condiments

[Mikaela]

Wow - interesting discussion. A couple of points that came to my mind while reading:

I think it's significant to this discussion that Ennis clearly loves - and takes care of (as in nose-wiping and so forth) - his daughters. In the short story he complains to the effect that "I used a want a boy for a kid - but just got little girls." The fact that we don't get any such statement - or sense any such sentiment on his part in the film (at least, I don't) shows me he's not at the worst end of Mel's continuum.

The scene at the grocery store seems to me to be as much as anything about the ongoing topic and conflict of being a husband and father "supporting them" vs. Ennis's relationship with Jack that runs through the entire film. Here, before the reunion, Ennis adheres to traditional thinking and is not willing to risk his job or make any concessions or adaptions in that connection. The contrast comes later, for instance when he rushes off, loosely figuring that the foreman ows him some days off. 

[Jeff Wrangler]

Apparently you've never had dinner at my mother-in-law's house. Not only do no men ever lift a finger to help with the after-dinner cleanup, but my mother-in-law wouldn't dream of expecting them to. And they're not even all that sexist!

What has dinner at your mother-in-law's got to do with Ennis? 

[serious crayons]

Katherine, you don't think someone can be sexist without being a stereotype?

Sure I do (think someone can be sexist without being a stereotype). But Ennis happens to be neither, at least not to any great degree. The theme that keeps reappearing throughout this conversation is that Ennis MUST be a sexist, because we know what kind of background he comes from, and we know that background is sexist, and Ennis in some ways represents the cultural ideal of that background -- iconic cowboy, masculine, strong, stoic -- and because he gets Alma to take the kids on that particular day, so therefore Ennis must be sexist. To me, that assumption is a stereotype.

What I'm saying is that if the filmmakers wanted to portray him as sexist, it would have been extremely easy to do so. OK, so maybe -- given their level of creativity -- they wouldn't have reached for the obvious conventions (beer in hand, feet on coffee table, ballgame on TV, etc.). Maybe they would have found some more original way to send the message that Ennis is sexist. But they don't, at least not in my view. In fact, they go out of their way to show Ennis behaving exactly the opposite of how we think sexists behave -- caring for his daughters when they're sick, watching them, as Penthesilea points out, while his wife is at work.

Back to Johnny Cash. Few people would come out of that movie going, "That Johnny Cash, what a sexist!" even though Johnny also grew up in a sexist culture and as far as I can remember (seven months after seeing the movie) spent zero time caring for his kids. But because Johnny in so many other ways breaches his culture's rules, we have no reason to tie him to his culture's sexism. (Note: I'm not saying he necessarily is sexist; I love Johnny Cash. I'm just saying you could just as easily conclude from the movie that he is -- more so, in fact, than Ennis.) Ennis, on the other hand, conforms to his cultural norms -- in some ways. Does that mean he conforms in all ways? Well, if you ask me, to assume so is a stereotype.

True, Ennis is not the perfect feminist ("nobody's eatin it unless you're servin it!") but if someone like me -- someone who once fired a tax preparer because he automatically put my husband's name first on the 1040 form -- can come out without being offended, surely he can't be that bad.

Another reason for my view goes back to Jeff's Occam's Razor. Why would the filmmakers necessarily want to show that Ennis is sexist? How does that advance the plot at all? What does his potential sexism have to do with either the love story or the tragedy or anything else important? His conflict with Alma seems to be mainly about Ennis being gay and Alma being frustrated by that. True, there's a subplot about money, but that also goes back to the love story (Ennis is willing to sacrifice jobs for Jack). So how would his sexism be relevant? If anything, it would confuse the issue (did Alma divorce him because he's gay and not a good provider, or because he's a chauvinist pig?). The filmmakers want to make him seem part of his milieu, and from a storyteller's perspective, it's worth putting in enough details to make the situation believable (see my "coffee pot" sig, below), so of course Ennis is not the world's most sensitive feminist. But the filmmakers know it's counterproductive to emphasize a characteristic -- such as sexism -- that has no impact on the main plot. What has a greater impact is that he loves his daughters a lot, to the point that he's more solicitous of them than the average circa-1960s rancher dad.

And still another reason is like what I suggested in a recent post, on a different thread, about Mr. Twist. I think it's a mistake to find something in a character just because circumstances lead you to expect it to be there. Mr. Twist, lo and behold, much as you might expect the contrary, is not homophobic. The movie demands that we look beyond our expectations. We assume Mr. Twist is homophobic, because he ran Jack off and Jack is gay, because he's from the same cultural millieu as Mr. del Mar, because if anything Jack's dad is even more of a jerk on the surface than Ennis' dad, and becaue homophobes are jerks ... yet, in fact, he's not in any obvious way homophobic.

Jerk? Absolutely. Homophobe? Show me the evidence. And that's the whole point of his character.

[serious crayons]

What has dinner at your mother-in-law's got to do with Ennis? 

I remember one time when, in the after-dinner cleanup, my husband came into the kitchen and loudly said, "What can I do to help?" My mother-in-law literally ignored him. No answer at all, as if he hadn't spoken. Yet if it had been me or one of my sister-in-laws, she would have said, "Could you put the leftover potatoes in a Tupperware?" Or whatever. Normally, in that family, the women a) cook the meal and b) clean up afterward, while the menfolk relax.

And yet my mother- and father-in-law are not particularly sexist. Don't get me wrong, they're not absolutely free of traditional assumptions, but if you knew them you would not consider that a defining characteristic. (And actually, in that familiy, with a wife good at cooking and cleaning and a husband skilled at automotives and carpentry, a traditional division of labor makes sense.)

But anyway. The point is that although Ennis clearing the dishes doesn't make him Alan Alda, it's not nothin.

[ruthlesslyunsentimental]

Hi everybody!  I’ve just read this thread for the first time and I’d like to chime in with my opinion.  (I quote some people below and I hope I give correct credit to each quote.  If I don’t, I apologize in advance.)

Let me first say that I have a different take on Ennis’ look in the grocery store scene.  I’ll get to that later.  But first, about the back-and-forth debate whether Ennis’ is sexist or a chauvinist, I’d have to give a resounding “No!”  I agree with just about everything latjoreme has said in this thread, probably the most important thing of all:

The movie demands that we look beyond our expectations.

This is one of the most true statements ever made about this film.  Our boys are not stereotypic homosexuals, nor are they stereotypic cowboys, nor is their love story stereotypic.  They are all very real to the characters as created.

I see a little bit of expectation on Ennis’ part for traditional roles – the ash-kicking scene – but other than that, I think the film does go out of its way to show that Ennis, as a married husband and father, is not what we would expect of a traditionally stereotypic husband and father of the time.

(I wonder if it’s important that I add a side note here about my own bias – I am neither for nor against Jack or Ennis, in terms of choosing one as the better of the two, or one more at fault, or one more … whatever.  I try to put all of my preconceptions aside and just let the film speak about Jack and Ennis and I take them for what they are – how they are presented.  I like some things in each and I dislike some things in each.  But they are who they are.)


Jeff Wrangler said:

Why do I think Ennis isn't thinking of the children in the later scene? Because he's carrying on because Alma's not doing what he wants her to do. It doesn't have anything at all to do with whether or not Alma, Jr., and Jenny get their supper. He's not getting his way, and it pisses him off.

I agree.  There is no doubt that Ennis is pissed off here -- but why?  Why really?

But latjoreme said:

Maybe it's about Alma's increasing disillusionment.

Again, I agree.

I believe that in this scene we are seeing their marriage deteriorate.  Alma is disillusioned.  She’s going to stand up for herself, not in an “I am Woman” way; rather, as a (perhaps subconscious) statement that she is disillusioned about her relationship with a man who kissed another man passionately in her own backyard.  Part of it is she wants to get away from Ennis, part of it is she wants to get away from “that home,” part of it is she wants to get away from “that life,” and all of it is conveniently accessible to her in signing up for another shift at a place away from Ennis, away from “that home,” and away from “that life.”  I view Alma’s departure here as being escapism.  The issue in this scene is NOT chauvinism or traditional roles.  Latjoreme is 100% correct in observing that Ennis is NOT painted that way for us – his caring for the girls and so much more.  The issue in this scene is Ennis, her husband, is gay.  She’s avoiding dealing  with the issue by escaping to a place where she doesn’t have to deal with it and where she gets calm, kind comfort from another man.  As I said, this is probably all subconscious, but I believe this is what this scene is about for Alma.

As to Ennis in this scene, I don’t think it’s about chauvinism – because I believe he is portrayed in the film exactly opposite from chauvinism.  It’s about his fears of rejection and abandonment that have haunted him ever since his parents died, his brother and sister left him, and Jack left him.  Again, I don’t think it’s conscious on Ennis’ part.  When two people argue, it’s very seldom that they’re really arguing about what’s on the surface.  Usually in big arguments, it goes much deeper.  It’s not about who’s working and who’s cooking, and who’s feeding.  It is about the deeper unresolved issue within each person that makes their desire to win the argument so vital.  Is this really an argument about something just so simple as serving the kids dinner?  No.   It’s about their own issues and that’s why they let the argument escalate – in fact, that’s why they MAKE it escalate.

Now, because I believe it’s about deep-seated issues within each of them, I reject the chauvinist approach because it’s not a central idea to the film.  What are central to the film are Alma’s disillusionment, avoidance and escapism, and also Ennis’ fears of rejection and abandonment.  They both know their marriage is on the rocks and these are the issues that really scare them when they think about their marriage being on the rocks.

Now, back to the grocery store scene…

Latjoreme said:

… its seeming pointlessness and 3) Alma's oddly sudden acquiescence. As for his expression, he looks to me like he's appealing to her to be reasonable, maybe because Monroe doesn't seem to mind the mid-shift childcare juggling, whereas the foreman undoubtedly would, and also because Alma has a sister she can call on in a pinch. Some people have suggested she's backing down out of fear of violence, which seems unlikely.

It’s not pointless.  It ties VERY strongly to an earlier and a later scene.  Sorry, folks, I’ll get to that in a minute when I get into my take on this scene.

Everything else latjoreme said here, I can see as good observations and comments.  And I agree wholeheartedly that fear of violence is not an issue here.  This is their first fight.  And later, Ennis' violence is seen (by Alma) only twice: first, as a physical attack on bikers – not on Alma – and second, after her Thanksgiving Spectacular – directed against Alma, but NOT physical. 

Also latjoreme is very correct in pointing out:

It's less about a career or independence or self-fulfillment than it is about making money to support their family. So if Ennis interferes with Alma's job, it's not exactly like he's squashing her feminist career dreams, at most he's jeopardizing her ability to make extra money to make up for what she feels he's failing to provide.

Agreed.  It’s about making money to make ends meet.  This scene is not about sexism or chauvinism.

And finally, here’s my take on this scene, why I believe it’s not pointless, and why I believe it’s not about sexism or chauvinism.

Earlier in the film, Alma wanted to move to town.  Ennis said it was too expensive in town.  This scene continues with that idea – that Ennis moved to town to please Alma (as symbolized by the fact that they moved next to the Elk Lodge – whenever there’s an elk, Ennis is trying to please someone with a poor substitute of what he can truly give).  And, that Ennis was correct.  It was too expensive.  So Alma has a job now.  She had to take a job to make more money to afford the move to town that she wanted and that Ennis’ finally acquiesced to against his better judgment – a recurring theme in the film.

Later in the film, we see that Ennis would not hold a job so he could be available for Jack.  We also see Alma complaining (and rightly so) about Ennis’ employment.  But we also see that before the reunion Ennis was having trouble keeping a steady job.  He worked, yes; but, not steady employment.  (He worked on a paving crew, he worked on a ranch.)  And in this scene, the calves are acomin’.  He’s called in to work and it appears that he’s not there everyday.  He just got called in.

Now, in the grocery store scene, Ennis comes arunnin’ in because he’s been called to go off to do a job and make money.  He’s doing what Alma has been complaining about.  Now that Ennis has a job to go and do, what does Alma do?  “What about my job?”  (And I’m not judging her for that response.)  So what does Ennis do?  Chauvinism?  Nope.  That’s not present here.  Potential violence?  Nope.  That’s not present here.  What’s present here is Alma and her complaints and Ennis actually doing something that should make Alma happy – albeit at the wrong time and in the wrong place.  So Ennis throws her a look that says “Listen bitch, you’re the one who’s been after me to work all this time…”  And Alma recognizes that and she acquiesces.  She says ”You’re right.”  With the unspoken words of “You’re right.  I have been on your case about that and now you have a job to go and do.  You’re right.”  Not "You're right, you sexist pig."  Not "You're right, you scary violent man."  But just simply "Here, now, you ARE right."

Also, this scene has a strong point in connection with the “morning after the motel” scene.  Alma asks Ennis whether he’s worried about losing his job – trying to keep him from going off with Jack.  She’s got a good point.  That should keep him home.  After all, look at how responsible he was to his job back at the grocery store scene.  But it doesn’t keep him home.  This is why the grocery store scene is so important: Because it, along with the "morning after motel" scene, shows Alma her place in Ennis’ heart – second to Jack.


Finally – someone said:

As for "I would if I had three hands," I think I saw somewhere that's supposed to have metaphoric meaning, but i don't remember what.

 

[nakymaton]

Back to Johnny Cash. Few people would come out of that movie going, "That Johnny Cash, what a sexist!" even though Johnny also grew up in a sexist culture and as far as I can remember (seven months after seeing the movie) spent zero time caring for his kids.

This is a good point. But I think that it points out how different BBM is from most Hollywood movies. Walk the Line portrayed Johnny Cash's first wife as a shrew who didn't understand his need to play music. (Aside: I think I heard an interview with Roseanne Cash in which she briefly mentioned that the portrayal of her mother bothered her.) So any of Johnny's failings as far as family life go become easy to excuse, because the audience just wants Johnny to keep making music.

BBM could easily have made Alma and Lureen into villains. (It wouldn't even be that hard to change the condiments scene to make Alma clearly the bad person -- take out the line about "what about my job," make Ennis's expression in that look just a bit weaker and more pleading, make Alma just a bit less understanding.) But BBM doesn't do that; nobody in the movie is an angel except you and Jenny here, and nobody is clearly to blame. (And viewers argue about who's to blame, and some are unfair to Ennis, and some to Jack, and TJ was unfair to the screenwriters who inserted the women in to the story. And I think that's one reason why BBM bothers some people... you get to the end of the movie and Jack's dead and Ennis is alone and the audience doesn't even have the satisfaction of having somebody obvious to be mad at.)

[Mikaela]

I'm wondering (this happens a lot!) whether to just keep silent when something is being discussed and my views have already been argued by someone else, much more eloquently than I ever could. But what the heck. I completely agree with you Katherine, and Mel, and others who share your views. Ennis is not sexist, nor is Jack - if anything, they both belong towards the other end of the scale when considering their time and place.

Without going into the filmmakers' intentions and character and specific scene analysis that has alreeady been covered here so brilliantly - I build my view on simple recognition and RL comparison. I'm of an age with Alma Junior. Born in an European city, thus different from rural Wyoming but IMO hardly less backwards. Comparing the dads of my local community where I and my siblings grew up to Ennis and Jack, I would say the vast majority of those dads showed less interest in the child-tutoring and nose-wiping and church-picnic'ing and plate-clearing than we see Ennis and Jack do. Everything to do with the kids was the mothers' responsibility. Most men did not have working wives at all, many would in fact have been appalled and would have felt it reflected poorly on them as family providers if their wives had even suggested going to work. Part time jobs were somewhat acceptable though, but only if the family couldn't manage financially without both husband and wife working. Many of those men certainly would have felt belittled if the wife was a business partner and even the main bread-winner like Lureen may be considered to be in the Twist household. Thinking back on this, I'm actually completely appalled at how the accepted and pervasive husband/wife dynamics were back then, - just one generation ago really. But that doesn't change that they actually *were* like that, - and that Ennis and Jack by comparison IMO, when considering both their behaviour towards their wives *and* how much they were engaged in their kids' wellbeing and upbringing, seem less sexist and more egalitarian than the average Joes of their time. When it comes to their care of and connection with their children, the filmmakers have deliberately chosen to present both men in a more positive light (both contrasting their own horrible fathers......) than the short story does. That's one of the main reasons I prefer the film over the short story, if forced to choose; - I am entirely happpy that Ennis and Jack are presented as (mostly) good fathers.

[opinionista]

BTW, Jeff and Opinionista and ZouBeini and everyone else: Do you see Jack as sexist? After all, Jack grew up in more or less the same culture as Ennis did.

We aren't given enough information about Jack's domestic life to analize his behavior as a husband and a father. However, I think his situation was different because he wasn't the main provider. Lureen was, and that puts Jack in an weaker position. In Jack's case LD. Newsome called the shots most of the time. But I bet Jack, deep inside, could not be too different from Ennis. He probably expected from Lureen the same behavior and attitudes Ennis expected from Alma, but he had no support and no means, which made him feel powerless IMO. Ennis had more power because he was the main provider, Jack wasn't. Jack had to live under LD Newsome's shadow.

[serious crayons]

Thanks for agreeing with me, Ruthlessly, and also for your excellent analyses of the two scenes.

Your ideas about the undercurrents in the ash-can argument sound right to me. Regarding Ennis, maybe he's afraid not only of abandonment, but also of what a divorce might suggest about him. Maybe he has picked up on vibes between Monroe and Alma; the rest of us certainly have. And if his wife refuses a traditional domestic role (serving dinner), if she leaves him, especially if she leaves him for another man (and kind of a wimpy man at that!), then what does that say about Ennis? Could it be more evidence that he's ... um, not the marrying kind?

You've convinced me that the grocery-store scene is not pointless. Now that you mention it, I can see that in the pre-camping scene when Alma, in that panicky voice, brings up Ennis' job and Ennis blows it off ("That foreman, he owes me ...") it does carry a faint reminder of this grocery store exchange. And that interpretation of the scene provides a better explanation than any of the others suggested here -- including mine -- for Ennis' look. It's not just simple beseeching, as I said -- "C'mon, Alma" -- it's more like, "Alma, remember we talked about this ..." That matches the slight tilt of his head and intense stare (trying to remind her of what they said, without having to discuss it in public). And that perfectly explains why she backs down so abruptly.

Yet another expample of how everything in the movie really does make sense if you look deep enough. (Well, everything except maybe some of the chronology, but that's another issue ...)

[opinionista]

I respect everyone's opinion in this forum. All the postings are interesting, but there's something I would like to ask. Why do some of you think Ennis was not a chauvinist? Most men were like that during the 1960's, so it's pretty much expected that both Ennis and Jack behave that way too. As I said above, in Jack's case it's different because he wasn't the main provider, but he was a chauvinist too. Perhaps I'm too down to earth but some scenes have the purpose of creating context for us to know the kind of society the plot takes place, so the story makes sense, IMO. I also wonder why some of you think calling Ennis a chauvinist is an insult to the character. It just a feature that shows the character's mind frame, and also the time and the culture to which they belong. It pretty much explains Ennis behavior towards Jack too.