what's the point of the job switch?

[starboardlight]

I've always, since 1997, taken that to mean that Ennis has well-developed saddle muscles that enable him to throw a good fuck.

This is also where the narrative tells us that Jack lies to Ennis about his sexual activity with other guys: "'Shit no,' said Jack, who had been riding more than bulls, not rolling his own."

Do we know for sure that's what it means though?

We all have discussed this same thing on other threads I recall, but I don't think we ever got a definitive answer.  As as woman, a man can ask me to 'ride him' which obviously means peg A in slot B.  But a Civil War soldier spoke of going to a whorehouse and 'riding a Dutch gal', meaning of course the same thing, but HE was doing the 'riding'.  So it seems the expression can be used either way.

Based on the text, we can be reasonably certain.

First time up, Ennis fucks Jack. That's clear from Annie Proulx's description of their first sexual encounter.

I won't dispute that the description could be used either way, but do bear in mind we're not talking about heterosexual sex here. Jack "rides" bulls. The implication here--to a gay man reading it--is that Jack's the one getting fucked, and there is nothing in Annie Proulx's text to indicate this changes. The analogy is Jack sitting down on a bull to ride it compared to Jack "sitting down" on Ennis's cock. Possibly the position used might change, but the understanding of this gay man--and of all the other gay men in my social circle--is that the one who is getting fucked is the one who is getting a cock inserted in his ass, regardless of whether he is being taken from behind--as in the first tent scene--or whether he might be straddling his partner and sitting down on his partner's erection.

Some gay men do switch roles. Every indication that we have of Ennis's character, in particular in the movie where internalized homophobia is such an important part of Ennis's make-up, suggests that he is not one of those gay men who switch roles. For Ennis, especially "Movie Ennis," to take Jack's cock up his own ass would have made him "queer." It just didn't happen.

Any other gay men care to "ride" this one?

Jeff, I think you make a strong argument, but I'm not convinced that "ride" meant getting fucked. The term might be used that way among your circle, but even in gay bars, I've heard it used interchangably. The imagery of "riding someone's ass" is having the person on all four and taking him from behind. (I"m sorry for the language, but we're getting into a water where the precise meaning of a word is necessary)

We do see a hint at a reversal. At the camp fire conversation, before the lake side showdown, it's Ennis who moves his hand between Jack's legs. I think he's more comfortable with Jack's cock than you suggested. Certainly the scene doesn't reveal anything specific, but it hints at Ennis being willing to give little Jack some happy attention.

Now, please try to help me out, here. I am trying to understand, and no offense or disrespect to anyone's opinion intended, but why do some of you women apparently have such a difficult time with the idea that Ennis didn't get fucked by Jack? This isn't a gay thing. Do you not get how powerful the taboo is among "straight" males against "taking it up the ass"? I would have an easier time believing that the Ennis of the original story, who at least can admit that he shouldn't have let Jack out of his sights, would switch roles, but not the Ennis of the film. That man, Ennis of the film, is extremely internally homophobic. That's one of his defining characteristics--this is what I meant when I said it would be an egregious violation of his character for him to have been the receptive partner.

The answer is not that Ennis isn't really "straight," because that is how he sees and defines himself. Guys like Ennis can ass-fuck any number of "queers" and emerge with their self-image intact because they've still played the "man's part." But try to turn the tables on them, you'll end up like Earl.

and I don't know if movie Ennis is that conflicted about being queer. He knows he is, as he asks Jack about having the feel ing that people are looking and knowing. To me, his conflict is not being able to envision a place for them to freely express their love and live a life together. So I really don't think it's that out of character for him to switch the sexual role with Jack once in a while.

That said, I'm arguing for the sake of exploring the ideas. I'm not sure I believe strongly one way or another. There's not enough to solidify their sexual dynamic in my mind.

[serious crayons]

Jeff, it's looking like no matter how many times we argue about this, I will never be able to convince you that I am right. We've reached an impasse; there is a fundamental difference in the way you and I understand the whole movie. Oh well. There are others among us at BetterMost who agree with you, and others who agree with me.

But of course, I can't just leave it there without a FEW quick comments. (I feel like such a thread hog! If only I could harness all this verbal energy for actual work!)

"[Annie Proulx] and I spoke about Ennis and his stoicism, his background, his homophobic worldview, his inability to access his emotions."

No flippancy or disrespect intended but I really don't see how you can "respectfully disagree" with one of the individuals responsible for bringing Ennis to life on the screen. We can all formulate our own interpretations, but in the end the authoritative voices belong to Annie Proulx, Larry McMurtry, Diana Ossana, Ang Lee, and Heath Ledger.

I don't know how I can disagree with her, except that her phrase just does not strike me as an accurate way to describe what I see onscreen. For that matter, I'm not exactly sure what she means by "inability to access." Maybe she is using the phrase in an offhand way, without closely examining its exact meaning, to loosely refer to Ennis' ability to accept himself. Maybe she's using it in a pop-psychology way, as you might say Ennis "has issues" or something. Maybe she's referring to the way Ennis at 19. Maybe she's just wrong. Diana (and by extension Annie) are undeniably important forces in shaping the movie, but you just mentioned three others who also had a hand.

Yes, it is love. But does this mean Ennis is willing to face up to it? In my view, he continues to deny it until the crisis of Jack's death, of really losing Jack, breaks down his resistance and he can't deny it any more. And it's too late. That's his tragedy.

... Again, noticing something and accepting it and facing up to it are two different things. You'll have to trust me on this one: Some of us gay men go through this, though I'll grant you it may not ordinarily take 20 years (though I've heard of some cases where it does even take a lot longer).

I'll give you the second point, deferring once again to your greater knowledge of that process, and because I can understand how in reference to one's sexuality there IS a difference between noticing and accepting. In Ennis' case that would be further complicated by denial and repression and so forth.

But love is different. I can't imagine how you could NOTICE that you're in love, behave toward your loved one in a completely and consistently lover-like manner, but still not ACCEPT that you're in love. Not accepting it would mean avoiding the person, treating him coldly, feigning lack of interest, etc. We've all seen that in other movies, and probably also in real life. But that doesn't describe Ennis AT ALL. So just what does it mean here? What DOES he think he's feeling?

I can't imagine how Ennis could act the way he does without being aware of strong emotions toward Jack that include not only friendship but also feelings that take it beyond friendship: sexual attraction and longing and so on. I'lll grant that he may never have used the word "love" to himself. Let's say, he feels "this thing" for Jack. We would translate "this thing" as "love." That counts just as much as if he used the Russian word for love.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Starboardlight,

Jeff, I think you make a strong argument, but I'm not convinced that "ride" meant getting fucked. The term might be used that way among your circle, but even in gay bars, I've heard it used interchangably. The imagery of "riding someone's ass" is having the person on all four and taking him from behind. (I"m sorry for the language, but we're getting into a water where the precise meaning of a word is necessary)

Good point. I've heard the term used that way, too. But taken in context of Jack sitting on the bulls as a rodeo bullrider, and the only explicit description we have of their sexual activity involves Ennis fucking Jack, I'm sticking with my interpretation.

We do see a hint at a reversal. At the camp fire conversation, before the lake side showdown, it's Ennis who moves his hand between Jack's legs. I think he's more comfortable with Jack's cock than you suggested. Certainly the scene doesn't reveal anything specific, but it hints at Ennis being willing to give little Jack some happy attention.

That's an interesting point, too. I'm going to double-check the text, but that will have to wait until I'm at home. I'm writing this at the office, and if I kept a copy of the story with me, I'd never get any work done!

[Jeff Wrangler]

Katherine,

No, we're never going to convince each other. I'm not evangelical about this. My principal concern is being sure that I've explained my own position clearly, and even that, it's now clear to me, is an evolving process.

If you're a thread hog (wonderful phrase!), so am I!

Tell you what, though, I also don't think I'll ever comprehend how you can "disagree" with Diana Ossana. Granted, as even I noted, she wasn't the only one to have a hand in the creation of "Movie Ennis" as we know him, but barring comments from any of the others, it just strikes me as, I don't know--presumptuous?--to say that a creator is "wrong" about a character she helped to create. For the record, since I first read her essay, I've taken the "inability to access" comment to mean "out of touch with" or "not understanding" his own feelings, but maybe that's been clear from what I've said previously of my interpretation.

What DOES he think he's feeling?

He doesn't know, or understand, what he's feeling. That's my point. He knows the emotion is strong, of course, but, at the risk of prolonging this discussion to absurd lengths, as I'm writing this I'm suddenly thinking that another factor is that Ennis has not seen a whole lot of love in his life, certainly not of the mature, adult variety.

I've written elsewhere in other contexts that a father who forced two little boys to view a desecrated dead body could probably be considered abusive, and in the society and place in which Ennis was raised, he probably didn't see a lot of love from his father, or see his father express a lot of love for Ennis's mother, though I realize this is merely conjecture on my part. I presume he thought he was in love with Alma when he asked her to marry him, but whether he really was or not I have no firm conviction.

So I have no problem believing that Ennis doesn't really understand that what he and Jack share is love until it's too late. Is that realistic? Probably not, but it's a part of the willing suspension of disbelief I make for this story anyway.

[starboardlight]

Tell you what, though, I also don't think I'll ever comprehend how you can "disagree" with Diana Ossana. Granted, as even I noted, she wasn't the only one to have a hand in the creation of "Movie Ennis" as we know him, but barring comments from any of the others, it just strikes me as, I don't know--presumptuous?--to say that a creator is "wrong" about a character she helped to create. For the record, since I first read her essay, I've taken the "inability to access" comment to mean "out of touch with" or "not understanding" his own feelings, but maybe that's been clear from what I've said previously of my interpretation.

"presumptuous"? maybe. Post-modern? YES!

[serious crayons]

OK, maybe "she's wrong" does sound a bit presumptious. (She's misguided? No, kidding.) I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not willing to let six words -- six very ambiguous and possibly casually chosen words -- dictate my interpetation of a central issue in a movie that I care enough about to have spent the past three months discussing constantly.

Besides, I think that's too big a burden to place on that tiny phrase. For one thing, I don't know how literally she meant it; I can imagine writing something like that without examining it all that closely. For another, I don't know exactly what it means. Ennis undeniably can be described as not accessing ALL of his feelings. Until Jack made his move in the tent, Ennis was unable to access his attraction to him. Unable to access his feelings of sadness or fear, Ennis reacts by beating people up. I would not be averse to applying it to his feelings about sexuality, Alma, his childhood. Those all make sense.

But if there's a way to do all the things I listed a couple of posts ago -- all those things people do when they're in love and that Ennis certainly is aware that he's doing -- if you can fully recognize that you long for someone when he's absent and be overjoyed when he's present and so on, if you can do all that stuff yet NOT think of what you feel as something like love ... Well, that's just too abstract a concept for me to grasp. What does that even mean? How would it look inside someone's head? What would they be telling themselves? I can't imagine that in any sort of concrete way.

Let's say for the sake of argument that love has maybe three major requirements that all have to be in place, broadly described as 1) friendship, 2) sexual attaction and 3) something harder to label but combining longing and joy and affection and emotional tension and all those other ways you feel about lovers as opposed to friends. I realize others might catalog these requirements differently, but assuming it goes something like that, then Ennis has all the requirements, and he KNOWS he has them. So almost by definition, he can access his feelings of love. Easily, I think.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Tell you what, the truth is, when I read Diana's comment, that was the catalyst that made all the pieces of the puzzle that is Brokeback Mountain fall into place for me. Suddenly I understood the difference between Annie Proulx's original Ennis and the Ennis we see on the screen. At last the movie made sense--it's own sense, but sense nevertheless--to me.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

Apparently I also have greater faith in the human capacity for denial than you do.

[j.U.d.E.]

Euh, just bumping for later, sorry.

~ j U d E

[Jeff Wrangler]

Starboardlight,

We do see a hint at a reversal. At the camp fire conversation, before the lake side showdown, it's Ennis who moves his hand between Jack's legs. I think he's more comfortable with Jack's cock than you suggested. Certainly the scene doesn't reveal anything specific, but it hints at Ennis being willing to give little Jack some happy attention.

It's been a while since I had time to sit down and watch the DVD, so my memory of the staging of that scene in the film is hazy and I won't address the film's treatment of the conversation. If, however, you are just referring to the Annie Proulx original, then I'm afraid you have it backwards.

Here's the paragraph from the story:

"The horses nickered in the darkness beyond the fire's circle of light. Ennis put his arm around Jack, pulled him close, said he saw his girls about once a month, Alma Jr. a shy seventeen-year-old with his beanpole length, Francine a little live wire. Jack slid his cold hand between Ennis's legs, said he was worried about his boy who was, no doubt about it, dyslexic or something, couldn't get anything right, fifteen years old and couldn't hardly read, he could see it though goddamn Lureen wouldn't admit to it and pretended the kid was o.k., refused to get any bitchin kind a help about it. He didn't know what the fuck the answer was. Lureen had the money and called the shots." [Boldface added by me.]

If Jack is doing anything here besides trying to warm his hand between Ennis's thighs, then he's trying to get Ennis hard so that Ennis can fuck him. Two paragraphs later we are told "they rolled down into the dirt." So in the original story anyway, I believe this passage actually tends to support my interpretation.

But thanks for reminding me of it!

[serious crayons]

Apparently I also have greater faith in the human capacity for denial than you do.

Maybe. But if that interpretation helps you make sense of the rest of the movie, then you definitely should go with it.