Author Topic: Why did Annie/Brokeback Mountain movie used men abused as children, why why why?  (Read 10899 times)

Offline Artiste

  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • ********
  • Posts: 15,998
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 conveniencefor 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

Offline Front-Ranger

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 30,287
  • Brokeback got us good.
(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.
"chewing gum and duct tape"

Offline Artiste

  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • ********
  • Posts: 15,998
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!

Offline optom3

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,638
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

Offline brokeplex

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,247
  • LCARS
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.

Offline RossInIllinois

  • Brokeback Mountain Resident
  • ****
  • Posts: 235
Why Why Why o Why is my answer... ::)

Offline brokeplex

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,247
  • LCARS
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.

Offline Fran

  • "ABCs of BBM" moderator
  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 9,905
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.

Offline Artiste

  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • ********
  • Posts: 15,998
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!!

Offline Artiste

  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • ********
  • Posts: 15,998
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!