Ennis finds the shirts and inhales their scent:

<<He pressed his face into the fabric and breathed in slowly through his mouth and nose, hoping for the faintest smoke and mountain sage and salty sweet stink of Jack>>

When I first read that I didn't like the use of the word 'stink', even qualified by 'salty sweet'. I guess I would've preferred something neutral and unchallenging like 'scent' or 'smell'.

I still have trouble with it. I guess I want to be able to imagine cozying up to Jack and I don't want him to be stinky.

BUT.. I wholeheartedly applaud Annie Proulx for phrasing it like this. It's real, not a polished and stylized representation of love. It doesn't matter that I have trouble with it. The visceral quality of the messiness and smelliness is part of what brings Jack and Ennis to life.

Btw, this is off-topic but the movie and my obsession with it have made my life messier than I'd bargained for too. And.. as a very general observation.. love messes things up. Maybe all the specific messes are reflections and manifestations of that.

[Front-Ranger]

I join you in applauding Annie Proulx for making us think about certain words in a different way. I truly never thought swear words would have the exalted place they have taken on in my lexicon. Large words like asphyxiate bring me so much pleasure that I go out of my way to use them. And stink is now a term of endearment. Yay Annie, and Ang, for messing up my life, or at least my vocabulary, something royally!! 

[Front-Ranger]

I'm still not done with smells, but I have to go back to spitting just for a moment. Recall how L.D. Newsome insists that his grandson is "the spitting image of his granddaddy?" Nice use of obscure regional sayings pressed into service to advance the metaphors!

[moremojo]

In the short story, when Ennis finds the shirts and inhales their scent:

<<He pressed his face into the fabric and breathed in slowly through his mouth and nose, hoping for the faintest smoke and mountain sage and salty sweet stink of Jack>>

When I first read that I didn't like the use of the word 'stink', even qualified by 'salty sweet'. I guess I would've preferred something neutral and unchallenging like 'scent' or 'smell'.

I still have trouble with it. I guess I want to be able to imagine cozying up to Jack and I don't want him to be stinky.

BUT.. I wholeheartedly applaud Annie Proulx for phrasing it like this. It's real, not a polished and stylized representation of love. It doesn't matter that I have trouble with it. The visceral quality of the messiness and smelliness is part of what brings Jack and Ennis to life.

Note also how Ennis takes comfort in the rancid or earthy smells of his menage with Alma and the babies--a world of odor that reminds him of the fecund cycle of life. The motel scene is also described in terms of raunchy odor, and Ennis and Jack are seen to be very much at home here.

I don't it's very unusual for gay men to find the smells of men (even smells that veer into the fetid) appealing (I'm certainly one of them), and I think Annie was spot-on in intimating this element of Ennis's personality. It's also interesting  how Jack is remembered in terms of smells of nature, as if he belonged, in both body and spirit, to the mountain that fed the boys' dreams.

[serious crayons]

<<He pressed his face into the fabric and breathed in slowly through his mouth and nose, hoping for the faintest smoke and mountain sage and salty sweet stink of Jack>>

When I first read that I didn't like the use of the word 'stink', even qualified by 'salty sweet'. I guess I would've preferred something neutral and unchallenging like 'scent' or 'smell'.

I also think it's another case of Annie inserting something jarring to undercut the sentimentality of an otherwise mushy moment.

[Front-Ranger]

You're right, Katherine, and so well expressed!

[serious crayons]

Why thanks, FRiend! (imagine nonexistent blushing smiley here)

[nakymaton]

About "stink":

Yes, it's Annie undercutting the mushiness of the moment. But I think it's also a way to keep developing the characters through the descriptions. It's part of drawing Ennis as a guy with rough edges, and a guy who's attracted to Jack's masculinity.

I love the word "stink" in that sentence. I think it's a great word choice, and I don't think the story would be as effective if it had used a more neutral or romantic-sounding word in its place.

[serious crayons]

Me, I probably would prefer "smell." But I would choose stink over scent, fragrance, odor, aroma, stench or bouquet.

 

(I never know if that smiley is supposed to be drooling or gagging, but in this case I guess either works.)

[nakymaton]

Katherine, you just like things a little on the mushier side than I do. (See the "I love you" discussion. )

It's also interesting  how Jack is remembered in terms of smells of nature, as if he belonged, in both body and spirit, to the mountain that fed the boys' dreams.

You know, I think that plays a part in developing Ennis's character, too. He associates love with earthy smells, outdoor smells, mountain smells. (And he's at his most content with Alma when he's associating his family life with animals and ranching, too.)

During the first few months after the movie came out, I used to rant and rant about people who said "why didn't they just move to San Francisco?" It drove me crazy... yes, in a city Ennis might be able to live with Jack, but he would lose something else that he loved. (I imagine a city boy would describe his lover's scent in different ways, even if he liked the same kinds of masculine smells?)

[serious crayons]

Katherine, you just like things a little on the mushier side than I do. (See the "I love you" discussion.

I've noticed that. On the other hand, Missy, I think anyone who is on this site every day must have just a bit of a taste for mushiness -- even if it's understated, obfuscated, rugged mushiness!

(I imagine a city boy would describe his lover's scent in different ways, even if he liked the same kinds of masculine smells?)

If Annie Proulx were writing it, City Ennis would be "hoping for the faintest bus exhaust and subway stairs ..."

Speaking of smells, Delalluvia wrote something smell-related a long time ago that was so evocative I had to do a search so I could quote it here:

They've been roughing it in the mountains for weeks, they clean as best they can, but they're still going to smell of earth, sheep and horses, their own bodies and male lust, the tent is going to have its own odor, mildew and dampness, the scent of pinyon pine from the trees, the smell of woodsmoke on their skin and in their hair...

Whew! Now I need an "is it hot in here?" smiley!

[Front-Ranger]

  Isn't this it??

[delalluvia]

I don't know how I missed this thread the first time out.

Yes, I love the way Proulx uses 'stink'.  Men in Ennis and Jack's line of work don't bathe that often - especially in 1963 - and if they do, rarely could they afford deoderant, so yes, they did stink after a hard day's labor.

The short story is majorly Ennis POV.  So Ennis is not about to describe another man's personal effluvia with such soft-pedaled words as 'scent', 'odor', 'fragrance' or what have you.  Jack stinks after a normal day's work - though in the short story we do wonder about Jack's personal hygiene after he's married Lureen and comes up to Riverton after 4 years.  He's a businessman by then and you'd think he'd be a little cleaner.

Or else, his scent is simply familiar and Ennis is so overcome with joy and memory at their reunion that just the scent of Jack - whether mild or strong - evokes their time on the mountain for Ennis.  People do have an individual scent, no matter how well they clean. 

So Jack has a personal smell and Ennis, attune to everything in the natural world, not only recognizes his scent, it is as wonderful to him as any perfume.

[serious crayons]

People do have an individual scent, no matter how well they clean.

Glad to see you here, Del! You obviously know your smells. (I hope that doesn't sound too weird.  )

Not only do people have individual scents, but if you love someone you usually love their stink, too. Hard to tell which is the chicken and which is the egg -- maybe it's their stink that attracts you in the first place.

[delalluvia]

Glad to see you here, Del! You obviously know your smells. (I hope that doesn't sound too weird.  )

Not only do people have individual scents, but if you love someone you usually love their stink, too. Hard to tell which is the chicken and which is the egg -- maybe it's their stink that attracts you in the first place.

Sorry I haven't been around much, been badly under the weather for a couple of weeks now.

Not weird at all.  I'm a nature girl.  I do love scents.  One of my favorite times is when you wake up with your lover in the morning w/ or w/o having made love the night before.  I love the way guys smell.

Nice........

[Penthesilea]

Not only do people have individual scents, but if you love someone you usually love their stink, too. Hard to tell which is the chicken and which is the egg -- maybe it's their stink that attracts you in the first place.

Yep. Thinking of pheromones, we don't know how much of what we call "attraction" is caused by them.

And regarding the use of the word stink: I love it. I love how Annie Proulx doesn't mince matters and is frank and outspoken in her descriptions of smells.
It's how the world is and how people are: messy at times. And people stink at times.
We often stated how real this movie feels, how real Ennis and Jack are for us. In the story, these descriptions play a part in creating this feeling of authenticity. It's not only for the purpose of undercutting sentimental mushiness.

Or else, his scent is simply familiar and Ennis is so overcome with joy and memory at their reunion that just the scent of Jack - whether mild or strong - evokes their time on the mountain for Ennis.  People do have an individual scent, no matter how well they clean. 

So Jack has a personal smell and Ennis, attune to everything in the natural world, not only recognizes his scent, it is as wonderful to him as any perfume.

Beautiful said, Mel. I can relate to Ennis on this. The familiar scent of a beloved person is something wonderful. And if it turns into something stronger than scent  = stink, I don't care. When my husband comes close to me after a day of labour in hot summer, it's all HIM.
And when he's on a business trip, I like to take his blanket, course it smells like HIM.

Reminds me of  Ennis sniffing at Junior's sweater. It's so typical Ennis and I love it. (I didn't re-read the whole thread, don't know if it's already mentioned here)

[Front-Ranger]

Another topic. I was just thinking recently about the scene where two Texans call Jack a "pissant" in front of his wife. And Jack complains of having to sleep in a tent that smells like cat piss, and also relieves himself in the woods before flicking his belt buckle in front of Ennis. What does this mean to the story, I wonder? Any ideas?

[Penthesilea]

Another topic. I was just thinking recently about the scene where two Texans call Jack a "pissant" in front of his wife. And Jack complains of having to sleep in a tent that smells like cat piss, and also relieves himself in the woods before flicking his belt buckle in front of Ennis. What does this mean to the story, I wonder? Any ideas?

More peeing (I didn't check if it was mentioned on this thread before):

Jack's father pi§§ed on him when he was a boy.
Ennis pees in the sink in the prologue.

(And let's not forget the peeing sheep  )

I think the peeing adds to the story's realism as much as other things mentioned on this thread. And, again, it's Proulx-like: rough worded, unsentimental.

[delalluvia]

More peeing (I didn't check if it was mentioned on this thread before):

Jack's father pi§§ed on him when he was a boy.
Ennis pees in the sink in the prologue.

(And let's not forget the peeing sheep  )

I think the peeing adds to the story's realism as much as other things mentioned on this thread. And, again, it's Proulx-like: rough worded, unsentimental.

I agree.  It's just clear observation.  People are animals.  They stink, piss and when they mess around with anal sex, you get the scent of shit as well.  Hard facts.  Doesn't detract from them as humans though.

[horo35]

Another topic. I was just thinking recently about the scene where two Texans call Jack a "pissant" in front of his wife. And Jack complains of having to sleep in a tent that smells like cat piss, and also relieves himself in the woods before flicking his belt buckle in front of Ennis. What does this mean to the story, I wonder? Any ideas?

Sorry Front but is that a serious question??  About all the pee in the story?? lol  Dont mean to laugh but sounds funny.  If it is serious I guess I really didn't think about something like that when I've seen or read the story.

[Front-Ranger]

Yes, horo, it was a serious question, but if it made you laugh, then it accomplished two good purposes! I especially wonder at the scene where the two geezers call Jack a pissant. What is that all about, anyway??

[horo35]

Mmm..well pissant is actually a word..means: "one that is insignificant -- used as a generalized term of abuse" And it definately comes from the word piss/urine.  The big question is did Annie mean to use these references to urine in the story?  Is there a meaning/connection? I suspect there really is no connection...but if there is i would have to agree with Penthesileas' quote: "I think the peeing adds to the story's realism as much as other things mentioned on this thread. And, again, it's Proulx-like: rough worded, unsentimental."
That's all I have to say about this subject...now if you'll excuse me I have to go to the bathroom!

[Front-Ranger]

Does it mean like, pissing on an ant? Cause if it does, that calls to mind the terrible experience Jack had as a child when his father actually pissed on him. Another thing along these lines. There is a lot of pissing associated with Jack but not a lot associated with Ennis. This seems in character, because Jack is associated with liquids in general, while Ennis's element is earth or stone (or fire). But the one time we see Ennis urinating is in the prolog, when he pisses in the sink after dreaming about Jack. This reminds me of the scene where Alma turns on the spigots of the sink and they seem to "call forth from their domestic cousin" to the wild waters of the mountain stream.

[coffeecat33]

here's an interesting definition I found for piss ants under "pests"...

Pissants, Piss Ants
Odorous Ants, Piss Ants, Sugar Ants

In the United States, any small or tiny ant that infests a home is often labeled as a Pissant or piss ant.  An actual Pissant is an ant that lives in certain European forests and gets its name from the odor produce by its nesting material - pine straw and pine needles.  Middle English pissemyre : pisse, urine (from the smell of the formic acid that ants secrete); piss + mire, ant (probably of Scandinavian origin; akin to Danish myre).

[Front-Ranger]

Question for the day: What kind of scent would Ennis wear? (I'm Xmas gift shopping) I'm envisaging a musk-based scent with top notes of salty-sweet mountain air, cigarette smoke, ozone, with a long finish of freshly-sythed green grass. Anybody know where I can get such an item??

[Marge_Innavera]

Yes, I love the way Proulx uses 'stink'.  Men in Ennis and Jack's line of work don't bathe that often - especially in 1963 - and if they do, rarely could they afford deoderant, so yes, they did stink after a hard day's labor.

The short story is majorly Ennis POV.  So Ennis is not about to describe another man's personal effluvia with such soft-pedaled words as 'scent', 'odor', 'fragrance' or what have you.  Jack stinks after a normal day's work - though in the short story we do wonder about Jack's personal hygiene after he's married Lureen and comes up to Riverton after 4 years.  He's a businessman by then and you'd think he'd be a little cleaner.

Ennis mainly saw Jack in a wilderness setting, first during that summer on Brokeback and later on camping trips. We can assume that Jack was much cleaner when he was at home and in sales situations.

Also, I remember 1963 clearly enough to know that plumbing, soap and deodorants were quite adequate then. It wasn't exactly the medieval era.

[Front-Ranger]

Today I'm thinking about the prologue and it's interesting that Jack pees in the woods (with firelight glittering in the arched stream), while Ennis pees in a sink.

[moremojo]

Today I'm thinking about the prologue and it's interesting that Jack pees in the woods (with firelight glittering in the arched stream), while Ennis pees in a sink.

In the short story, we read of both young men urinating in each other's presence on the mountain, with the liquid sparkling golden in the fire's light. In the film, interestingly enough, we only ever bear witness to Jack urinating (more inferred than actually seen), and it is indeed on the mountain. I think in both story and film, the act of urinating in the presence of the other might suggest the great comfort the two men feel with each other.

All acts of urination in the story seem to be tinged with an air of the illicit or the gauche: Ennis relieving himself in the sink (suggesting gaucheness or laziness), the two lads letting loose on Brokeback (illustrating freedom from restraint), and Old Man Twist's humiliating inundation of his young son (an abusive act redolent of contempt and sexual sadism).

[Front-Ranger]

From the story's prologue:

[Ennis] gets up, scratching the grey wedge of belly and pubic hair, shuffles to the gas burner, pours leftover coffee in a chipped enamel pan; the flame swathes it in blue. He turns on the tap and urinates in the sink, pulls on his shirt and jeans, his worn boots, stamping the heels against the floor to get them full on.

This starts the story out on a depressing note. Ennis is a washed up guy who shuffles, settles for warmed over leftover coffee, pees in the sink, and hurriedly pulls on worn boots. The only thing that stands out here is the flame that swathes the coffee in its blue flame. Blue is a reminder of Jack, and the flame tells us that Ennis still carries the torch for Jack after all these years.

[moremojo]

Ennis is a washed up guy who shuffles, settles for warmed over leftover coffee, pees in the sink, and hurriedly pulls on worn boots.

Notice how no mention is made of Ennis donning underwear or socks, just as years (decades) earlier, Jack noted their absence when Ennis undressed in preparation for bathing on Brokeback. This adds emphasis to Ennis's poverty throughout his life.

Blue is a reminder of Jack,...

Blue is very much associated with movie-Jack, but is the story's character specifically linked to this color? (I'm sorry, I don't have the short story in front of me, and cannot recall such this specific element right now).

[HerrKaiser]

Obviously, the short story came first, and in spite of the author's endorsement of the screenplay, had Larry McMurtry not done his Hollywoodization and had Lee not selected two young, very attractive men to play the roles, I think the love affair the the film, and Ledger and Gyllenhall specifically, would be much less.

neither man was as the book described them to be physically, in terms of standard sex appeal. So, it is hard to compare such aspects from the story vs the screenplay, in my opinion.

[Front-Ranger]

Notice how no mention is made of Ennis donning underwear or socks, just as years (decades) earlier, Jack noted their absence when Ennis undressed in preparation for bathing on Brokeback. This adds emphasis to Ennis's poverty throughout his life.

Blue is very much associated with movie-Jack, but is the story's character specifically linked to this color? (I'm sorry, I don't have the short story in front of me, and cannot recall such this specific element right now).

Yes, I did notice this Scott, and I thought it was interesting that the author implies that Ennis sleeps in the buff. For some citations to blue and Jack in the story, see posts in this topic over on the Arts & Entertainment forum.

Generally, I have been struck by how often I have noticed something in the movie and when I went back to the story, it's in the story too!!

[Penthesilea]

Notice how no mention is made of Ennis donning underwear or socks, just as years (decades) earlier, Jack noted their absence when Ennis undressed in preparation for bathing on Brokeback. This adds emphasis to Ennis's poverty throughout his life.Blue is very much associated with movie-Jack, but is the story's character specifically linked to this color? (I'm sorry, I don't have the short story in front of me, and cannot recall such this specific element right now).

Yes, I did notice this Scott, and I thought it was interesting that the author implies that Ennis sleeps in the buff. For some citations to blue and Jack in the story, see posts in this topic over on the Arts & Entertainment forum.

Good observation Scott about Ennis not donning underwear or socks. I hadn't nocticed it.

But could it be that he just slept in his underwear and therefore didn't don it in the morning? I always had an image on my mind of Ennis in drawers and tank-top undershirt, pushing the undershirt up while scratching his belly.
Maybe that's just because this is what men do. This is how I am used to seeing men: sleeping in their underware, yawning and scratching their belly (must be their second favorite thing to do after grabbing their private parts    ).

But after your posts I read the first sentences again and now I think you are both right

Generally, I have been struck by how often I have noticed something in the movie and when I went back to the story, it's in the story too!!

I hear you FRiend. Just five minutes ago, while re-reading the first sentences of the prologue, I had another revelation of something I had seen in the movie, but had not noticed in the story yet. Just looking for a thread where it fits in.

[Front-Ranger]

Maybe that's just because this is what men do. This is how I am used to seeing men: sleeping in their underware, yawning and scratching their belly (must be their second favorite thing to do after grabbing their private parts    ).

I thought it was farting??

Looking forward to seeing your new topic, Chrissi!!

[Marge_Innavera]

Obviously, the short story came first, and in spite of the author's endorsement of the screenplay, had Larry McMurtry not done his Hollywoodization and had Lee not selected two young, very attractive men to play the roles, I think the love affair the the film, and Ledger and Gyllenhall specifically, would be much less.

neither man was as the book described them to be physically, in terms of standard sex appeal. So, it is hard to compare such aspects from the story vs the screenplay, in my opinion.

I've had my moments of getting het-up about a favorite book being changed for a film. But they are two different media, and what works in one wouldn't work in another. IMO the casting as well as the slight change in the ending was less "Hollywoodization" than it was adaptation; e.g., the story was a very bleak one and with the added impact of sound and visuals that a movie brings, what was haunting in the story could be very off-putting in the film.

It was a matter of making choices as to what they wanted to do. If Ang Lee et al. had wanted a limited run in small theatres they would have done it a different way and the film would have been more 'purist' but I doubt it would be so extensively discussed and I'm not sure that anyone would be saying they were inspired or their lives changed by it.

[Marge_Innavera]

And regarding the use of the word stink: I love it. I love how Annie Proulx doesn't mince matters and is frank and outspoken in her descriptions of smells.
It's how the world is and how people are: messy at times. And people stink at times.
We often stated how real this movie feels, how real Ennis and Jack are for us. In the story, these descriptions play a part in creating this feeling of authenticity. It's not only for the purpose of undercutting sentimental mushiness.

The story had a much lesser impact on me than the film, but one of the parts that intrigued me was Annie's reference to the smells in the del Mar apartment right after Alma Junior is born: blood, dirty diapers, etc.  She uses a turn of phrase that suggests a less than pleasant smell, but Ennis, she tells us, is a man who works around livestock and finds that rather reassuring and familiar.

[ednbarby]

It was a matter of making choices as to what they wanted to do. If Ang Lee et al. had wanted a limited run in small theatres they would have done it a different way and the film would have been more 'purist' but I doubt it would be so extensively discussed and I'm not sure that anyone would be saying they were inspired or their lives changed by it.

Excellent point, Marge.  Had I read the story first, I'd have envisioned very different people as those characters.  Neither of them would have been handsome, per ce, but they would have had a certain winsomeness that would justify them both being able to marry attractive women and in one case, an attractive woman with a lot of money.  I agree that had the filmmakers gone with relative unknowns and been more true to the story in that sense, we first of all would not be here right now having this discussion.  Nor would it have gotten any notice from any awards-giving entity except for film festivals and perhaps the Independent Spirit Awards, and thus people would have never talked about it like they have let alone still be talking about it.

I saw a lovely, lovely film a couple weeks ago called "Sweet Land."  It was a first-time film from the director and had two relative unknowns playing the leads.  And while it had a few names with some indie cred like Alan Cumming, Ned Beatty, Lois Smith, and Alex Kingston in peripheral roles, it was never going to be a theater blockbuster.  That's a shame because it was a really lovely film and a beautiful love story.  This movie would have had the same fate had Ang Lee gone with lesser-known and perhaps less universally attractive actors.  I'm thankful that he/they didn't.  And though I can't speak for her, I believe Annie is, too.

[Penthesilea]

I thought it was farting??

 
Okay, belly scratching comes third place 

Looking forward to seeing your new topic, Chrissi!!

I didn't open a new topic. I put it in the "Jack and the wind"-thread. Here: http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,1097.msg157925.html#msg157925

[HerrKaiser]

Excellent point, Marge.  Had I read the story first, I'd have envisioned very different people as those characters.  Neither of them would have been handsome, per ce, but they would have had a certain winsomeness that would justify them both being able to marry attractive women and in one case, an attractive woman with a lot of money.  I agree that had the filmmakers gone with relative unknowns and been more true to the story in that sense, we first of all would not be here right now having this discussion.  Nor would it have gotten any notice from any awards-giving entity except for film festivals and perhaps the Independent Spirit Awards, and thus people would have never talked about it like they have let alone still be talking about it.

I think you and marge are making, indirectly, the point I am suggesting...that to try to make direct comparisons between the book and the film can be muttled because of the effect of the VERY attractive film version of Ennis and Jack vs the not so versions in the book. Their attractiveness in the book was empathetic, sympathitic, and somewhat pathetic, but not romantic and erotic per se. the film was hollywoodized with the two of the keys to successful film making--great looking people and audience appeal.

[Front-Ranger]

Let's talk about guts, shall we? When Jack cuts loose in the rodeo/fuck-ups scene, he says, "I'm spurrin his guts out!" (meaning the horse's) But, sadly, we see a portent of his future fate due to not spurs but a tire iron 

And Ennis, for his part, talks of the gut cramps he had after he and Jack parted, thinking he musta ate something bad in DuBois. But instead he had something very very good with de boi and he let it go.   

[Marge_Innavera]

I think you and marge are making, indirectly, the point I am suggesting...that to try to make direct comparisons between the book and the film can be muttled because of the effect of the VERY attractive film version of Ennis and Jack vs the not so versions in the book. Their attractiveness in the book was empathetic, sympathitic, and somewhat pathetic, but not romantic and erotic per se. the film was hollywoodized with the two of the keys to successful film making--great looking people and audience appeal.

They are no less sympathetic for being physically attractive. The term "hollywoodized" isn't a magic incantation, believe it or not.

[Marge_Innavera]

Excellent point, Marge.  Had I read the story first, I'd have envisioned very different people as those characters.  Neither of them would have been handsome, per ce, but they would have had a certain winsomeness that would justify them both being able to marry attractive women and in one case, an attractive woman with a lot of money.  I agree that had the filmmakers gone with relative unknowns and been more true to the story in that sense, we first of all would not be here right now having this discussion.  Nor would it have gotten any notice from any awards-giving entity except for film festivals and perhaps the Independent Spirit Awards, and thus people would have never talked about it like they have let alone still be talking about it.

That's true. It would have been an obscure film that would have changed few, if anyone's lives. But in the eyes of many, it would have retained its moral purity for not being "Hollywoodized."   

As much as I liked the story, it did not have the effect on me that the film did. That's no disrespect to the story, but that's how it happened.  And I have to wonder if a penniless man who looked like Jack is described in the book could have married into money; it would have been a double whammy.  Puts me in mind of the classic WKRP In Cincinnatti exchange between part-time-receptionist-full-time-courtesan Jennifer and a scruffy older man:

SOM: I'm a lot younger than I look!
Jennifer: Are you any richer than you look?

[Front-Ranger]

Let's talk about guts, shall we? When Jack cuts loose in the rodeo/fuck-ups scene, he says, "I'm spurrin his guts out!" (meaning the horse's) But, sadly, we see a portent of his future fate due to not spurs but a tire iron 

And Ennis, for his part, talks of the gut cramps he had after he and Jack parted, thinking he musta ate something bad in DuBois. But instead he had something very very good with de boi and he let it go.   

Two other instances where guts are mentioned: At the Siesta Motel, Jack says that his new father-in-law hates his guts. I wonder if the mention of guts reminds Ennis of the grisly sight he saw on the morning after Tent Scene 1, when he left the dogs to babysit the sheep too long. And it's a sure thing that seeing the eviscerated sheep certainly gave him a flash back to the time he was nine years old...

[Brown Eyes]

Two other instances where guts are mentioned: At the Siesta Motel, Jack says that his new father-in-law hates his guts. I wonder if the mention of guts reminds Ennis of the grisly sight he saw on the morning after Tent Scene 1, when he left the dogs to babysit the sheep too long. And it's a sure thing that seeing the eviscerated sheep certainly gave him a flash back to the time he was nine years old...

Yes, I think there's a big equation made between the mutilated sheep (a victim of "predator loss") after TS1 and Jack and Earl.  It's interesting that the language about "guts" exists to such a strong degree in the film and the story too.  I'd never noticed that before!
 

But, I've always thought that an equation was set up between the vulnerable sheep and gay men (i.e. Jack and Earl) in BBM.  I think the film tries to visually set this equation between Jack and sheep up through the quick jump between the dead sheep and Jack's naked, shivering body by the stream.  And, also things like the nice scene of Jack holding the sheep in his lap trying to get something out of its hoof.  Ennis is just sitting in the background watching the flock... which in some way includes Jack here due to his proximity and involvement with the sheep.  Anyway, Earl is clearly a victim of "predator loss" (the gang of murderers).  And, Ennis believes that this is Jack's fate too.  And, the reason that Jack dies is that Ennis wasn't there to protect him (too far away... not looking after his "sheep" properly).  Ennis believes himself to be the protector and I think that comes out very clearly in the language used by Proulx to describe Ennis's anger that no one was there to roll Jack over following the attack/accident.  I also think that Ennis's feeling of responsibility towards sheep in the sense that he sees himself as the protector... comes in the statement when he says "we're supposed to guard the sheep not eat them."

 

[Front-Ranger]

an equation was set up between the vulnerable sheep and gay men (i.e. Jack and Earl) in BBM.  I think the film tries to visually set this equation between Jack and sheep up through the quick jump between the dead sheep and Jack's naked, shivering body by the stream.  And, also things like the nice scene of Jack holding the sheep in his lap trying to get something out of its hoof.  Ennis is just sitting in the background watching the flock... which in some way includes Jack here due to his proximity and involvement with the sheep.  Anyway, Earl is clearly a victim of "predator loss" (the gang of murderers).  And, Ennis believes that this is Jack's fate too.  And, the reason that Jack dies is that Ennis wasn't there to protect him (too far away... not looking after his "sheep" properly).  Ennis believes himself to be the protector and I think that comes out very clearly in the language used by Proulx to describe Ennis's anger that no one was there to roll Jack over following the attack/accident.  I also think that Ennis's feeling of responsibility towards sheep in the sense that he sees himself as the protector... comes in the statement when he says "we're supposed to guard the sheep not eat them."

So many insights here, my friend! You are in fine form tonite! I was thinking of the sheep in a rather narrow-minded religious way but you have opened my mind to a new interpretation!

[serious crayons]

But, I've always thought that an equation was set up between the vulnerable sheep and gay men (i.e. Jack and Earl) in BBM.  I think the film tries to visually set this equation between Jack and sheep up through the quick jump between the dead sheep and Jack's naked, shivering body by the stream.  And, also things like the nice scene of Jack holding the sheep in his lap trying to get something out of its hoof.  Ennis is just sitting in the background watching the flock... which in some way includes Jack here due to his proximity and involvement with the sheep.  Anyway, Earl is clearly a victim of "predator loss" (the gang of murderers).  And, Ennis believes that this is Jack's fate too.  And, the reason that Jack dies is that Ennis wasn't there to protect him (too far away... not looking after his "sheep" properly).  Ennis believes himself to be the protector and I think that comes out very clearly in the language used by Proulx to describe Ennis's anger that no one was there to roll Jack over following the attack/accident.  I also think that Ennis's feeling of responsibility towards sheep in the sense that he sees himself as the protector... comes in the statement when he says "we're supposed to guard the sheep not eat them."

So many insights here, my friend! You are in fine form tonite! I was thinking of the sheep in a rather narrow-minded religious way but you have opened my mind to a new interpretation!

Absolutely, A, a really cool post. And like all great insights, it made me think about the movie in a new way, especially something the line about "bad predator loss."

You know how we think about that trailer scene as being a wedding ceremony, with Aguirre being the preacher/God? Well, it just suddenly occurred to me (as maybe it already had to others) that Aguirre also roughly establishes the form the rest of their lives will take: they'll live separately, on the QT.

They'll get together for a couple of high altitude fucks breakfast and dinner, but they'll sleep with the sheep (pretend to follow society's rules) hunderd percent, no fire, don't leave no sign, roll up that tent every morning case the Forest Service snoops around -- that is, pretend not to be doing what they're doing in case the people on the pavement snoop around.

Maybe this is all obvious to other people, but it's the first time I've thought about the wedding/trailer scene in quite this way. I've concentrated on the certificate (they came together on paper) and the vows (No! No! Not on your fucking life!) and the ring (the watch), and walking down the aisle (the steps) and the kiss (the handshake). But I've never thought of the wedding service in terms as literally as this.

Two years in, and it's still going ... 

[Front-Ranger]

You know how we think about that trailer scene as being a wedding ceremony, with Aguirre being the preacher/God? Well, it just suddenly occurred to me (as maybe it already had to others) that Aguirre also roughly establishes the form the rest of their lives will take: they'll live separately, on the QT.

They'll get together for a couple of high altitude fucks breakfast and dinner, but they'll sleep with the sheep (pretend to follow society's rules) hunderd percent, no fire, don't leave no sign, roll up that tent every morning case the Forest Service snoops around -- that is, pretend not to be doing what they're doing in case the people on the pavement snoop around.

Maybe this is all obvious to other people, but it's the first time I've thought about the wedding/trailer scene in quite this way. I've concentrated on the certificate (they came together on paper) and the vows (No! No! Not on your fucking life!) and the ring (the watch), and walking down the aisle (the steps) and the kiss (the handshake). But I've never thought of the wedding service in terms as literally as this.

Yes, and they held their reception at the saloon, and their honeymoon on Brokeback Mountain!! Yee-haw!

Two years in, and it's still going ... 

Isn't this story incredible!! 

[Meryl]

Amanda, Katherine and Lee, you get gold stars for those great insights! 

[Brown Eyes]

Thanks Buds!   This really is an interesting discussion... and it certainly is amazing that after 2+ years there are still new things to think about all the time.

About the dead sheep... last night while thinking about this, I wanted to post a series of film-stills from that sequence.  I think in the movie, we see the dead sheep, then a shot of Ennis's face looking at the sheep, then Ennis looking off in the distance and then a cut to Jack shivering by the stream doing laundry.  But, when I went to Striped Wall, it turns out they don't have a screen cap of the close-up of the mutilated sheep, at least that I was able to find (it seems to have been cut out of their selection).  Also, I've noticed that the Striped Wall website doesn't have all the screen caps for the Childress dinner dance, or even for the opening sequences.  It's interesting, when you know the film so well... you can begin to really get a sense of what's missing there.

Anyway, the shots of Ennis's face inserted between the dead sheep and Jack's naked body are really interesting to me.  In a way, it's like Ennis is the factor here (or his ideas/memory/issues) that creates the equation between the threat of death/violence and Jack (or danger directed towards Jack... and himself too).  At this point, of course, we don't yet know about Earl as film viewers... but the knowledge of Earl for a viewer who's seen the film more than once really can change how the sheep seems to function.  Or, this scene takes on a loaded meaning in hindsight.

Lee, I think the sheep probably also does have a religious connotation.  And, initially, in my first viewings of the dead sheep scene, I thought it was an over-determined symbol for loss of innocense or loss of virginity.

From my perspective, it can be all of these things at once.  And, there are probably many other ways to interpret it as well.

You know how we think about that trailer scene as being a wedding ceremony, with Aguirre being the preacher/God? Well, it just suddenly occurred to me (as maybe it already had to others) that Aguirre also roughly establishes the form the rest of their lives will take: they'll live separately, on the QT.

They'll get together for a couple of high altitude fucks breakfast and dinner, but they'll sleep with the sheep (pretend to follow society's rules) hunderd percent, no fire, don't leave no sign, roll up that tent every morning case the Forest Service snoops around -- that is, pretend not to be doing what they're doing in case the people on the pavement snoop around.

Maybe this is all obvious to other people, but it's the first time I've thought about the wedding/trailer scene in quite this way. I've concentrated on the certificate (they came together on paper) and the vows (No! No! Not on your fucking life!) and the ring (the watch), and walking down the aisle (the steps) and the kiss (the handshake). But I've never thought of the wedding service in terms as literally as this.

Katherine, I think this is just great.  Yes, I think that early trailer scene with Aguirre sets up so much... in terms of patterns and themes for the rest of the film.  I love the analogy with a wedding ceremony, the "negative" vows, etc. And, the fact that the "time line" or the "never enough time" also starts with Aguirre tossing the watch to Ennis.

It's a great observation to note that Aguirre is essentially teaching them/ or requiring them to be secretive and sneaky.  And, definitely all throughout the Brokeback summer and for the rest of their lives we see Ennis and Jack coming and going from each other consistently (lots of greetings and good byes peppered throughout the film).

[optom3]

I read the s.s first then saw the film.I always thought in the s.s that Ennis was almost like Jacks guardian angel/protector, his role being to look after and protect Jack in the same way he looks after the sheep.But I think this protective mode is a counter balance to his inherent vulnerability.

In their last trip there is a beautiful line where Proulx writes "Ennis put his arm round Jack pulled him close"Almost a protective gesture.In both the ss and film there is the dozy embrace scene,where again Ennis holds Jack,keeping him close and safe.
In the motel reunion scene she writes "Ennis pulled Jack's hand to his mouth"
Ennis calls Jack "little darlin" after the reunion kiss. Ennis also admits to Jack that he was ill after comming down from BB, and he realises that he should not have let Jack out of his sight.Once he is out of sight and the protection of Ennis,it is almost as if his fate has been sealed.It is also a very deep thing for Ennis to admit to.It is tantamount to saying I love you.In fact probably even more meaningful.He was sick literally, and emotionally too.

Ennis is the tender one of the two in the short story.Interestingly the only time when Jack tends to Ennis,after the fight,Proulx writes "he laid the ministering angel out".It seems that Ennis wants to be the one doing the "looking after" He does not like it when Jack tends to him.
When he hears about the accident he wants to curse Lureen for "letting Jack die on the dirt road"

It seems that when Ennis is not around to protect Jack, he expects Lureen to do the job for him.Or maybe he just feels so guilty for not being there himself.
It strikes me that Ennis has the deeper love albeit allied with the deeper fear.He does not go with any other men.His love for Jack is his sole male love.There is no one else who can fulfill that need.He even talks at the motel of having "wrang it out a hundred times thinking about you"
There is something very raw and emotionally searing about that statement.For someone as closed as Ennis to admit to something so deeply sexual and personal indicates to me the depth of his love for Jack.

He immediately then seeks reassurance from Jack,saying"you do it with other guys"
That breaks my heart when I read it.It is such a needy thing to ask, and again gives a vulnerability to Ennis.He is in the throes of a very deep love,which he does not understand,and needs some validation from Jack.
He later admits to being scared when he says "there's no reins on this one.It scares the piss out a me"He is so desperately vulnerable here.He is stripped bare,both physically and emotionally, nowhere to hide.So that scene in the s.s is more poignant for me than in the film,where it occurs outside with them both clothed.

Throughout the s.s I always felt that Ennis was far and away the more emotionally vulnerable one, and that his need to protect/look after Jack was a way of counter balancing this vulnerability.

I love the film.and always will.It renders me senseless every time I see it, but I do not get the same sense of vulnerability in Ennis that comes across to me in the s.s. Not until the very end with the shirts. I suspect this done quite deliberately,to save the film becoming too sentimental.That is avoided in the s.s because of Pollux's gritty prose.

Well that is my 2 cents worth,and maybe I would have had a different take had I seen the film first.Who knows.When reading the story I had to rely on the words and my own imagination, which will always differ from someone Else's interpretation.I just wish, and I have said this on other posts that Ennis had called Jack" little darlin" in the film.But maybe coupled with the ending that would just have been way too emotionally draining.

[BlissC]

You know how we think about that trailer scene as being a wedding ceremony, with Aguirre being the preacher/God? Well, it just suddenly occurred to me (as maybe it already had to others) that Aguirre also roughly establishes the form the rest of their lives will take: they'll live separately, on the QT.

They'll get together for a couple of high altitude fucks breakfast and dinner, but they'll sleep with the sheep (pretend to follow society's rules) hunderd percent, no fire, don't leave no sign, roll up that tent every morning case the Forest Service snoops around -- that is, pretend not to be doing what they're doing in case the people on the pavement snoop around.

Maybe this is all obvious to other people, but it's the first time I've thought about the wedding/trailer scene in quite this way. I've concentrated on the certificate (they came together on paper) and the vows (No! No! Not on your fucking life!) and the ring (the watch), and walking down the aisle (the steps) and the kiss (the handshake). But I've never thought of the wedding service in terms as literally as this.

Two years in, and it's still going ... 

I can't believe I've never noticed that before! Duh! It always struck me that Aguirre bringing them down from the mountain early, cutting their summer short, and their time together, and maybe altering the course of how their relationship might have developed had they had longer up on the mountain, but I can't believe I never noticed that with Aguirre's trailer! Must. Pay. Better. Attention.!!! 

I always thought in the s.s that Ennis was almost like Jacks guardian angel/protector, his role being to look after and protect Jack in the same way he looks after the sheep.But I think this protective mode is a counter balance to his inherent vulnerability.

In their last trip there is a beautiful line where Proulx writes "Ennis put his arm round Jack pulled him close"Almost a protective gesture.In both the ss and film there is the dozy embrace scene,where again Ennis holds Jack,keeping him close and safe.
In the motel reunion scene she writes "Ennis pulled Jack's hand to his mouth"
Ennis calls Jack "little darlin" after the reunion kiss. Ennis also admits to Jack that he was ill after comming down from BB, and he realises that he should not have let Jack out of his sight.Once he is out of sight and the protection of Ennis,it is almost as if his fate has been sealed.It is also a very deep thing for Ennis to admit to.It is tantamount to saying I love you.In fact probably even more meaningful.He was sick literally, and emotionally too.

Ennis is the tender one of the two in the short story.Interestingly the only time when Jack tends to Ennis,after the fight,Proulx writes "he laid the ministering angel out".It seems that Ennis wants to be the one doing the "looking after" He does not like it when Jack tends to him.
When he hears about the accident he wants to curse Lureen for "letting Jack die on the dirt road"

It seems that when Ennis is not around to protect Jack, he expects Lureen to do the job for him.Or maybe he just feels so guilty for not being there himself.

I agree Fiona that Ennis is both seen as the protector, and sees himself as the protector, and the fact that in the SS especially we get to see his vulnerability simply adds to the pathos of the whole situation, but in the SS we get the story almost entirely from Ennis's POV. I think though that although in more subtle ways Jack's also protective of Ennis - he doesn't relate the whole of his conversation with Aguirre the summer after the mountain to Ennis, tries to clean up Ennis's cut after he's thrown when the horse is startled by the bear, doesn't tell Ennis about the other men, or later on about Randall, or his trips to Mexico, and probably more I've missed (it's late and I'm getting tired), and though it could be argued he doesn't tell Ennis to protect himself, I think a part of it's wanting to protect Ennis and take care of him in his own small ways, and later, with the things he doesn't tell Ennis protecting Ennis's delicate view of their relationship as "we're not queer". He's certainly not the protector in the same way that Ennis sees himself as "the protector", but he's protective of Ennis.

It strikes me that Ennis has the deeper love albeit allied with the deeper fear.He does not go with any other men.His love for Jack is his sole male love.There is no one else who can fulfill that need.He even talks at the motel of having "wrang it out a hundred times thinking about you"
There is something very raw and emotionally searing about that statement.For someone as closed as Ennis to admit to something so deeply sexual and personal indicates to me the depth of his love for Jack.

He immediately then seeks reassurance from Jack,saying"you do it with other guys"
That breaks my heart when I read it.It is such a needy thing to ask, and again gives a vulnerability to Ennis.He is in the throes of a very deep love,which he does not understand,and needs some validation from Jack.
He later admits to being scared when he says "there's no reins on this one.It scares the piss out a me"He is so desperately vulnerable here.He is stripped bare,both physically and emotionally, nowhere to hide.So that scene in the s.s is more poignant for me than in the film,where it occurs outside with them both clothed.

That scene breaks my heart because even though Ennis asks him outright, and despite his love for Ennis, Jack lies to him. "'Shit no,' said Jack, who had been riding more than bulls, not rolling his own." I guess he's trying to protect Ennis, in the same way he doesn't tell Ennis about his trips to Mexico (though in the end by that point in the story, post-divorce after Ennis 'sends him away', I think there's been a fundamental shift in their relationship), but it still jars. Jack can't admit his need for Ennis and his need to find a "substitute" for Ennis, and neither of them in twenty years manages to outright admit their love in so many words.

Throughout the s.s I always felt that Ennis was far and away the more emotionally vulnerable one, and that his need to protect/look after Jack was a way of counter balancing this vulnerability.

Yep, Jack was definitely the stronger of the two - and I seem to remember that Ennis admits as much at one point, but Jack had his vulnerabilities too, though not so obvious, as discussed in the TOTW the other week. One of the many tragedies though is that though he sees himself as Jack's protector, ultimately his actions and his sending Jack away put Jack in harm's way. Who knows how things might have turned out differently if only?

I just wish, and I have said this on other posts that Ennis had called Jack" little darlin" in the film.But maybe coupled with the ending that would just have been way too emotionally draining.

I don't know about the ending, but I wish they'd left the "little darlin" in the reunion scene. Probably it was felt adding "romantic" stuff in would over-Hollywoodize it without the grittiness of AP's prose, but as it was in the original SS I feel it would have been fitting. Ah well, I guess they had their reasons...

[serious crayons]

I can't believe I've never noticed that before! Duh! It always struck me that Aguirre bringing them down from the mountain early, cutting their summer short, and their time together, and maybe altering the course of how their relationship might have developed had they had longer up on the mountain, but I can't believe I never noticed that with Aguirre's trailer! Must. Pay. Better. Attention.!!! 

But wow, that's a good point, too, BlissC! I'd never made that connection before -- that Aguirre, representing God, cuts short their relationship on the mountain, foreshadowing how the actual God (or Fate, or whatever) cuts short their relationship 20 years later.

[BlissC]

Ain't never enough time...

[Brown Eyes]

But wow, that's a good point, too, BlissC! I'd never made that connection before -- that Aguirre, representing God, cuts short their relationship on the mountain, foreshadowing how the actual God (or Fate, or whatever) cuts short their relationship 20 years later.

I think the idea that Aguirre, at the end of the Brokeback summer, is the force introduces the "paradise lost" element of the story is very good.  Aguirre certainly does represent (at the most basic levels) power and authority (including the power and authority to observe while at the same time not being observed himself).  He sets the whole thing in motion in the beginning trailer scene and he "expels" them from the "paradise" of Brokeback too early towards the end of the summer after they've broken rules (changed jobs, fool around rather than watch the sheep, etc.).  The idea (as stated by Proulx in the story) that Ennis and Jack never return to Brokeback seems really important here.  Brokeback/ the '63 summer is their "lost" Eden or paradise and also the lost "golden age" of their youth when things seemed idyllic.

In that way BBM really does bounce off of some major religious themes and also off of some really Classical themes.  The whole notion of shepherds of course has a lot of religious/poetic resonance, but also reminds me a lot of Classical pastoral imagery (i.e. things like a lost "golden age").

(When I say "religious" here I mean it in a general literary/metaphoric sense more than anything else).

[Front-Ranger]

Anyway, the shots of Ennis's face inserted between the dead sheep and Jack's naked body are really interesting to me.  In a way, it's like Ennis is the factor here (or his ideas/memory/issues) that creates the equation between the threat of death/violence and Jack (or danger directed towards Jack... and himself too).  At this point, of course, we don't yet know about Earl as film viewers... but the knowledge of Earl for a viewer who's seen the film more than once really can change how the sheep seems to function.  Or, this scene takes on a loaded meaning in hindsight.

Lee, I think the sheep probably also does have a religious connotation.  And, initially, in my first viewings of the dead sheep scene, I thought it was an over-determined symbol for loss of innocense or loss of virginity.

From my perspective, it can be all of these things at once.  And, there are probably many other ways to interpret it as well.

Right you are, atz75. I think of the sheep as a sacrifice, like the sacrifice of Christ in the crucifixion, or of the chicken in The Virginian or the Mudge Boy, the Minotaur to Theseus, or like the prized racehorse in The Godfather, to use an eclectic mix of sources. Yes it certainly also stands for loss of innocence but what does that mean really? As far as innocence goes, you may be a sinner, but I ain't yet had the opportunity LOL! Does anybody really mourn the loss of their innocence?? Not me! Likewise virginity. Does anyone really mourn the loss of it? To me that seems like a paternalistic made-up concept. Rather we mourn the loss of an innocent creature that gets caught up in the machinations of man or nature. It doesn't seem fair. But death is a force of nature just like love. They are the flip sides of the coin, which falls at random. Perhaps this is another meaning of the dead sheep, depicting the randomness, the heartlessness, the total lack of mercy of Nature.

Your latest post is also very interesting. I recall the old movie "Aguirre Wrath of God" and Joe Aguirre is definitely a wrathful Jehovah-like person. The scenes you cite support this. And there's also the scene where Aguirre rides up and "fixes Jack with his bold stare" and gives him the news about his relative. Jack takes this omen of the innocent sacrifice of a loved one in stride and Aguirre seems to imply that Jack has the ability to cure illness, just as he seemed to imply earlier that Jack could save the sheep from being struck by lightning if he wanted to. And, glory be, he was right! Uncle Harold didn't die after all!! Aguirre and the slovenly black woman who plays God in The Matrix...we should get them together sometime!!

[serious crayons]

More excellent points, ATZ and F-R!

Aguirre's role is very illustrative of the complexity of symbolism in BBM. Yes, he's God. And on the one hand, he's a benevolent god -- bringing them together, officiating at the wedding, saying nothing after he sees them frolicking. And on the other hand he's a wrathful God -- "No. No. Not on your fucking life!" abruptly casting them out of Paradise (after Ennis shoots that coyote with "balls the size of apples" -- coyotes are kind of the serpents of the Brokeback Eden), generally being a grouch. (In these respects, I guess, Aguirre is like the actual God.) Just goes to show how complicated it is to untangle the sheep metaphors in BBM.

Wonder why Aguirre keeps trying to give Jack the opportunity to perform Christlike miracles (the lightning, Uncle Harold), and Jack keeps disavowing them? BTW, have we ever noted that Jack's account of the mass sheep death is yet one more occurrence of a Jack-and-breathing-related problem ("thought I'd asphyxiate from the smell")?

I recall the old movie "Aguirre Wrath of God"

Pop quiz: How many degrees of separation from "Aguirre Wrath of God" to "Brokeback Mountain"? I can think of a progression with three.

Does anybody really mourn the loss of their innocence?? Not me! Likewise virginity. Does anyone really mourn the loss of it? To me that seems like a paternalistic made-up concept. 

My feeling has always been that this is a parent's perspective. No one mourns the loss of his/her own innocence, but they do mourn watching their children lose theirs, and often try to postpone it as long as they can. In that case, the fig-leaf business -- the awareness of nakedness -- really does tend to segue right in to lost innocence in general. In this sense, as in so many others, the parent casts him/herself in the role of God.

I imagine it's always bittersweet at best, terrifying at worst, to watch your cute little child become a snotty teenage delinquent mature young man or woman.

[BlissC]

Wonder why Aguirre keeps trying to give Jack the opportunity to perform Christlike miracles (the lightning, Uncle Harold), and Jack keeps disavowing them?

Call it a crazy hunch if you like, as I've nothing to back it up with, but I've always wondered if Aguirre sees something of a younger version of himself, perhaps when he had no power, in Jack? He'd employed Jack the previous year, so he couldn't have been that displeased with Jack to hire him again in '63.

[optom3]

Call it a crazy hunch if you like, as I've nothing to back it up with, but I've always wondered if Aguirre sees something of a younger version of himself, perhaps when he had no power, in Jack? He'd employed Jack the previous year, so he couldn't have been that displeased with Jack to hire him again in '63.

I have always had a niggling suspicion about Aguirre.As you point out he had previously hired Jack,so must not have disliked him that much.Also in the S.S he watches Jack and Ennis "for ten minutes,one day witing untill they had buttoned up their jeans,waiting untill Ennis rode back to the sheep,before bringing the message"
Several things bother me about this.
Aguirre has obviously watched them having sex,which seems odd for a totally straight guy.He then waits to get Jack on his own,and finally there is no reprimand for Jack.
Even if we take away the gay aspect,surely if you had just witnessed 2 employees doing anything other than what they were paid for,would you not at least reprimand them both,maybe even fire them.He comes over as such a hard man that this seems at odds with how he reacts.
I cannot believe that anything Proulx writes is without significance.So what am I missing here.Does Aguirre actually have leanings towards,homosexuality,and in particular Jack.Is that why he watches them fully and lets them stay a little longer.
Does he then become jealous and decide to curtail their freedom,bringing them down early.There is something that does not quite gell.I would have thought that any completely straight man,would watch,see what was happening and then cease watching p.d.q.
Aguirre almost seems on some levels to mirror OMT in that he pays lip service to the idea of 2 men being together,but does not fully embrace it and consequently,feels the need to wound and hurt.In my experience those who are completely happy in their own skin are less judgemental.
That would make him ill at ease with his own sexuality,maybe it is all a little too close for comfort.
I am willing to be shot down for this.Happy for another explanation.As I say the whole episode bothered me from the very first reading.The words literally jumped off the page at me.Why just wait watching the whole thing,and then wait to get Jack on his own?
I have asked a few straight men who are not homophobes,including my husband,and not one of them would willingly watch 2 men having full blown sex,if they had the option to turn away.

[mouk]

Very interesting points, Optom, and they make sense. AP says in Story to Screenplay that she was told by an old sheep ranger that 'he always sent up two men to tend the sheep so if they get lonesome they can poke each other'. She adds that 'From that perspective Aguirre, the hiring man, would have winked and said nothing'

It is quite possible that Aguirre had been a shepherd in his younger days and had done exactly the same thing - but just as a one shot deal. This may have brought back happy memories. Also it was probably not the first time in his long career that his employees poked each other. Perhaps this is why he wants them to sleep separately, so they are not too distracted to do the job properly. It seems to me that the Basque is also winking with his 'it's too early in the summer' - he has an amused smile, a kind of 'here we go again' smile.

Aguirre is a businessman, he needs his herd to be well fed and in good shape, he can't just bring the sheep down because he is angry with the boys. Perhaps it was difficult to find people willing to do this kind of unglamorous  job. Or perhaps it was difficult to find people to replace them when the season was so advanced already. So I think the weather really is the reason why he makes them go down early.

IMO the reason he refuses a job to Jack the following year is because his negligence has caused, once again, heavy losses. He does not have the excuse of a thunderstorm this time (well it was quite another type of thunderstorm that struck him ).  And he wants to tell him that he is no dupe, he knows exactly what happened up there.

[Shakesthecoffecan]

I agree with those points, Mouk, plus remember they were both 19 years old. I know it is a stereotype, but sometimes "kids" don't have exactly the best job performance, so keeping them seperate might ensure more work getting done.

[BlissC]

I have always had a niggling suspicion about Aguirre.As you point out he had previously hired Jack,so must not have disliked him that much.Also in the S.S he watches Jack and Ennis "for ten minutes,one day witing untill they had buttoned up their jeans,waiting untill Ennis rode back to the sheep,before bringing the message"
Several things bother me about this.
Aguirre has obviously watched them having sex,which seems odd for a totally straight guy.He then waits to get Jack on his own,and finally there is no reprimand for Jack.
Even if we take away the gay aspect,surely if you had just witnessed 2 employees doing anything other than what they were paid for,would you not at least reprimand them both,maybe even fire them.He comes over as such a hard man that this seems at odds with how he reacts.
I cannot believe that anything Proulx writes is without significance.So what am I missing here.Does Aguirre actually have leanings towards,homosexuality,and in particular Jack.Is that why he watches them fully and lets them stay a little longer.
Does he then become jealous and decide to curtail their freedom,bringing them down early.There is something that does not quite gell.I would have thought that any completely straight man,would watch,see what was happening and then cease watching p.d.q.
Aguirre almost seems on some levels to mirror OMT in that he pays lip service to the idea of 2 men being together,but does not fully embrace it and consequently,feels the need to wound and hurt.In my experience those who are completely happy in their own skin are less judgemental.
That would make him ill at ease with his own sexuality,maybe it is all a little too close for comfort.
I am willing to be shot down for this.Happy for another explanation.As I say the whole episode bothered me from the very first reading.The words literally jumped off the page at me.Why just wait watching the whole thing,and then wait to get Jack on his own?
I have asked a few straight men who are not homophobes,including my husband,and not one of them would willingly watch 2 men having full blown sex,if they had the option to turn away.

I've thought very much the same things myself Fiona. There's just something that niggles me about Aguirre, and as Mouk pointed out I noticed recently that line in Story to Screenplay too. Mouk makes some very valid points. It almost seems that both Aguirre and the Basque were complicit in the whole situation.

[optom3]

I've thought very much the same things myself Fiona. There's just something that niggles me about Aguirre, and as Mouk pointed out I noticed recently that line in Story to Screenplay too. Mouk makes some very valid points. It almost seems that both Aguirre and the Basque were complicit in the whole situation.

Thank goodness it is not just me.Niggle is a very good way to describe it.I just always had a funny feeling that I was missing something,but could not put my finger on it. It still bothers me and I am not sure why.Curious and disconcerting.

[BlissC]

Curious and disconcerting.

Spot on. "Disconcerting" - yup, that's the feeling.

[Front-Ranger]

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

About the Basque, he is bandy-legged and he also instructs Ennis in how to pack the mules, lashing them up: "ring-lashed with double diamonds." This is the wedding ceremony is it not? There are rings, bands, AND diamonds. Is the Basque the ring bearer? And then the Basque leaves him with a warning, not to eat from the fruit of the tree of Life, er, soup, because "them boxes a soup are real bad to pack." Not hard to pack, BAD to pack. In other words, they are a kind of Pandora's box, them boxes a soup.

[BlissC]

About Aguirre, I was noticing in the story how he has "wavy hair...parted down the middle" just like the Red Sea (only his is the color of cigarette ash). Also, in his trailer are venetian blinds (separating the window into light and dark) which are hanging askew so that they "admit a triangle of white light." In other words, a mountain-shaped light.

Yep, there's that God/religious thing again, and the triangular symbolism again. Actually it's just struck me that the triangle theme continues through the rest of the story as well, but not just in the visual cues....Ennis - Jack - Alma: triangle....Ennis - Jack - Lureen: triangle....Ennis - Jack - Randall...

About the Basque, he is bandy-legged and he also instructs Ennis in how to pack the mules, lashing them up: "ring-lashed with double diamonds." This is the wedding ceremony is it not? There are rings AND diamonds. Is the Basque the ring bearer? And then the Basque leaves him with a warning, not to eat from the fruit of the tree of Life, er, soup, because "them boxes a soup are real bad to pack." Not hard to pack, BAD to pack. In other words, they are a kind of Pandora's box, them boxes a soup.

So true agin - back to the wedding ceremony and the whole garden of Eden idea - and all just in a few lines in the story! The whole story amazes me, because just when you think you've spotted everything, something crops up that's glaringly obvious when you look at it again.

That Pandora's box analogy's a good one as well, because once you've opened Pandora's box, you can't get it back inside. Thinking back to the story of Pandora's box though, dimly remembered from my school days, I seem to remember too though that there was one thing that Pandora was quick enough to close it again to keep inside - Hope. In the Pandora's box there's Jack's hopes and dreams for the sweet life.

[serious crayons]

And then the Basque leaves him with a warning, not to eat from the fruit of the tree of Life, er, soup, because "them boxes a soup are real bad to pack." Not hard to pack, BAD to pack. In other words, they are a kind of Pandora's box, them boxes a soup.

Ooohh, good point! And Ennis orders them anyway ... 

It's interesting how much their food choices revolve around what's against the rules (soup, sheep, elk) and what's approved and safe, but boring (beans).

[Brown Eyes]

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

About the Basque, he is bandy-legged and he also instructs Ennis in how to pack the mules, lashing them up: "ring-lashed with double diamonds." This is the wedding ceremony is it not? There are rings AND diamonds. Is the Basque the ring bearer? And then the Basque leaves him with a warning, not to eat from the fruit of the tree of Life, er, soup, because "them boxes a soup are real bad to pack." Not hard to pack, BAD to pack. In other words, they are a kind of Pandora's box, them boxes a soup.

This is a great, great post Sister Mod!   

I love the observation about the soup being like the forbidden fruit (or like Pandora's box).  I think folks have wondered about this term "boxes" in relation to the soup topic for a while.  Why boxes?  And why would soup be any harder to pack than beans (for example).  Also, the use of the term   "bad" as you note, is definitely intriguing.  It's interesting that this is another warning or line that Ennis and Jack decide to cross.

[Penthesilea]

Wow, love all those great insights posted the last days  .

Also, the use of the term   "bad" as you note, is definitely intriguing.  It's interesting that this is another warning or line that Ennis and Jack decide to cross.

Ennis. Only Ennis. Not Jack and Ennis. Metamophorically crossing lines, boundaries, rules: during their first summer, it is always Ennis, not Jack who goes first. Jack suggests (seduces), complains, is first with his mouth - but Ennis is the one who actually does the line-crossing (first).

Jack complains about commuting --> Ennis offers to switch (and does switch)
Jack complains about the beans --> Ennis orders soup
Jack suggests to shoot a sheep --> Ennis is the one who actually does shoot the elk

Ennis is the one who goes up to the sheep later and later ("... but the hours he was away from the sheep stretched out and out.")

Ennis is the one who decides "it's too late to go up to them damned sheep" and decides to stay in camp the whole night, against Aguirre's/God's will.

So while between the boys, Jack is the leading one (TS1, Jack introducing himself first, etc.), metamophorically, Ennis is the one who crosses the lines first.

[Brown Eyes]

That's an interesting point Chrissi!

I wonder if Jack may in his head have already crossed a bunch of lines... or maybe he doesn't even see or perceive the lines-to-be-crossed in the same way that Ennis does.  It seems like he hardly recognizes some of the potential problems with crossing certain lines (i.e. suggesting that they kill and eat a sheep and seeming to be exasperated by Ennis's resistance to this suggestion by saying "but there's thousands of them").  Essentially, maybe certain boundaries are a non-issue for Jack.  And, Ennis's increasing willingness to test boundaries (or boundaries that Ennis perceives in his own head) in some cases can be seen as part of his effort to woo Jack. Especially with the soup... the soup is a really flirty gesture (even if Ennis wouldn't be able to recognize that consciously at that point probably).

It seems like differing understandings of boundaries and lines-to-cross may have been one of the most difficult issues in their relationship from the beginning.

[BlissC]

That's an interesting point Chrissi!

I wonder if Jack may in his head have already crossed a bunch of lines... or maybe he doesn't even see or perceive the lines-to-be-crossed in the same way that Ennis does. 

Interesting point Amanda! As you say, maybe Jack doesn't see the lines. He certainly doesn't seem to be "troubled" by them, doesn't seem nervous at all about them. They all just seem to be natural occurrences almost for him.

So while between the boys, Jack is the leading one (TS1, Jack introducing himself first, etc.), metamophorically, Ennis is the one who crosses the lines first.

TS1's an interesting one, because as we've said, Jack does the leading, and it's Jack who reaches over and takes Ennis's hand like it's any everyday occurrence, and while Ennis is clearly very shocked ("...Ennis jerked his hand away as though he'd touched fire."), he recovers from that shock very quickly and makes the decision to take matters further - mere seconds IIRC, which suggests that he's been seriously thinking about this turn of events, whether consciously or subconsciously. Given all the line-crossing and the fact that there seems to me to be a slight pause between him getting up from the side of the fire and setting off for the tent (not just a decision about whether to go into the tent, but whether to go into the tent with Jack), I'm edging towards consciously....

[Front-Ranger]

I love the observation about the soup being like the forbidden fruit (or like Pandora's box).  ...this is another warning or line that Ennis and Jack decide to cross.

Remember also that the Basque said later "It's too early in the summer to be sick of beans" as if the forbidden fruit is not ripe enuff to eat yet.

Good point, friend Amanda.

[Artiste]

Front-Ranger:

As I just read this:
          Remember also that the Basque said later "It's too early in the summer to be sick of beans" as if the forbidden fruit is not ripe enuff to eat yet.

               
...........
may I say: Wow ! Great thought !


More news ?

Au revoir,
hugs!

[Front-Ranger]

As I just read this:
          Remember also that the Basque said later "It's too early in the summer to be sick of beans" as if the forbidden fruit is not ripe enuff to eat yet.

               
...........
may I say: Wow ! Great thought !

I can't take credit for it, Artiste. It was part of an astounding series of revelations by Clancypants Nasty aka ruthlessly unsentimental, who doesn't come around here any more, but his posts can be read on the Open Forum and on IMDB Rewound.

[Artiste]

Merci Front-Ranger !

Could you present those threads please ?


Au revoir,
hugs!

[Front-Ranger]

Merci Front-Ranger !

Could you present those threads please ?

Here is where it is located:

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,3033.new.html#new

[nagsheadsea412]

I remember my brother in the 1960's spitting on the pavement...and thinking nothing of it...it's just what boys did...and think of all the baseball players who had that habit...and I have an uncle in fargo, ND....who does his fair share...dunno

[Front-Ranger]

We haven't talked about blood yet...another very messy thing in life and this movie!!

[nagsheadsea412]

Blood, mud, bad cooking, bloated beans feeling...but a little ditty....'There wasn't a fence in the world that we knew, for the West an' its people was honest and new, ENNIS AND jACK) And the range stretched away with a sky for a lid---I'm old but I'm glad I lived when I did.'

[Front-Ranger]

So true agin - back to the wedding ceremony and the whole garden of Eden idea - and all just in a few lines in the story! The whole story amazes me, because just when you think you've spotted everything, something crops up that's glaringly obvious when you look at it again.

Here's what ClancyPantsNasty had to say about the wedding idea in his thread "Why BBM is a Masterpiece of Art":

Jack and Ennis came together at Aguirre’s trailer. The short story says “they came together on paper as herder and camp tender for the same sheep operation.” This has a marriage license/contract imagery to it. They stand before Aguirre who hands out rules to them for how they will live their lives. This is an imagery for a wedding ceremony. But it is turned on its head by the phone call in which Aguirre keeps saying “No.” In Ennis’ trailer, the discussion with Jr. is about her upcoming wedding. She’s the same age as Ennis was when he met Jack. She drove up to him waiting outside his trailer the same way that Jack drove up to Ennis waiting outside Aguirre’s trailer. This time, the wedding ceremony imagery is not turned on its head. He shares a toast with Alma and he makes a pledge to her to go to her wedding. Then, the very next thing he does is go to the closet, adjust Jack’s shirt and he says (according to the short story): ““Jack, I swear—” he said, though Jack had never asked him to swear anything and was himself not the swearing kind.” This is not talking about cursing (swearing) or Ennis being at a loss for words, there is a definite vow imagery at work here. It is also significant that the “wedding clothes”, so to speak, in the end, are the same ones that were on the boys in Aguirre’s trailer.

[Front-Ranger]

Ang Lee exchanged places of a lot of things in the movie. One of them was...spit! The actors spit at pivotal times in the movie. In Annie Proulx's story, Ennis applied spit during the FNIT, as well as the clear slick. 

[Front-Ranger]

There are 60 "guests" and no "users" at this site right now, and one of the guests is perusing this thread!! 

[Sason]

There are 60 "guests" and no "users" at this site right now, and one of the guests is perusing this thread!! 

Well, there had to be at least one user, since you were here, Lee!   


This seems to be a highly interesting thread. I'll dive into it as soon as I get the time.

[Front-Ranger]

Bumping an interesting topic, for Throwback Tuesday, I guess.