Why did Annie/Brokeback Mountain movie used men abused as children, why why why?

[Artiste]

Why did Annie/Brokeback Mountain movie used men abused as children, why why why? 

[Artiste]

Why did Annie/Brokeback Mountain movie used men abused as children, why why why? 

Why did Annie/Brokeback Mountain movie used men abused as children, why why why?

........

Post as you please !!

[Artiste]

Why did Annie/Brokeback Mountain movie used men abused as children, why why why?
.......

This puzzles me !!

Maybe it does to you too?

Au revoir,
hugs!

[brokeplex]

Why did Annie/Brokeback Mountain movie used men abused as children, why why why? 

1)who are you talking about? the characters Ennis del Mar and Jack Twist?

I don't think that either were "abused" as children.

Ennis' parents were killed in an truck accident, and his siblings raised him mostly. He was a victim of poverty, but I'm not sure how that can be thought of a deliberate abuse.

Jack was raised in a two parent household. His father was gruff and crude and enforced his lessons harshly, but abusive? I think that is debateable.
Is it abuse that his parents did not force him to finish high school? That comes closest in my mind to abuse, but I suspect that it was Jacks' decision to drop out.

2) are you talking about the Lureen and Alma characters?

 I can't see how either were abused, in fact Lureen was probably spoiled as a child.

On the other hand, I have always wondered, with no real evidence, if Lureen was a victim of incest. Could Bobby be L.D.s child?

Now that would be bona fide abuse!   

3) are you talking about Ennis's two girls or Bobby Twist?

the girls seem to be treated well. now was Bobby abused?

 Lureen seemed to neglect getting a tutor for his dyslexic reading problem, was that abuse? maybe

[Artiste]

Merci beaucoup brokeplex!!

Your post reveals much. You are brilliant!!

A- I am very happily surprised to think that Lureen was possibly a victim of incest !! In the past, I did think that,
but I did NOT dare mention it before, because many were displeased that I thought that she was lesbian  !! ??

So, maybe that could be like a proof ??
............

B- It just now brings me to mind (to my surprise) that Jack was so sexually abused too... as maybe incest ??

.......

C- Am also surprised that you think differently about abuse !! Maybe that or those concepts vary/ are varied ??

Au revoir,
hugs!  You merit more than one trumpet for your great[/b] post!! Good start !! Pray you'll add many too !!

[brokeplex]

Merci beaucoup brokeplex!!

Your post reveals much. You are brilliant!!

A- I am very happily surprised to think that Lureen was possibly a victim of incest !! In the past, I did think that,
but I did NOT dare mention it before, because many were displeased that I thought that she was lesbian  !! ??

So, maybe that could be like a proof ??
............

B- It just now brings me to mind (to my surprise) that Jack was so sexually abused too... as maybe incest ??

.......

C- Am also surprised that you think differently about abuse !! Maybe that or those concepts vary/ are varied ??

Au revoir,
hugs!  You merit more than one trumpet for your great[/b] post!! Good start !! Pray you'll add many too !!

a) I have no real evidence as to the Lureen incest, just some suggestive elements in the film. As you know, I do not think that Bobby is Jack's child.And I think that marriage was one of convenience and a certain fondness that developed over time and then faded away over time.

b) Jack as a victim of sexual abuse? I don't really see even the suggestion of sexual abuse.

OMT was not a supportive father, he was very short on praise. Why?

 I have to consider that if the Jack that we saw on the mountain is the same Jack who worked his fathers ranch, then OMT was probably justified in being harsh with Jack while he was working on family ranch, just as Aguirre was later on. Jack was kind of lazy and unlike Ennis he really wasn't cut out for ranch work.

[Artiste]

Merci brokeplex!

Now, you are making me pensive... much more and that's good !!

1- I agree with you that Bobby is likely not Lureen's child !! I always thought that and still think so, much especially if she is lesbian (not to be negative against lesbians now); and if she was abuse in an incest way, than that is a gray light, making her sad !! And her actions are therefore coloured to somehow revenge is that it: her towards the incest abuser ??

2- I am starting to see Jack as a victim of sexual abuse !! Yes! Think about it ??

Later as I must check to see which movie is coming up (with toi 4 cheeked in it maybe) ?

Waiting for your news,
hugs!!

[brokeplex]

Merci brokeplex!

Now, you are making me pensive... much more and that's good !!

1- I agree with you that Bobby is likely not Lureen's child !! I always thought that and still think so, much especially if she is lesbian (not to be negative against lesbians now); and if she was abuse in an incest way, than that is a gray light, making her sad !! And her actions are therefore coloured to somehow revenge is that it: her towards the incest abuser ??

2- I am starting to see Jack as a victim of sexual abuse !! Yes! Think about it ??

Later as I must check to see which movie is coming up (with toi 4 cheeked in it maybe) ?

Waiting for your news,
hugs!!

maybe you should separate that issues of

1) Lureen as a lesbian, and

2) Bobby as not Jack's child

I think there is no evidence that Lureen was a lesbian, but there is some evidence that Bobby was not Jack's child and there is a suggestion that LD is the father of Bobby.

Where is the evidence of Jack as a sexually abused boy? You aren't talking about the OMT pissing incident are you? I hope not, that is so overwrought!

OMT used a crude method of teaching little Jack a lesson in hygiene, but to call it sexual abuse is stretching it way past the snapping point! 

[Artiste]

Merci brokeplex!

Since you are asking me for evidence, you are asked to hand some too please:
1- Where is the suggestion that LD is the father of Bobby ?? (Who is LD again?)

2- Someone wrote to me that children want to help the parent who abused them ! So maybe that is a clue that Jack had been abused ??

Au revoir,
hugs!

[brokeplex]

Merci brokeplex!

Since you are asking me for evidence, you are asked to hand some too please:
1- Where is the suggestion that LD is the father of Bobby ?? (Who is LD again?)

2- Someone wrote to me that children want to help the parent who abused them ! So maybe that is a clue that Jack had been abused ??

Au revoir,
hugs!

LD Newsome is the father of Lureen Newsome the wife of Jack Twist. Hello!!! Artiste!!! Earth calling!!!

The suggestion that Lureen is the victim of incest and that LD is the father of Bobby makes sense only if you first accept that Jack is not the father of Bobby.

(see timeline problems of Lureens pregnancy and her first meeting Jack, Jack just can't be the boys father, can't fight the math - it is on another thread)

 Look at the film and notice that LD takes possesion of the baby in the nursery scene and says that he is the spittin' image of his "grandpa", well if grandpa is the father then that is certainly true.

The whole issue of a marriage of convenience between Lureen and Jack makes more sense if LD is the father, because Jack is expendable in both LD's and Lureens eyes, it also explains some of LD's hostility. And it explains the payoff that Jack says to Ennis that LD is willing to make just to get rid of Jack. Jack is an inconvenient reminder to LD of his transgressions.

[Artiste]

Hello brokeplex!!! Artiste calling!!!  ha! ha!

You say:
Look at the film and notice that LD takes possesion of the baby in the nursery scene and says that he is the spittin' image of his "grandpa", well if grandpa is the father then that is certainly true.

The whole issue of a marriage of convenience between Lureen and Jack makes more sense if LD is the father, because Jack is expendable in both LD's and Lureens eyes, it also explains some of LD's hostility. And it explains the payoff that Jack says to Ennis that LD is willing to make just to get rid of Jack. Jack is an inconvenient reminder to LD of his transgressions.   
..........


Brokeplex, you are right that LD considers the baby an spittin' image of himself... but you do not know that he is lead to think that,   possibly ?? (As both Lureen and her mother wants him to think that now !!)

But, even if indeed LD had sex with Lureen, I do not think that she is having his child, but lets her father think that, for convenience,  for now in the nursery scene !!
L
Later on, he figures it out for himself that is not his love-child (is that the right expression ?), since Lureen had sex with somebody else besides Jack !!

That is why the Thanksgiving scene is finding that LD is mother-hen, and replacing Jack as father, but Jack refuses that !! 

That is what I figure!! Surprised!! ??

..............

Waiting for your advise, (note that Jack is being abused by LD till then, and even after since he was offered $ to go away,)

hugs!  And Jack does NOT go away because he was an abused child in his youth... so stays with Lureen

[Front-Ranger]

(note that Jack is being abused by LD till then, and even after since he was offered $ to go away,)

hugs!  And Jack does NOT go away because he was an abused child in his youth... so stays with Lureen

This is a pattern among abused children. You are right Artiste. Oftentimes abused children seek out partners or others in their adult lives who will abuse them again because that is what they think they deserve, and/or they seek to resolve past dramas by replaying them over and over.

However, this does not mean that I agree with the notion of Jack being sexually abused as a child. To suggest this would be dangerous because then someone might argue that he was "indoctrinated" into homosexuality, and I do not agree with that line of thinking. Furthermore, there is no suggestion in the story that this was the case.

[Artiste]

Thanks Front-Ranger!

You say:
This is a pattern among abused children. You are right Artiste. Oftentimes abused children seek out partners or others in their adult lives who will abuse them again because that is what they think they deserve, and/or they seek to resolve past dramas by replaying them over and over.

.....

Front-Ranger:
1- Your first paragraph places a light which not many persons know about !! And too many don't want to know about ?? Among them are likely some who have been abused, and continue to help the abuser... in different ways. Tell us more ??

......

2- You second paragraph says a lot too:
However, this does not mean that I agree with the notion of Jack being sexually abused as a child. To suggest this would be dangerous because then someone might argue that he was "indoctrinated" into homosexuality, and I do not agree with that line of thinking. Furthermore, there is no suggestion in the story that this was the case.
 

.........

Front-Ranger:

I am just trying to start to learn about persons who have been abused.  You do not think that Jack was maybe abused sexually as a child ??  Some persons figure, unfortunately, that they have been indoctrinated into homosexuality !! You know some thinking that way ?? Of course, there are others who think, fortunately, that it (being gay), is natural !! Guess those views are maybe two opposites sides of the coin??

Better maybe to start thinking too about other forms of abuse ?? That needs to be talked about !! ??

Au revoir,
hugs!

[optom3]

In the S.S Jack tells how his father urinated over him when he kept mising the toilet.To me that has always had sexual overtones to it.There is a phrase is there not used to describe the act of urinating on your partner during sex,it is called a golden shower.At worst it has I think sexual overtones.at best it is an abusive act anyway.
I can think of no "normal" father who would act in such a fashion,to try and toilet train a kid.It leaves a nasty taste.
As to whether the child is Jacks or not,there is no evidence time line wise in the s.s to indicate either way.It is the film  and screenplay where the whole thing becomes more ambiguous.Only Proulx heself I think knows the answer to that.In the ss it ays that Jack goes back to BBM the next year but as there is no work goes rodeoing in Texas,then meets Lureen,but there is no indication of the time elapsed.The only mention of time is when they meet after 4 years we know Jacks kid is 8 months old.So he could easily be Jacks.4 years is plenty of time to meet Lureen,get her pregnant and then the child be 8 months old.
I agree if the child is not Jacks the that opens up a whole new minefield.The one thing I love about Proulx is that she does not spoon feed you.That means that pretty well everything is open to interpretation by each individual

[brokeplex]

In the S.S Jack tells how his father urinated over him when he kept mising the toilet.To me that has always had sexual overtones to it.There is a phrase is there not used to describe the act of urinating on your partner during sex,it is called a golden shower.At worst it has I think sexual overtones.at best it is an abusive act anyway.
I can think of no "normal" father who would act in such a fashion,to try and toilet train a kid.It leaves a nasty taste.
As to whether the child is Jacks or not,there is no evidence time line wise in the s.s to indicate either way.It is the film  and screenplay where the whole thing becomes more ambiguous.Only Proulx heself I think knows the answer to that.In the ss it ays that Jack goes back to BBM the next year but as there is no work goes rodeoing in Texas,then meets Lureen,but there is no indication of the time elapsed.The only mention of time is when they meet after 4 years we know Jacks kid is 8 months old.So he could easily be Jacks.4 years is plenty of time to meet Lureen,get her pregnant and then the child be 8 months old.
I agree if the child is not Jacks the that opens up a whole new minefield.The one thing I love about Proulx is that she does not spoon feed you.That means that pretty well everything is open to interpretation by each individual

the ss and the film are separate works of art and must be evaluated independently.

1) in the film the date shown of Jack meeting Lureen is Aug 1966, if Bobby is conceived that night then he would then be 4 months old in Sept of 1967, just can't get around the human gestation period. But, when Jack meets Ennis in Sept of 1967 he says that his son is 8 months old. Accepting the cold hard facts of the math, Lureen was pregnant with Bobby when she met Jack. Looking carefully at the film, this in not ambiguous at all. And, I don't believe that the film makers would leave a glaring continuity error this big, I believe that Ang Lee is offering us a much more poignant alternative to the Proulx story. I agree that in the SS this alternate reality is not touched upon.

2) In the ss, the pissing on little Jack was offered as a narrative told as a memory by Ennis of a story that Jack told him. It gets real third hand.  And that "story" in the ss must be evaluated independently from the film. I think the pissing is nasty and crude, but not necessarily a form of abuse given the time and place of the setting of the story. Ranch life was very rough, little boys had to be taught lessons quickly. We should not imbue our 21st notions of what is "child abuse" into the actions of a character in a story set over a half a century ago. One of the things that is very clear about Proulx is that she is exactingly faithful to time and place in her stories. We must evaluate OMT's actions within the context of a rancher in rural WY in the 1950's, not exotic sexual acts of some gay men or straight couples from a later decades which OMT would have no reasonable likelihood of knowledge (i.e. golden showers) 

3) reiterating about the suggestion that Lureen was a victim of incest. That is only weakly suggested in the film and not touched on in the ss, and only makes a least partial sense if one accepts that Lureen was pregnant when she met Jack. I am not entirely sure whether or not I accept that LD is the father of Bobby, but I am very sure that Jack is not Bobby's father.

[RossInIllinois]

Why Why Why o Why is my answer...

[brokeplex]

Artiste's question about the "portrayal" of survivors of child abuse in BM is a fair one and deserves a hearing. I don't agree with all of Artiste's conclusions, but he does ask interesting questions.

[Fran]

Here are my thoughts on Artiste's question in terms of the story:

By today's standards, story Jack and story Ennis were subjected to some form of child abuse (not sexual abuse, in my opinion):  Jack when his father urinated and beat him up for missing the toilet when he was only three or four and Ennis when his father took him to see Earl's mutilated corpse when he was nine years old and then joked about it. 

As for why, I believe Annie Proulx included these anecdotes as plot devices.

Ennis needed a reason for continuing to deny himself a "sweet life" with Jack, and she gives him a perfect reason to be afraid to be open about his love for Jack.  What his father exposed him to made a lasting impression on him; his fear would never allow him to live openly with Jack. 

Ennis's suddenly remembering Jack's story about his father's reaction to his toilet-training accident reinforces for the reader how horrible a person OMT is.  While up on Brokeback, Jack told Ennis that his father, even though he had been a well-known roper in his time, had never come to see him ride and had kept all of his secrets to himself.  We dislike OMT from the beginning for being an uncaring father; when we read about the bathroom incident on the heels of OMT's telling Ennis about Jack's ranch neighbor from Texas, we dislike OMT even more. 

Additionally, Jack's and Ennis's abuse show us what tough childhoods they had and how difficult their formative years must have been.  Neither of them had the happy childhood children deserve, which makes their inability to have a "sweet life" together when they were older and in control of their own lives even harder for the reader to accept.

[Artiste]

Thanks optom!

I am glad that you brought up the term: golden shower !! I had forgotten it, as it displeases me terribly when someone asked me to urinate on him, or he on me !! I have met some persons like that, and since they shocked me, I never thought of asking why do you want that, etc. ?? Of course, I broke up my communications with such!! I wonder how many are there who like such actions? Utmostly rare, from my experiences with unumerable gay men and others!!

I find it as a form of abuse !!  I think that some persons do not at all care about others, but themselves. Some are bullies !! Some are thugs !! ??

OMT seems to me now, as a bully, in some ways!!

And, therefore, he abuses others, and not only Jack the child ... also his wife ?

Au revoir, awaiting your news,
hugs!!

[Artiste]

Thanks brokeplex!

I agree totally with you that Lureen is pregnant BEFORE she meets Jack!

Therefore, do you see that as a form of abuse?

As you post always wonderful communications too, au revoir,
hugs!

[Artiste]

Thanks RossInIllinois!

Are you asking why I created this thread?

Or the whys as the answers?

Au revoir,
hugs!

[Artiste]

Thanks Elaine!

I am very pleased with your post too.

You accentuate that Annie does add abuse to increase fear  ??

Both, but WHY does Annie do that to both Ennis and Jack ??

Ennis and Jack both seemed continuing the different forms of abuse that they had as children, but why not have only ONE instead of the two ??

Au revoir,
hugs!!

[optom3]

Thanks Elaine!

I am very pleased with your post too.

You accentuate that Annie does add abuse to increase fear  ??

Both, but WHY does Annie do that to both Ennis and Jack ??

Ennis and Jack both seemed continuing the different forms of abuse that they had as children, but why not have only ONE instead of the two ??

Au revoir,
hugs!!

I think that maybe she involved both Jack and Ennis to let us see the different effects on both men.Jack has not let whateve ha happened to him,grind him down and laden him with guilt.Quite the reverse,it appears to spur him on almost to stick two fingers up.He seems almost set free by it. Ennis on the other hand is imprisoned by what happened to him.He is bowed down with guilt.
So we see the differences between the two men are further enhanced and magnified.
Of course to draw this conclusion presupposes that we believe both men were at least to some extent the victims of childhood abuse.

[Artiste]

Thanks  very much optom!

Your post says a great deal about Ennis and Jack !!
You accentuate different effects
that child abuse can have, when they become men !!

.........

Jack becomes outgoing (is that the right term ?) !!

Ennis remains in his fear !!

.............

Now, I am lost... as to what to say.
Both Ennis and Jack seem to have grown up by themselves, in a way ??
Since Ennis' mother passed away while he was young, that also made a difference in him ??
However, in Jack's case, he got continued love from Mrs. Twist, who cared for him, and that made a big difference as to his personnality?

Maybe ? ?

Of course as you say, if both Ennis and Jack were abused as children.

Awaiting your news,
hugs!