The Infamous Electric Carving Knife - A Moment of Levity

[Phillip Dampier]

You really can't do more to wimp up someone than to show them cutting up the Thanksgiving turkey in giant wedges with an electric carving knife.  Our Alma, in a relationship with probably the only guy in Wyoming who owned one of those things.  (My grandfather owned one when they were trendy in the late 70s/early 80s - my father refused to go near it using colorful language to describe the machismo factor in even owning one.)

And they made sure we knew in the film by showing the Alpha Male Slamdown at the Twist house in a contrast.  Let's get ready to slice, indeed!

[SFEnnisSF]

So true, so true.

[Kazza]

It is a moment of levity indeed. Needed after the tension of the previous scene.

On a more personal note it always makes me smile because my Mum owned one of those electric knives back in the 80s. Lord above, we needed ear plugs when she carved a roast. It also left the meat with a strange zig-zag pattern on it.

Technological advancement isn't always a good thing. 

Karen

[Ed59]

     
          Yes I remember my folks bought one of those things.And no my Dad would never use it!
   That had to be in the mid 70s as I was still at home.

         The scene with the electric knife did lighten things up a bit.


                                                                                 Ed

[Katie77]

Well, I still have an electric carving knife, and if I hadnt had one for the last ten years, I would not have ever cooked a roast dinner, because I hated carving meat with just an ordinary knife.

I recently bought one for my mum, because we go over there for a roast dinner nearly every Sunday, but I must admit, I wont let her use it, as she is 80, and I worry that she wont be able to manouvre it without cutting off a finger or something......so when we go over for dinner, I take on the job of cutting the roast.....with the electric knife.......it is so quick eand easy......

.......I thought EVERYONE owned and used one.....and when I saw it in the movie, I thought that was a pretty common occurence....

[Phillip Dampier]

.......I thought EVERYONE owned and used one.....and when I saw it in the movie, I thought that was a pretty common occurence....

They were trendy back in the late 1970s and early 1980s.  Technology solving the problems of carving.  You mounted the holder on the wall in your kitchen and then plugged it in (they were cordless and you removed it when you needed to use it).  My grandfather used it for one or two Thanksgiving meals carving the turkey (my grandfather would have been horrified by the wedge hunks Alma's new husband was making) into wafer thin slices.  In our family, we always carved a plateful of meat - you didn't hack at the turkey when you wanted seconds - you cut the rest of the meat off after dinner and then either tossed the carcass or, inevitably, someone would want it to make stock or soup.

My father would never have anything of the sort in our house.  He used the carving knife and he was the only one allowed to use it.  I was amused with the alpha male scene in Jack's house because I've seen similar stuff in big family gatherings in my own life.  The man of the house was the only one allowed to carve the meat.  My mother woudn't touch his knives, nor would I.  TV was -always- forbidden at the dinner table when I was growing up, so there would not have been that competition.

[Katie77]

Cordless.........now that would be helpful......even the one I bought for my mum recently, still has a cord.......and I am always wary that the cord is well out of the way, so it doesnt get sliced, and maybe electrocute me..

[Jeff Wrangler]

.......I thought EVERYONE owned and used one.....and when I saw it in the movie, I thought that was a pretty common occurence....

In the stratum of U.S. society to which my family belonged, the upwardly striving working class, I'd say it was a pretty common occurence, at least when it was, as Philip says, trendy in the late 1970s to early 1980s. Mom and Dad thought it was a Big Deal when they finally got one--only way my dad could cut decent, even slices--which might have had something to do with the propensity of the womenfolk in our family to roast meat and poultry till it just about fell apart. 

I won't dispute that the electric knife may be intended to show poor Monroe as a wimp, but maybe, since that's Thanksgiving 1977, it also shows that he can give Alma the kind of trendy, up-to-date things that Ennis never gave her. Put another way, it may also speak to the economic factor in Alma's divorce of Ennis.

[serious crayons]

That, plus an electric knife is the domesticated, indoor, society way to cut up meat -- as opposed to cutting up a whole elk at the campsite.

[Ellemeno]

... maybe, since that's Thanksgiving 1977, it also shows that he can give Alma the kind of trendy, up-to-date things that Ennis never gave her. Put another way, it may also speak to the economic factor in Alma's divorce of Ennis.

That, plus an electric knife is the domesticated, indoor, society way to cut up meat -- as opposed to cutting up a whole elk at the campsite.

Good points, you two.

[Brown Eyes]

[Jeff Wrangler]

Tell you what, when I saw this thread pop up this morning, I was going to go back and delete my post, but on reading it, I think it still holds up pretty well after a year! 

And it's only been a year. I would have thought this discussion had taken place a lot longer ago than just a year. Shows how memory plays tricks. 

[Marge_Innavera]

.......I thought EVERYONE owned and used one.....and when I saw it in the movie, I thought that was a pretty common occurence....

I did too. Had no idea there was so much macho-snobbery connected with an unremarkable kitchen appliance.

One thing I've always noted in references to Monroe is the tacit approval of male stereotypes when it comes to this character, but not to Ennis and Jack.

[serious crayons]

I did too. Had no idea there was so much macho-snobbery connected with an unremarkable kitchen appliance.

One thing I've always noted in references to Monroe is the tacit approval of male stereotypes when it comes to this character, but not to Ennis and Jack.

Good point, Marge. But that's not just about biases on the part of commenters here. I believe that reaction is what the fillmmakers intended to provoke, and viewers respond to that.

[Marge_Innavera]

Good point, Marge. But that's not just about biases on the part of commenters here. I believe that reaction is what the fillmmakers intended to provoke, and viewers respond to that.

So Ang Lee had a double standard about destructive male stereotypes -- verboten for characters he wanted us to like but okay when...... what?  The guy isn't good looking enough?  Somehow, I doubt that. It's more likely that the character pushes some unacknowledged-conflicts buttons in viewers.

[Brown Eyes]

So Ang Lee had a double standard about destructive male stereotypes -- verboten for characters he wanted us to like but okay when...... what?  The guy isn't good looking enough?  Somehow, I doubt that. It's more likely that the character pushes some unacknowledged-conflicts buttons in viewers.

This is interesting Marge, could you explain a little bit more about what you think the "unacknowledged conflict buttons" might be? 

I'm sure at some level this has a lot to do with stereotypes... and I do think Ang Lee may have been deliberately playing with audiences and their possible ingrained stereotypes (throughout the film and with various characters). 

In terms of Ennis and Monroe, I think this might be a case of Ang Lee simply trying to flip stereotypes around.  Meaning... that sometimes the most "macho"/ "tough guy" in town is a closeted gay man... and sometimes a less-than-macho/soft-spoken guy who likes to watch figure skating is a married straight man with a child on the way.

[Front-Ranger]

That, plus an electric knife is the domesticated, indoor, society way to cut up meat -- as opposed to cutting up a whole elk at the campsite.

I have a book that Pete Tannen gave me about elk that has a photo series on cutting up an elk in the field. The hunter is in full camoflage paint. Pretty scary stuff!!

[Marge_Innavera]

This is interesting Marge, could you explain a little bit more about what you think the "unacknowledged conflict buttons" might be? 

Well, very few of us are as free of stereotypes and prejudices as we like to think we are. And while Ennis and Jack may challenge masculine stereotypes in terms of sexuality, someone like Monroe doesn't fit the stereotypes much better.  The actor has an unfortunate arrangement of features, described variously as bland and baby-faced, that would lead people to make negative assumptions about him. In a traditional Western movie, Monroe would have been the Western town's general storekeeper; here, he's translated into the Riverton grocer who wears an apron and knows what "condiments" are.  IMO, this character gives viewers who might feel some uneasiness about the implied challenges to American/Western/masculine stereotypes a kind of safety valve: now, here's a character that one can safely consider a "sissy" -- he even uses an electric knife.  That isn't a comment about BBM fans generally and certainly not about anyone on this thread, but Monroe, in addition to being a necessary plot device, does serve the classic dramatic function of a "foil."  And I guess it's possible that Ang Lee did intend that, come to think of it.

Of course, this character isn't much developed in the movie and even less in the ss, but I'd really question as to whether he can be considered "less of a man" than some of the other characters, especially Lureen's father. The "stud duck" displayes his perceived masculinity by dissing his son-in-law and insisting on carving poultry; Monroe is willing to have his stepdaughters' father at Thanksgiving dinner. And for that matter, he was willing to hang in there and wait for the woman he loved.

Well, I guess we've meandered pretty far from slicing up that turkey.....  

[Jeff Wrangler]

I did too. Had no idea there was so much macho-snobbery connected with an unremarkable kitchen appliance.

"Me neither."

[Brown Eyes]

I think the idea that Monroe serves as a foil is very good.

He's a classic nice guy it seems to me.  I think his image as less-than-macho or perhaps even a "sissy" is everything to do with the underlying stereotypes that have to do with sexuality (maybe more so... or linked with stereotypes about masculinity).  In this case, the reliable straight husband is the "sissy" and the gay man is the macho, tough guy.  Making the contrast between Ennis and Monroe marked and very obvious I think was certainly intentional in this regard.

And, I don't think we're too far off topic.  The electric knife is also all about stereotypes and even sexual stereotypes (metaphorically speaking).

[Jeff Wrangler]

Well, very few of us are as free of stereotypes and prejudices as we like to think we are. And while Ennis and Jack may challenge masculine stereotypes in terms of sexuality, someone like Monroe doesn't fit the stereotypes much better.  The actor has an unfortunate arrangement of features, described variously as bland and baby-faced, that would lead people to make negative assumptions about him. In a traditional Western movie, Monroe would have been the Western town's general storekeeper; here, he's translated into the Riverton grocer who wears an apron and knows what "condiments" are.  IMO, this character gives viewers who might feel some uneasiness about the implied challenges to American/Western/masculine stereotypes a kind of safety valve: now, here's a character that one can safely consider a "sissy" -- he even uses an electric knife.  That isn't a comment about BBM fans generally and certainly not about anyone on this thread, but Monroe, in addition to being a necessary plot device, does serve the classic dramatic function of a "foil."  And I guess it's possible that Ang Lee did intend that, come to think of it.

Of course, this character isn't much developed in the movie and even less in the ss, but I'd really question as to whether he can be considered "less of a man" than some of the other characters, especially Lureen's father. The "stud duck" displayes his perceived masculinity by dissing his son-in-law and insisting on carving poultry; Monroe is willing to have his stepdaughters' father at Thanksgiving dinner. And for that matter, he was willing to hang in there and wait for the woman he loved.

Well, I guess we've meandered pretty far from slicing up that turkey.....  

Not to mention, too, that Monroe apparently does a better job of supporting a family on his own, whereas Ennis is pretty much of a dud in that respect, and Jack rides the coattails of his father-in-law and his wife.

But sure enough, in Monroe we have the sissy storekeeper who knows what a condiment is, watches figure skating with his step-daughters, and uses a parvenu electric carving knife--and he's straight, whereas our macho stereotypical Western heroes sleep with each other.

[Brown Eyes]

Not to mention, too, that Monroe apparently does a better job of supporting a family on his own, whereas Ennis is pretty much of a dud in that respect, and Jack rides the coattails of his father-in-law and his wife.

But sure enough, in Monroe we have the sissy storekeeper who knows what a condiment is, watches figure skating with his step-daughters, and uses a parvenu electric carving knife--and he's straight, whereas our macho stereotypical Western heroes sleep with each other.

Yep, this is pretty much exactly how I see it.

(Although, at least it can be said that Ennis isn't a complete dud in terms of supporting his family... he at least feels a sense of responsibility about it... eventhough he's not very effective at actually generating a lot of money for them).

[Jeff Wrangler]

(Although, at least it can be said that Ennis isn't a complete dud in terms of supporting his family... he at least feels a sense of responsibility about it... eventhough he's not very effective at actually generating a lot of money for them).

Sure enough. Why I said dud instead of dead-beat, because he surely isn't a "dead-beat dad." He just doesn't do a very good job of it, and economics is clearly one of the reasons Alma leaves him.

[Brown Eyes]

Sure enough. Why I said dud instead of dead-beat, because he surely isn't a "dead-beat dad." He just doesn't do a very good job of it, and economics is clearly one of the reasons Alma leaves him.

OK!  Sure enough -  right back atcha!

[serious crayons]

It's interesting to examine stereotypes about masculinity as they apply to Monroe, and I don't think I've ever seen this discussion take place explicitly before.

I think clearly Ang Lee deliberately send signals that Monroe is "sissified" -- the babyish look, the apron, the electric knife, the figure skating, the fact that he takes a suspiciously long time to rush to Alma's aid when she screams for him from the kitchen.

The question is, what is Ang trying to say?

In a traditional Western movie, Monroe would have been the Western town's general storekeeper; here, he's translated into the Riverton grocer who wears an apron and knows what "condiments" are.  IMO, this character gives viewers who might feel some uneasiness about the implied challenges to American/Western/masculine stereotypes a kind of safety valve: now, here's a character that one can safely consider a "sissy" -- he even uses an electric knife.  That isn't a comment about BBM fans generally and certainly not about anyone on this thread, but Monroe, in addition to being a necessary plot device, does serve the classic dramatic function of a "foil."  And I guess it's possible that Ang Lee did intend that, come to think of it.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here, but it sounds like you're attributing Monroe's "sissy" characteristics to slightly different motivations than I would. I agree (with what I think you're saying) that in the traditional Western, Monroe's role would be to set off the "masculinity" of the main characters -- the sheriff or marshal or bad guys. He's not going to be the one reaching for his pistol in the middle of Main Street at high noon, or throwing the bad guy down the bar, whiskey glasses flying -- he's going to be hiding behind the bar or cowering in the grocery store with the women folk.

But I think Monroe's role is more complex in BBM, and I don't think he's there just to give insecure viewers some comic relief. Yes, in some respects, he makes Ennis look tough by comparison. Imagine him trying to shoot an elk. Or how he'd react to the bikers at the 4th of July.

And yet, as others have pointed out, Monroe expresses his "masculinity" in a different way. The "sissy" can get his wife pregnant and support the children after the "tough guy" has failed to do so. When Ennis displays classic tough-guy behavior -- when he beats up the bikers or fights the truck-driver outside the bar -- he's motivated quite directly by insecurity regarding his sexuality. Similarly, I think Monroe's character is another way of turning traditional images on end, showing that people aren't always what they seem and that our assumptions about those stereotypes can be wrong.

[Brown Eyes]

I often wonder about Monroe in relation to the question of Alma's happiness too.  Given that Monroe and Ennis are so different... is it implied here that she's "settling" for Monroe?  I mean he's a nice guy and can provide her with stability... but is really probably not the man of Alma's dreams.  Are both Ennis and Monroe about Alma's disappointments... but in two very different ways?

I wonder if Alma represents a big trend for a lot of women (when it comes to Monroe)... the desire for stability over almost everything else.

[Jeff Wrangler]

I often wonder about Monroe in relation to the question of Alma's happiness too.  Given that Monroe and Ennis are so different... is it implied here that she's "settling" for Monroe?  I mean he's a nice guy and can provide her with stability... but is really probably not the man of Alma's dreams.  Are both Ennis and Monroe about Alma's disappointments... but in two very different ways?

I wonder if Alma represents a big trend for a lot of women (when it comes to Monroe)... the desire for stability over almost everything else.

Tell you what, reading the first part of the post, I was reminded of a comment Annie Proulx made about both Alma and Lureen learning some hard lessons about life. Maybe Ennis was initially Alma's dream man; I'm not sure we can know that, even though she married him. Yet from her perspective he turned out to be a dud. Settling is a sad word, however accurate it might be. As a divorced mother of two with no education and no prospects in the Wyoming of the 1970s, she could have done a lot worse than a sweet guy who loves her and can provide some financial security for her and her kids, not to mention a much better home than that cruddy apartment--even if it is a bit fusty and old-fashioned.

I'll let someone else address the concept of stability, although I wonder whether security might be a better word here.

[Brown Eyes]

Hi Jeff,

Yes, I agree with what you just wrote.  It's true that Alma may not have felt like she had many options following the divorce.  And, maybe there really weren't even that many available/ somewhat-appealing single men for her to choose from in Riverton anyway.  Also, yes, you're right that Monroe seems like a sweet and responsible guy.

I do think sometimes and even often the quest for stability or security (I think both terms apply very well here) comes at a sacrifice with regard to personal happiness in terms of dreams and ideals/ passion.  The extreme pragmatism of the concepts of stability and security seem at odds with a sense of risk/drama/passion/freedom (etc.) that might be associated with a more bold dream or ideal.  And, again, I think women often make this sacrifice... and a woman like Alma was probably raised to do so.

It's true that we don't know a lot about what Alma's personal dreams (I mean her vision of her personal "sweet life" or "cow and calf operation") might be.  Maybe they never extended beyond a simple life in Riverton as a wife and mother.

[serious crayons]

Tell you what, reading the first part of the post, I was reminded of a comment Annie Proulx made about both Alma and Lureen learning some hard lessons about life. Maybe Ennis was initially Alma's dream man; I'm not sure we can know that, even though she married him. Yet from her perspective he turned out to be a dud. Settling is a sad word, however accurate it might be. As a divorced mother of two with no education and no prospects in the Wyoming of the 1970s, she could have done a lot worse than a sweet guy who loves her and can provide some financial security for her and her kids, not to mention a much better home than that cruddy apartment--even if it is a bit fusty and old-fashioned.

I'll let someone else address the concept of stability, although I wonder whether security might be a better word here.

Good point, Jeff. A even happier spin on it might be that Alma is established early on as someone who places importance on financial security and the comfortable life it buys. She cajoles Ennis for an apartment in town, takes a job (the story's "saw she'd always have to work to keep ahead of the bills on what Ennis made" suggests a certain bitterness), warns Ennis against upsetting the foreman, says she'd have kids if he'd support 'em, promptly marries Monroe after their divorce. It's possible that Monroe provides her the very life she always dreamed of.

I'm not doubting that she loves Ennis. But how much evidence do we have, really, that in her eyes he was ever such a superior catch to Monroe? The only thing I can think of is to show her less than happy with her later lot in life is her sour mood at Thanksgiving, but there are other explanations for that. Beyond that, we might be projecting our own preference for Ennis onto her.

After all, she married Ennis without knowing him very well ("more than I've spoke in a year"). Even early on, at the wedding, sliding, when the girls are sick, even in bed that night, there's no really strong evidence that Ennis is the absolute love of Alma's life. She doesn't seem particularly happy or passionate. For all we know, she may have gone -- given her era, probably DID go -- into marriage imagining that their life together would be a comfortable, middle-class, white-picket-fence existence, that is, featuring the comforts that life with Monroe eventually has.

It's true that we don't know a lot about what Alma's personal dreams (I mean her vision of her personal "sweet life" or "cow and calf operation") might be.  Maybe they never extended beyond a simple life in Riverton as a wife and mother.

I would guess that's true. She's not well educated or sophisticated, it's the early '60s, and she lives in a small town, all suggesting that a simple life in Riverton as a wife and mother was probably exactly her vision of the sweet life.

[Jeff Wrangler]

I do think sometimes and even often the quest for stability or security (I think both terms apply very well here) comes at a sacrifice with regard to personal happiness in terms of dreams and ideals/ passion.  The extreme pragmatism of the concepts of stability and security seem at odds with a sense of risk/drama/passion/freedom (etc.) that might be associated with a more bold dream or ideal.  And, again, I think women often make this sacrifice... and a woman like Alma was probably raised to do so.

This could be the "hard lesson in life" that Annie talks about. 

[southendmd]

I see parallels between Alma's "settling" for Monroe and finding financial security with Jack's marrying Lureen for the same reason.

We know Jack wants more (Ennis); we don't necessarily know what Alma wants. 

[Brown Eyes]

I see parallels between Alma's "settling" for Monroe and finding financial security with Jack's marrying Lureen for the same reason.

We know Jack wants more (Ennis); we don't necessarily know what Alma wants. 

Yep, this makes a lot of sense to me.

[Marge_Innavera]

I think the idea that Monroe serves as a foil is very good.

He's a classic nice guy it seems to me.  I think his image as less-than-macho or perhaps even a "sissy" is everything to do with the underlying stereotypes that have to do with sexuality (maybe more so... or linked with stereotypes about masculinity).  In this case, the reliable straight husband is the "sissy" and the gay man is the macho, tough guy.  Making the contrast between Ennis and Monroe marked and very obvious I think was certainly intentional in this regard.

IMO it might have been to mix it up a bit, especially for viewers who are moving outside their comfort zone in terms of how they see Ennis and Jack.  i.e., that late in the movie, the viewer imight be comfortable with considering the gay character masculine but just as you thought it was safe to go back in the water, here comes another reversal.

Monroe is the classic nice guy who finishes last but also could be many a woman's good catch as a second husband.  In high school and early adulthood, he'd be the nerd or the dull workaholic that most females would overlook in favor of the guy who's more macho, better-looking , maybe with more of an aura of danger about him.  Unfortunately, bad-boys don't age nearly as well as nice-guys and tend more than the Monroes of the world to be lead characters in very bad marriages -- some much worse than Alma's that's for sure.  The Monroes more often improve with age.

And, I don't think we're too far off topic.  The electric knife is also all about stereotypes and even sexual stereotypes (metaphorically speaking).

Well, that can certainly put the Swords suit in the Tarot in a whole new light!   

[Lynne]

Hey!  I was just revisiting this thread after my BBM viewing in Seattle this past weekend.  The electric carving knife did indeed provide some much-needed comic relief after the Thanksgiving scene in Jack's house, AND Eric had a special revelation during this scene. 

[SFEnnisSF]

For some reason I figured it was battery operated.  This was the first time I seen it plugged into an extension cord running from the kitchen. 

[Jeff Wrangler]

For some reason I figured it was battery operated.  This was the first time I seen it plugged into an extension cord running from the kitchen. 

How 'bout that! I never thought to look for the cord, but then the issue never occurred to me because the eletric carving knife my mom and dad had was "plug-in."

[serious crayons]

I just reread this thread. Gosh, we all sure were (are?) brilliant. And still making astute observations about subtle meanings in the movie -- nearly two and a half years after it came out. Amazing. What an education this place has been.

[serious crayons]

I just reread this thread. Gosh, we all sure were (are?) brilliant. And still making astute observations about subtle meanings in the movie -- nearly two and a half years after it came out. Amazing. What an education this place has been.

Almost scary: As I just read through this thread, I kept thinking how smart we all sounded and decided that when I got to the end I would post a comment saying something to that effect. Then I come to the end and find I said just that a year ago! 

I do miss having something to analyze in this depth in the company of such brilliant analysts. 

[Marge_Innavera]

I've been puzzled all along that using an electric knife was so execrable; something akin to farting at the table.   

[serious crayons]

I've been puzzled all along that using an electric knife was so execrable; something akin to farting at the table.   

I don't agree with that analogy or the adjective. It's not like some kind of social faux pas or obnoxious habit reflecting lack of refinement. On the contrary, it seems overly civilized -- a fussy, complicated instrument designed to save a miniscule amount of muscular effort when doing what a plain classic tool (i.e., a knife) could do just as well. In BBM parlance, it's a regular knife's citified cousin. It's like washing clothes in a sink on one of them fancy washboards Alma uses, vs. washing them in the river.

That and its symbolism as a vibrator, underscoring Monroe's status as Alma's second-best replacement for Ennis.

I say this about its meaning in the movie, not its meaning in real life. My family had an electric knife and although it seemed slightly overkill I never thought that much about it. It was just a trend in that era, along with pet rocks.

[Marge_Innavera]

I don't agree with that analogy or the adjective. It's not like some kind of social faux pas or obnoxious habit reflecting lack of refinement. On the contrary, it seems overly civilized -- a fussy, complicated instrument designed to save a miniscule amount of muscular effort when doing what a plain classic tool (i.e., a knife) could do just as well. In BBM parlance, it's a regular knife's citified cousin. It's like washing clothes in a sink on one of them fancy washboards Alma uses, vs. washing them in the river. . .

That and its symbolism as a vibrator, underscoring Monroe's status as Alma's second-best replacement for Ennis.

Here we go again.     Anybody spot any symbolism in the wallpaper?  How about the china pattern?

Civilization just went to you-know-what when people started to use metal tools.  Its decline started with the discovery of fire.  And by Gawd, a trevois should have been good enough for anybody, what did we need those fussy wheels for?

[serious crayons]

Here we go again.     Anybody spot any symbolism in the wallpaper?  How about the china pattern?

No, but do feel free to describe whatever you've observed, this being the Open Forum and the place where BetterMostians have been discussing symbolism in the movie and story for going on seven years. Here you'll find brilliant discussions of such metaphors as the bucket and coffee pot, the rotary fans, the bread bags, the elk and the bear, the little carved horse and the horse-and-rider toy, the various forms of water, and of course the two shirts in the closet. And in the knives. As I recall, Ennis has a bunch of knives in his tiny under-furnished trailer.

Civilization just went to you-know-what when people started to use metal tools.  Its decline started with the discovery of fire.

Actually, I seem to recall reading just the opposite -- something about a connection between cooked foods and the growth of human brains. Not having to use our teeth to tear raw flesh from a carcass, they could become smaller, leaving more room in the skull for the brain. And sitting around the fire gave us nightly opportunities to develop our social nature.

Oh, here's a story about researchers linking the development of fire and growth of intelligence not to eating softer meat, but to eating softer root vegetables:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/08/990810064914.htm

You seem to be quite passionate in your defense of electric carving knives. Perhaps they, too, have helped human intelligence make a great leap forward. Let's see ... once patriarchs no longer had to prove their masculinity through the manual carving of tough holiday meat courses, they were free to take on other domestic chores, leaving women more time to participate in business and politics, leading to election defeats for some office-holding Neanderthals ... Or something like that.

 

[Marge_Innavera]

No, but do feel free to describe whatever you've observed, this being the Open Forum and the place where BetterMostians have been discussing symbolism in the movie and story for going on seven years. Here you'll find brilliant discussions of such metaphors as the bucket and coffee pot, the rotary fans, the bread bags, the elk and the bear, the little carved horse and the horse-and-rider toy, the various forms of water, and of course the two shirts in the closet. And in the knives. As I recall, Ennis has a bunch of knives in his tiny under-furnished trailer.

No argument there; I've done my share of that, though I'm planning to view the movie again this week and will look for the knives in the last scene.

Actually, I seem to recall reading just the opposite -- something about a connection between cooked foods and the growth of human brains. Not having to use our teeth to tear raw flesh from a carcass, they could become smaller, leaving more room in the skull for the brain. And sitting around the fire gave us nightly opportunities to develop our social nature.

Oh, here's a story about researchers linking the development of fire and growth of intelligence not to eating softer meat, but to eating softer root vegetables:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/08/990810064914.htm

You seem to be quite passionate in your defense of electric carving knives. Perhaps they, too, have helped human intelligence make a great leap forward. Let's see ... once patriarchs no longer had to prove their masculinity through the manual carving of tough holiday meat courses, they were free to take on other domestic chores, leaving women more time to participate in business and politics, leading to election defeats for some office-holding Neanderthals ... Or something like that.  

LOL, I have no particular affinity for electric carving knives; it's just consistently surprised me that people seem to think they're so terrible.  And I've wondered if it's a close relative to an odd pattern I noticed when I worked at a living history museum.

People who saw us doing things like washing clothes by hand (poor Alma!  she must have loved living over a laundromat after that), or cooking a meal on a fireplace hearth, or churning butter tended to react in two different ways.  People who said they'd come from rural and/or poverty backgrounds would remark that they remembered doing work like that but they didn't seem to be particularly nostalgic about it.  However, middle- or upper-class people, and most people from cities, tended to over-romanticize all that.  I did enjoy hearth cooking and the exercise I got, but I wasn't really living a pre-industrial lifestyle; I did it from 8:30 to 5:00 five days a week and went home to all my modern conveniences.  But it gave me enough of a taste of that life to know that it wasn't "quaint" or fun; nor were the people necessarily more "real", all of which are illusions that people who never had to do that kind of work indulged in.  It can be fun churning butter at a special event, which I often did as a hands-on activity; quite another if you had to live that kind of energy-intensive life all the time.  It was no coincidence that most of the old photographs we saw of people in the 19th century, other than upper-class people, showed how much more quickly people aged in those days.  My remark about humanity declining after the discovery of fire was just a comment on that kind of reverse sentimentality about technology.

I do think there's a case to be made for some of what I've heard referred to as a "hand-made life."  If you make a cake from scratch, there's a certain amount of creative energy and constructive attention paid to it; not so much if you use a cake mix, although you still have a cake.  IMO our society would be more healthy -- physically and otherwise -- if we made more of an effort to revive some of that.  But still there would be a qualitative difference: people would have to make a conscious choice, whereas in pre-industrial times it was just how life was, and nothing much you could do about it.

That said, I suspect that my family liked electric carving knives at holidays because nobody was very good at carving up a turkey or duck by hand.  

[serious crayons]

(poor Alma!  she must have loved living over a laundromat after that)

Good point.

People who said they'd come from rural and/or poverty backgrounds would remark that they remembered doing work like that but they didn't seem to be particularly nostalgic about it.  However, middle- or upper-class people, and most people from cities, tended to over-romanticize all that.  I did enjoy hearth cooking and the exercise I got, but I wasn't really living a pre-industrial lifestyle; I did it from 8:30 to 5:00 five days a week and went home to all my modern conveniences.  But it gave me enough of a taste of that life to know that it wasn't "quaint" or fun; nor were the people necessarily more "real", all of which are illusions that people who never had to do that kind of work indulged in.

Totally agree. People tend to romanticize the past as well as the lifestyles of "simpler," less high-tech societies as being more authentic. For example -- and I apologize, as I know this isn't really your area of interest, but it's such a great example -- they'll talk about how wonderful "natural" childbirth is, free of all those artificial modern interventions. And while yes, you can make an argument that we've gone too far with modern interventions if people are scheduling their C-sections to accommodate their vacations or something, but let's not romanticize an era when babies were delivered with a minimum of medical frou-frou, and an alarming number of mothers and babies did not survive the event.

I think baking a cake from scratch is a fine way to spend your time if you really like doing it, if you like to bake the way other people like to read or watch TV or garden or do pottery or craft handmade furniture. My aunt is this way: she truly loves to bake and cook, even though she doesn't always eat the stuff herself. But I think expecting everybody (i.e., women) to do more scratch cooking all the time, regardless of personal interest, because it's "healthier" or otherwise morally superior can manifest as a perhaps unwitting yet insidious pressure to get women to focus on domestic chores at the expense of other achievements. There's only so much time, and our great-grandmothers not only didn't have convenience products, they also didn't have the internet or cable TV or movies or much reading material or 40-hour-a-week office jobs.

In practice, luckily, most people can make the choices that most suit them -- they love to bake cakes from scratch, but they wouldn't dream of pinning their laundry to a clothes line, let alone making their own soap from lye. Or they make the soap but buy the cake from the bakery.

If I'm going to bake a pie, it's going to be from scratch: I make the crust from flour and stuff, use fresh fruit or, my specialty, sweet potatoes, for the filling. But I only do it once or twice a year, not for every big Sunday after-church dinner.

[x-man]

I just discovered this thread, serious crayons, and thoroughly enjoyed all of it.  Marge Innavera's comments were especially funny.  You mention, but do not elaborate upon, the carved horses.  I thought I was the only one to notice.  Do others react the same way I did?:  As soon as I saw the horse on Jack's desk I thought of the one Ennis was carving in the tent.  Did Ennis give the horse and rider to Jack some time in the first summer?  Or did Jack carve the horse and rider, perhaps as a child, and the idea is a comparison between the skillfully carved horse on the desk and the rough horse in Ennis' hand?  Say more, people.  I wonder about the horses every time I watch the movie.  I just know Ang Lee did not have those horses there for no reason.

[Penthesilea]

There's an entire thread dedicated to the carved horses.
The horse Ennis gave to Jack is NOT the same he finds and picks up in Jack's room two decades later. The first doesn't have a rider and is much more rough, as you rightfully noticed. The one in Jack's room has a rider on it.
But I'm completely with you that the second horse is very evocative of the first one and that Ang Lee did it on purpose.

We've talked a lot of times about it, and possibly there's another thread especially about the carved wooden horsies, but here's the one I found for now:

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,2511.0.html

Have a look at it, and don't skip the last page, you may be surprised.