Author Topic: Got What They Deserved?  (Read 22306 times)

Offline Jeff Wrangler

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,165
  • "He somebody you cowboy'd with?"
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #50 on: June 26, 2006, 03:30:00 pm »
What bothers me about the embrace thing -- and it bothered me when I first read the story, before seeing the movie -- is that it seems not to enhance anything but rather contradicts Annie's own purposes. After all, by her own words Ennis also prefers to "embrace" ALMA from behind, as if not wanting to remember it's a woman he's with! And she portrays Story Ennis as otherwise not particularly homophobic, except for that one anomalous detail. I felt as if she threw that in because it was a catchy way to describe a man ambivalently involved in a gay relationship, without regard to the contradiction and larger implications for her character.

Interesting point, though I wonder--haven't resolved for myself, but do wonder--whether this comparison of embraces is a comparison of apples to oranges. When we see him embracing Alma from behind, they're having sex. When we see him, in Jack's memory, embracing Jack from behind in the "dozy embrace," he's being affectionate.

Yes, we see him embracing Jack sexually from behind, but that's not what the "dozy embrace" is about.
"It is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellow-men, and travel far and wide."--Charles Dickens.

Offline serious crayons

  • Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,711
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #51 on: June 26, 2006, 04:51:35 pm »
Interesting point, though I wonder--haven't resolved for myself, but do wonder--whether this comparison of embraces is a comparison of apples to oranges. When we see him embracing Alma from behind, they're having sex. When we see him, in Jack's memory, embracing Jack from behind in the "dozy embrace," he's being affectionate.

Yes, we see him embracing Jack sexually from behind, but that's not what the "dozy embrace" is about.

True. The moods and purposes and situations are very different. It just seems an ironic and additionally confusing detail. His embrace of Alma clearly does have something to do with wishing she were someone else. And his embrace of Jack supposedly has similar reasons. So what kind of partner DOES he want?

Offline Mikaela

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,229
  • Unsaid... and now unsayable
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #52 on: June 26, 2006, 07:33:14 pm »
He wants Jack. Not trying to be flippant, here, - au contraire, I agree with everything you've written concerning Ennis in your recent posts in this thread, Katherine. You've spoken my mind.

The "not want to know nor feel that it was Jack he held" is a description of the short story situation as it was or may have been, fairly soon after the two of them had initiated their sexual relationship. It doesn't hold true for the later events. Nor is it an objective description, but subjectively seen by Jack through the lense of 20 years of disappointments and twarted hopes and dreams, in the narrative following on the heels of a devastatingly hurtful quarrel between the two. Hardly the best circumstances in which Jack might give a level-headed evaluation of Ennis's state of mind back in the day. And moreover, it is a stepping stone leading up to the conclusion he's working towards: That they haven't gotten very much further, despite all that time. Clearly they have gotten *some* tiny little way, even in Jack's disappointed mind. And the way they've gotten, is (for instance) that Ennis was later willing to embrace him face to face (the reunion) and was willing to admit out loud that he longed for Jack, specifically for Jack, sexually and romantically. ("Wrang it out a hunderd times thinking about you/I shouldn't a let you out a my sights").

So in my view, even in the short story, Ennis is able to face Jack and face what Jack means to him - though it happens about 1 year into the relationship instead of 1 day into it. Though I admit that when I first read the short story (months before I saw the film), this was not immediately clear to me and I went wailing onto the internet in utter disbelief, completely incredulous and devastated that "the fact that Ennis didn't want to know nor feel that it was Jack he held"  didn't "mar the memory for Jack".

How *could* that not mar it?  And if they'd really gotten no further, if Ennis still couldn't face up to and admit who he really loved, how could Jack bear to still be there, 20 years later?

The film then came as an immense comfort and reassurance to me, because TS2 IMO completely removed the above questions from the equation. And the movie flashback, the way it's filmed with Ennis looking at Jack's profile, did the same. There was no doubt in my mind any more. In the film, Ennis faces up both to Jack *and* his love for Jack - and Jack knows it too.

The way film Ennis acts around Jack and in relation to Jack through the long years - as detailed in one of Katherine's posts above, - Ennis would have to be completely sleepwalking through life, entirely oblivious to absolutely every emotion and desire, if he wasn't in fact aware of and admitting to his feelings for Jack (whether he uses the word "love" or just calls it "this thing" to himself is not important IMO).

The tragedy just becomes *more* poignant in that Ennis *is* aware of and acknowledges to himself that he loves another man - but considers this beautiful emotion within himself repulsive, in accordance with his childhood conditioning and the shared opinion of the society he lives in - and is never able to move beyond that to actually live the life that he truly wants (and is ashamed for wanting). It also, to me, makes it more understandable why Jack would manage to wait nearly 20 years before making half-hearted attempts to move on. Knowing Ennis loves him but is unable to move past society's judgement IMO is something else, - emotionally more nurturing, providing more hope for the future, - than being with a man who won't even admit to himself (much less to Jack) that he loves him.

Whether Ennis thinks of himself as not just loving Jack, but as being homosexual, I'm somewhat  less certain about. But IMO, at least by the time he asks Jack about "being stared at in the street", he has come to this conclusion concerning himself - he doesn't any more think of himself as a straight guy who inexplicably has happened to fall in love with a man.

Offline dly64

  • Brokeback Got Me Good
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #53 on: June 26, 2006, 07:34:53 pm »
What bothers me about the embrace thing -- and it bothered me when I first read the story, before seeing the movie -- is that it seems not to enhance anything but rather contradicts Annie's own purposes. After all, by her own words Ennis also prefers to "embrace" ALMA from behind, as if not wanting to remember it's a woman he's with! And she portrays Story Ennis as otherwise not particularly homophobic, except for that one anomalous detail. I felt as if she threw that in because it was a catchy way to describe a man ambivalently involved in a gay relationship, without regard to the contradiction and larger implications for her character.

Anyway, this is a minor issue, but it illuminates a major one that, as I have said before, divides Brokies. What did Ennis know and when did he know it? What did he realize at the end? I disagree with most of the past several posters about this, and as it seems an unresolvable controversy I'm sure you will all disagree with me. But here's my opinion:

Ennis loves Jack throughout the movie. And he knows he does -- he may not use the word "love" to describe "this thing," but he knows his feelings for Jack are so intense he barely trusts himself to be around Jack in public because they might grab hold of him at any time. That's why he mopes while Jack breaks camp on Brokeback, why he cries in the alley, why he pines for Jack for four years, why he gets all excited about the postcard, why he dresses in his best shirt and sits with his nose pressed against the window for the reunion, why he is overjoyed when he sees Jack, why he sends up a prayer of thanks, why he continues to see him for 16 more years despite all the risks and fears and shame entailed, why he always looks thrilled whenever he sets eyes on Jack, why he breaks up with Cassie, why he looks miserable in the bus station ... and on and on and on. People who don't know or want to deny that they are in love feign disinterest in the object of their love, they don't behave like that.

I also think he knows from the beginning that he is gay, though he is doing his damnedest to repress it. He believes what he's been taught -- that it's immoral and disgusting and so on. Yet he gradually comes to some recognition of it, as evidenced by the "people know" scene (Update: Jane, I just saw your post, and that is exactly what I think!). The stress of coping with these contradictory emotions is part of what prompts his breakdown at the lake. But it's also because he knows that he can't stand it no more -- loving Jack but not being able to live with him -- yet has no idea how to fix it.

And what he finally, finally realizes at the end is that he should have made his love for Jack his first priority, that it should have outweighed all other considerations -- fear, shame, following rules -- that he should have fixed the situation rather than stood it. Hence his question to Alma, "this Kurt, he loves you?" He has realized that love is what's most important.

Guess what? I disagree.

Let me make sure I am not misunderstanding you ... you think Ennis knew he loved Jack and could admit it to himself even though he never used the word "love"? You also think the Alma, Jr. scene is when Ennis realizes that he should have made Jack a priority? And that Ennis knows from the get-go that he is gay, but tries to repress it?

Ennis could not admit to himself that he loved Jack until it was too late. Previously, I quoted Ang Lee ... I will do it again (excuse the repetitiveness ... but it proves my point):

You've been quoted as saying the movie is about the impossibility of love?

Ang Lee: I think the gay factors, after a while, maybe half the movie, the circumstances are set. They can live together. Ennis has a choice to make it work. That's why Jack complains later in the movie. All they got is Brokeback? That's bullshit. They're both gays, but one chooses to be more adventurous. The other has to go through self denial and only accepts it when it's too late, when he missed him. That is true. Eventually we surpass the obstacles and it's really a search for that obscure object of love.


The whole interview can be read at:

http://www.movieweb.com/news/28/10128.php

There is another interview with Diana Ossana and Larry McMurty that also indicates when Ennis realized he loved Jack:

MW: For what purpose did you expand the role of Cassie (Linda Cardellini), and what part did she play in Ennis’ relationship to the women in his life?
DO: Cassie somewhat exemplifies Ennis’s continual denial of his emotional makeup, and his attempts to have what he believed was a “normal” relationship with a woman. After his and Jack’s final confrontation about Mexico, Ennis realizes that it is Jack he truly loves, and he simply cannot continue in his attempts at a relationship with Cassie, thus her confronting him in the diner about his whereabouts and her frustrations and painful realization that she’s not “the one.”

http://www.cinemalogue.com/2006/02/14/brokeback-interview/

A second interview talks about Ennis' homophobia at what point he gets to by the end of the film:

McMurtry: I don’t think Ennis would kill himself.
Ossana: He’s too tough. That would be a sign of weakness, and it would leave a memory of him as being weak, and I don’t think he would want that. But I do think that Ennis knows that people probably know that he’s homosexual, and emotionally [at the end of the film] I think he makes a tiny bit of progress, because he agrees to attend Alma Jr.’s wedding. Finally he compromises—
McMurtry: And doesn’t disappoint a woman.
Ossana: It’s the first time in the film that he doesn’t disappoint someone, male or female. It’s a tiny baby step, but he does it. I just don’t know how much [more] he’s capable of changing. I think if anything, he might become even more homophobic and bitter because of what he did, what he gave up, what he lost, what he’ll never have.

http://www.advocate.com/currentstory1_w.asp?id=25277&page=2

I think all of these quotes support what I am saying. Let me know your thoughts!

Mikaela - your note came through before I posted this. Some of what you say, I have rebuttled above.

Quote
The "not want to know nor feel that it was Jack he held" is a description of the short story situation as it was or may have been, fairly soon after the two of them had initiated their sexual relationship. It doesn't hold true for the later events. Nor is it an objective description, but subjectively seen by Jack through the lense of 20 years of disappointments and twarted hopes and dreams, in the narrative following on the heels of a devastatingly hurtful quarrel between the two. Hardly the best circumstances in which Jack might give a level-headed evaluation of Ennis's state of mind back in the day. And moreover, it is a stepping stone leading up to the conclusion he's working towards: That they haven't gotten very much further, despite all that time. Clearly they have gotten *some* tiny little way, even in Jack's disappointed mind. And the way they've gotten, is (for instance) that Ennis was later willing to embrace him face to face (the reunion) and was willing to admit out loud that he longed for Jack, specifically for Jack, sexually and romantically. ("Wrang it out a hunderd times thinking about you/I shouldn't a let you out a my sights").

So in my view, even in the short story, Ennis is able to face Jack and face what Jack means to him - though it happens about 1 year into the relationship instead of 1 day into it. Though I admit that when I first read the short story (months before I saw the film), this was not immediately clear to me and I went wailing onto the internet in utter disbelief, completely incredulous and devastated that "the fact that Ennis didn't want to know nor feel that it was Jack he held"  didn't "mar the memory for Jack".

How *could* that not mar it?  And if they'd really gotten no further, if Ennis still couldn't face up to and admit who he really loved, how could Jack bear to still be there, 20 years later?

The film then came as an immense comfort and reassurance to me, because TS2 IMO completely removed the above questions from the equation. And the movie flashback, the way it's filmed with Ennis looking at Jack's profile, did the same. There was no doubt in my mind any more. In the film, Ennis faces up both to Jack *and* his love for Jack - and Jack knows it too.

The way film Ennis acts around Jack and in relation to Jack through the long years - as detailed in one of Katherine's posts above, - Ennis would have to be completely sleepwalking through life, entirely oblivious to absolutely every emotion and desire, if he wasn't in fact aware of and admitting to his feelings for Jack (whether he uses the word "love" or just calls it "this thing" to himself is not important IMO).

The tragedy just becomes *more* poignant in that Ennis *is* aware of and acknowledges to himself that he loves another man - but considers this beautiful emotion within himself repulsive, in accordance with his childhood conditioning and the shared opinion of the society he lives in - and is never able to move beyond that to actually live the life that he truly wants (and is ashamed for wanting). It also, to me, makes it more understandable why Jack would manage to wait nearly 20 years before making half-hearted attempts to move on. Knowing Ennis loves him but is unable to move past society's judgement IMO is something else, - emotionally more nurturing, providing more hope for the future, - than being with a man who won't even admit to himself (much less to Jack) that he loves him.

Whether Ennis thinks of himself as not just loving Jack, but as being homosexual, I'm somewhat  less certain about. But IMO, at least by the time he asks Jack about "being stared at in the street", he has come to this conclusion concerning himself - he doesn't any more think of himself as a straight guy who inexplicably has happened to fall in love with a man.

I have said before that the "dozy embrace" flashback in regards to Ennis' inability to acknowledge it was Jack he was holding, needs to be seen as symbolic, not literal. Ennis cannot face the fact he is in love with Jack until it is too late. Everything I have seen and read supports this theory.

That is my story and I'm stickin' to it! ;D (just kidding)

« Last Edit: June 26, 2006, 07:52:07 pm by dly64 »
Diane

"We're supposed to guard the sheep, not eat 'em."

Offline silkncense

  • Brokeback Got Me Good
  • *****
  • Posts: 372
  • "It's alright; 's alright."
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #54 on: June 26, 2006, 07:43:46 pm »
I agree that the two "embraces" are not the same.  Ennis is not embracing Alma, he is having sex (and more pointedly, not with her). There is no embrace involved.

Also, comparing the book to the movie adds to the problems.  I also agree that Annies description of the dozy embrace is confusing & contradictory to both the book and the movie.  I think the embrace should not have been described as not wanting to acknowledge that Ennis was holding a man.  It was simply a loving, non-sexual embrace - one that is similary shared by heterosexual couples, parents and children, etc.  However, and this will sound contradictory on my part, I do agree that was a sgn that Ennis was in love as was his gut reaction to leaving Brokeback both while Jack was packing up & in the alley.

I think the problem of "when" Ennis knew is a matter of definition.  I believe Ennis loved Jack from their days on Brokeback forward.  Jack made him happier than any person had or could.  Jack allowed Ennis to open up, express himself more than he'd done in the "last year" (ever), despite being engaged to the assumed love of his life, Alma.  Jack was his BEST & possibly ONLY true friend.  It was also great sex, obviuosly better than he had with his wife.

But, to me, Ennis did not equate this to being IN LOVE.  I'm sure that it doesn't make sense to most people, but my interpretation is that that is what allowed Ennis to accept "this thing." 

When did Ennis realize that what he had w/ Jack was "being in love?"  Good question.  I think it started when Jack told him he'd been to Mexico.  Ennis began down the path of acceptance & understanding after the lake scene; he "couldn't stand it anymore"  He could accept Jack discussing having sex with women, here they were just two buddies talking like buddies do.  But when he was confronted with Jack & other men, with the possiblity that Jack could fall in love with another man - his body overpowered all his reason & he collapsed.  This has happened to me.  No control.  Perhaps you think the alley scene was the same.  I think it was not - it was powerful, but it was not a total uncontolled collapse of desperation. 

EDIT -OK, I was busy writing my thoughts & before I can post it, you throw up those quotes from Diana Ossana - I had not read/heard it previously but am glad to read it now.

AND I hate dial-up!!!
« Last Edit: June 26, 2006, 07:54:46 pm by silkncense »
"……when I think of him, I just can't keep from crying…because he was a friend of mine…"

Offline Mikaela

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,229
  • Unsaid... and now unsayable
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #55 on: June 26, 2006, 08:06:27 pm »
I think all of these quotes support what I am saying. Let me know your thoughts!


I know this was not written in response to me, but I am of a mind with Latjoreme so in a way I felt it applies to my post as well.

I would think that Ang Lee, Ossana/McMurtry, Ledger, Gyllenhaal and everyone else involved in making the movie would first and foremost want me to interpret the film for myself, form my own views and consider my own emotions when experiencing this unique work of art they've collectively presented to me. They've gone out of their way to make many scenes and lines in the film as ambiguous as possible - they've avoided including any "Messages"; - they did not want to hit people over the head with their "one correct interpretation". I'm sure they'd be thrilled if I didn't read exactly the same into it that they outline in any interviews they give.

I have my firm interpretation now that I feel the film very clearly conveys to me - and I don't mind sharing that. I enjoy going on the internet to read others' differing opinions and interpretations .I've had many an illuminating read that way in terms of examining the character development, the film symbolism etc.  But interpretation of the main issues of the film and the main character development and motivation in the film is so intimately connected with each viewer's personal viewpoints and life experiences that I don't think we'll ever reach a concensus. Nor do I want us to. Nor do I think the filmmakers want us to. 

Offline dly64

  • Brokeback Got Me Good
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #56 on: June 26, 2006, 08:20:31 pm »
I know this was not written in response to me, but I am of a mind with Latjoreme so in a way I felt it applies to my post as well.

I would think that Ang Lee, Ossana/McMurtry, Ledger, Gyllenhaal and everyone else involved in making the movie would first and foremost want me to interpret the film for myself, form my own views and consider my own emotions when experiencing this unique work of art they've collectively presented to me. They've gone out of their way to make many scenes and lines in the film as ambiguous as possible - they've avoided including any "Messages"; - they did not want to hit people over the head with their "one correct interpretation". I'm sure they'd be thrilled if I didn't read exactly the same into it that they outline in any interviews they give.

I have my firm interpretation now that I feel the film very clearly conveys to me - and I don't mind sharing that. I enjoy going on the internet to read others' differing opinions and interpretations .I've had many an illuminating read that way in terms of examining the character development, the film symbolism etc.  But interpretation of the main issues of the film and the main character development and motivation in the film is so intimately connected with each viewer's personal viewpoints and life experiences that I don't think we'll ever reach a concensus. Nor do I want us to. Nor do I think the filmmakers want us to. 

Mikaela - I had added an edit while you were writing your response, because I did feel that what I write also applies to you.

I do enjoy discussing the film because I think there is a lot of ambiguity. And you are right that each individual is going to have his/her own point of view. Personally, I don't want to reach a concensus .... it is too much fun to debate. (I was on the debate team in college, so I could go on and on. That is why, however, I like to find quotes or "proof" to back up my theories. It's a habit .... don't hate me for it!  :-\)
Diane

"We're supposed to guard the sheep, not eat 'em."

Offline Jeff Wrangler

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,165
  • "He somebody you cowboy'd with?"
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #57 on: June 26, 2006, 09:35:25 pm »
So what kind of partner DOES he want?

Thinking of Ennis's actions with Alma suggests a very vulgar response to this question, but I will not say it!  :laugh:

(Sorry, folks. Tell you what, sometimes I just can't resist an opportunity like that!)

Edit: OK, now that I've had my little joke, let me thank Diane for sharing those quotes from Ang Lee, Diana Ossana, and Larry McMurtry. They've already been added to my Brokeback file!
« Last Edit: June 26, 2006, 09:41:44 pm by Jeff Wrangler »
"It is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellow-men, and travel far and wide."--Charles Dickens.

Offline serious crayons

  • Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,711
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #58 on: June 27, 2006, 03:06:19 am »
I would think that Ang Lee, Ossana/McMurtry, Ledger, Gyllenhaal and everyone else involved in making the movie would first and foremost want me to interpret the film for myself, form my own views and consider my own emotions when experiencing this unique work of art they've collectively presented to me. They've gone out of their way to make many scenes and lines in the film as ambiguous as possible - they've avoided including any "Messages"; - they did not want to hit people over the head with their "one correct interpretation". I'm sure they'd be thrilled if I didn't read exactly the same into it that they outline in any interviews they give.

I have my firm interpretation now that I feel the film very clearly conveys to me - and I don't mind sharing that. I enjoy going on the internet to read others' differing opinions and interpretations .I've had many an illuminating read that way in terms of examining the character development, the film symbolism etc.  But interpretation of the main issues of the film and the main character development and motivation in the film is so intimately connected with each viewer's personal viewpoints and life experiences that I don't think we'll ever reach a concensus. Nor do I want us to. Nor do I think the filmmakers want us to.

Once again, Mikaela, you and I agree. A work of art is a collaboration between the imaginations of artist and audience -- one can't exist without the other. The fillmmakers (screenwriters, director, actors, etc.) have their own views, and because they created the work of art that we love, their views are important. But their authority is not absolute.

We have all spent many hours and many words developing our interpretations of Brokeback Mountain. I would hate to feel forced to scrap all those efforts if I came across some magazine interview in which someone's offhand, hasty, impromptu, possibly ambiguous remark seemed in less than perfect synch with my own cherished dreams and visions. As a journalist who has conducted hundreds of interviews, I believe they are useful and even enlightening but I'm afraid I don't have a very idealistic opinion of them as a source of immutable truths. Far too many factors -- haste, superficiality, misquoting, extemporanity, etc. -- can compromise their reliability.

As it happens, Diane, I don't find the statements you quote to be all that incongruous with my own views. For example, I don't see how Ang's "The other has to go through self denial and only accepts it when it's too late, when he missed him" or even "After his and Jack’s final confrontation about Mexico, Ennis realizes that it is Jack he truly loves, and he simply cannot continue in his attempts at a relationship with Cassie," drastically contradict what I've said. They don't send me back to the drawing board; on the contrary, I think they basically describe -- in a rough, entertainment-press interviewese sense -- what I said.

But even if they didn't, so what? It's the finished product I care about, not the opinion of any one person involved in its creation (who, for that matter, might disagree with any number of OTHER people involved in its creation). If we're going to pretend that Jack and Ennis exist on some other plane of reality -- which we do, in a way, when we speculate about their motivations and inner lives -- then each viewer ought to be allowed to interpret their behavior for himself or herself.

However, this is not to say that my mind can never be changed, that my opinions are beyond influence. I still fairly often come upon posts that enhance, deepen or even alter my interpretations of BBM. One of them, posted yesterday, is very germane to our discussion here, and some of you might be interested in checking it out:

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php?topic=2858.0;topicseen#bot

Offline dly64

  • Brokeback Got Me Good
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
Re: Got What They Deserved?
« Reply #59 on: June 27, 2006, 10:19:11 am »
Once again, Mikaela, you and I agree. A work of art is a collaboration between the imaginations of artist and audience -- one can't exist without the other. The fillmmakers (screenwriters, director, actors, etc.) have their own views, and because they created the work of art that we love, their views are important. But their authority is not absolute.

We have all spent many hours and many words developing our interpretations of Brokeback Mountain. I would hate to feel forced to scrap all those efforts if I came across some magazine interview in which someone's offhand, hasty, impromptu, possibly ambiguous remark seemed in less than perfect synch with my own cherished dreams and visions. As a journalist who has conducted hundreds of interviews, I believe they are useful and even enlightening but I'm afraid I don't have a very idealistic opinion of them as a source of immutable truths. Far too many factors -- haste, superficiality, misquoting, extemporanity, etc. -- can compromise their reliability.

As it happens, Diane, I don't find the statements you quote to be all that incongruous with my own views. For example, I don't see how Ang's "The other has to go through self denial and only accepts it when it's too late, when he missed him" or even "After his and Jack’s final confrontation about Mexico, Ennis realizes that it is Jack he truly loves, and he simply cannot continue in his attempts at a relationship with Cassie," drastically contradict what I've said. They don't send me back to the drawing board; on the contrary, I think they basically describe -- in a rough, entertainment-press interviewese sense -- what I said.

But even if they didn't, so what? It's the finished product I care about, not the opinion of any one person involved in its creation (who, for that matter, might disagree with any number of OTHER people involved in its creation). If we're going to pretend that Jack and Ennis exist on some other plane of reality -- which we do, in a way, when we speculate about their motivations and inner lives -- then each viewer ought to be allowed to interpret their behavior for himself or herself.

However, this is not to say that my mind can never be changed, that my opinions are beyond influence. I still fairly often come upon posts that enhance, deepen or even alter my interpretations of BBM. One of them, posted yesterday, is very germane to our discussion here, and some of you might be interested in checking it out:

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php?topic=2858.0;topicseen#bot

You and Mikeala are both right ... it doesn't matter what I or anyone else think. Everyone's  interpretation of BBM is going to be different since each human has his/her own frame of reference.  But, like I said, since I was on the debate team in college, I like to find information to support my theories. Habit .... I got it from my dad and drove my mom nuts. We could go on for hours and hours. Amazingly, that does not make me inflexible. I like the link you have posted, latjoreme. I read the whole thing and found it quite insightful. There were a few things that I had not previously considered. The long and short of it is this .... I love hearing all ponts of view. Sometimes I like to be the protagonist. (You should have heard the heated debate I had with my brother when I argued Mary wasn't a virgin when she had Jesus! Whoa!!! Then, at the end I laughed .... I loved seeing his face turn purple.) 

Keep bringing your viewpoints! I love it! Sometimes we'll agree, sometimes we won't. Others may agree with me, others will agree with you, and still others will think we are all nuts. Isn't that the best!?  ;D
Diane

"We're supposed to guard the sheep, not eat 'em."