How would you describe Jack's and Ennis' sexuality?

[serious crayons]

A conversation on Safe Haven about bisexuality started veering into a conversation about Jack's and Ennis' sexuality. Was one or both of them bisexual? Was one or both of them "completely" gay? Or was one maybe even pretty close to straight but just happened to fall in love with a man? Or were they somewhere in between on that complicated spectrum?

I know some people object to trying to label or pigeonhole people in this respect. And when we're talking about real people, I can understand the resistance. But in this case, we're discussing the movie, in which the main characters' sexuality seems every bit as relevant as other analytical questions, such as whether Ennis flirted, or why Lureen complained about husbands and dancing. Whether they were attracted to their wives, for instance, or just married them because social expectations required it, seems pretty important.

For the record, I think both were pretty much "completely gay." They only married women because they thought it was expected of them. They had heterosexual sex, but they weren't very excited about it.

What are your views?

[Brown Eyes]

 

I had to smile when I saw this thread appear.

Well, I think this is one of the most fascinating issues to re-examine and always seems to lead to lively debate since people often have very strong opinions about this.  Several months ago I seem to recall there were lots of debates about how Ennis and Jack would describe their sexualities.  I think that's an interesting nuance to the question.  How we see or interpret each character's sexuality vs. how the characters themselves understood their own sexuality.

In this case I'm going to answer based on how the situation seems to an outside viewer (i.e. to me  ...not how I feel Jack or Ennis might verbalize their own ideas about their sexuality).

I think I'm on the record in a number of different threads for, my view, like Katherine's that both Ennis and Jack are gay.  Even though, obviously, they both are "capable" of being with women and have relationships with women, it's not the focus of either of their true desire.  The chemistry and desire between Jack and Ennis is pretty undeniable.  The motivations for both Ennis and Jack to have relationships with women has to do with societal expectations and a desire to appear "normal" or beyond "suspicion" in their daily lives.  Ennis may also be motivated by his desire to have children (maybe more so than Jack), but that doesn't necessarily mean that he's therefore very attracted to Alma (which, of course is a very horrible situation for Alma to be in, one must admit).  Jack is friends with Lureen (I truly believe that they have a strong... if often-strained... friendship) and is sort of bowled over by her sexual assertiveness in the beginning.  And he sees her as a ticket to a more comfortable lifestyle at least as far as money goes.  I think it's easier for some viewers to understand Jack as gay than Ennis... because Jack has relations with other men besides Ennis and because Jack is much more willing to commit to living with Ennis, etc.  I think one of the functions of Cassie's character is to demonstrate that Ennis is gay.   He's trickier because he is seemingly only interested in Jack and because he's more adamant in his stance that he's not queer up until the very last argument (I think the "boys like you" comment was meant to be another version of "I ain't queer"... and was meant to be a jab at Jack).  But, Cassie is presented as this gorgeous, friendly woman who practically throws herself at Ennis and he still is very, very reluctant to even dance with her.  He shows no enthusiasm for her while he's with her or in his comments about "some waitress" to Jack during the camping trip.  I think Cassie is supposed to seem like a dreamgirl for most straight men so that Ennis's lack of interest really becomes glaring.

I think the related discussion of how Jack and Ennis would describe themselves (and maybe how their descriptions of their sexuality might change over the course of the movie) is really tricky.

[Phillip Dampier]

I think what people need to remember about human sexuality is that there are rarely absolutes.  I am a big believer in the Kinsey scale, which allows for gradiations of sexuality.  I think Jack was clearly more in touch with his sexuality than Ennis was.  His relationship with Lureen seemed to fulfill expectations of society while he simply waited on Ennis, prepared to dump the marriage the second Ennis was ready.  The other men in his life were designed to fulfill sexual, not emotional needs, but I had a feeling he may have been trying to move on when he suggested he'd bring that 'other fella' up to the Twist ranch.

But we never really move on from relationships like Jack and Ennis had.  We simply "stand it."  Hell, Cassie couldn't even move on from Ennis, falling apart in the bus station when seeing Ennis again.  The frustration level of enigmatic people like Ennis can drive anyone crazy - I have friends who work on the same emotional level as Ennis and they drive me nuts because I am much more a Jack-type.

A lot of guys have tremendous hangups about sexuality, despite the bravado we often see in society.  It's amazing how much work you have to do just to wade through all of the nonsense thrown up because of discomfort.

One thing this movie does effectively portray are the inherent risks of not taking risks!

But the message is still lost on many... one of the most enigmatic friends I've got who is gay hated Brokeback Mountain for all the same silly reasons I heard from a lot of straight haters -- Jack and Ennis "victimized" their wives and cheated, their relationship was too physical and disjointed, blah blah blah....  Life is messy and sometimes you can't just clean it up and make everything all Happy Fun Ending Joy Time, like they do in so many other films.  Of course, my friend just looovvvved the movie Michael with John Travolta that was out several years back.  I had a diabetic coma over the sugary sappiness and was wretching in the aisles.  That same night, as a double feature, we also saw The People vs. Larry Flynt, which I found fascinating and amusing... and he hated.  But we remain friends.

[Scott6373]

Ok for those of you who believe in God, and that GLBT folkl were made that way by God, then lets carry this notion forward a little.

Annie Proulx created Ennis and Jack, so for all intents and purposes, she is their God and creator.  She has said that they were/are gay, so...

I got into this argument over on DC a long while ago.  Does the creator of an artistic endeavor, have the right to impose their intentions on the person who is reading/watching/looking art?

[Jeff Wrangler]

Does the creator of an artistic endeavor, have the right to impose their intentions on the person who is reading/watching/looking art?

That's not a simple question, particularly in the case of a film adapted from a literary work. Annie Proulx is the ultimate creator of Ennis and Jack, and has said they are gay, but I have this memory that, someplace in her essay "Getting Movied," she also says that at some point she had to accept that Brokeback Mountain was no longer her story, it was Ang Lee's movie.

What I'm getting at is that Ennis and Jack as we know them in the film didn't have just one creator, they each had at least five creators, Annie Proulx, Larry McMurtry, Diana Ossana, Ang Lee, and Heath (Ennis) and Jake (Jack).

In the end, though, it strikes me as presumptuous that a reader or viewer could claim to "know" a fictional character better than the creator(s) of that character.

Just my P.O.V.

[Brown Eyes]

Ok for those of you who believe in God, and that GLBT folkl were made that way by God, then lets carry this notion forward a little.

Annie Proulx created Ennis and Jack, so for all intents and purposes, she is their God and creator.  She has said that they were/are gay, so...

I got into this argument over on DC a long while ago.  Does the creator of an artistic endeavor, have the right to impose their intentions on the person who is reading/watching/looking art?

I firmly don't believe that an author/ artist can impose an interpretation on an audience member.  No one can control another person's reactions or response to an ambiguous work of art to that degree.  I would think it wouldn't even be an interesting thing to try to do... to impose a meaning (I mean).  One of the best things about art is that it generates discussion, causes people to think and creates debate (I think most all good art does this to some degree).

Also, when it comes to the film... Proulx is no longer the only author we're talking about.  Ang Lee, McMurtry, Ossana have all contributed to changes and nuances given to the characters and story line.  Even the way the actors play the characters (tone of voice, facial expression, etc.) contribute to variations in how scenes are interpreted. (**editorial note**- Jeff, I was posting this at the same time you were I think... so sorry for appearing to re-iterate some of your points!)

Phillip!  Thanks for jumping into this topic!  I'm being bad and posting this little response while I'm at work, so I don't have a lot of time to reply.  I'll come back and write more once I'm home from work and at liberty.

[Jeff Wrangler]

(**editorial note**- Jeff, I was posting this at the same time you were I think... so sorry for appearing to re-iterate some of your points!)

That don't bother me none. 

I wonder, though, if this isn't a more basic question? If an author says, "This character whom I have created is gay," who am I to say, "No, this character is not gay."

I can see where you can discuss whether or not the character as created is convincingly gay, whether things the character says or does ring true in light of your own experience of being gay, or of gay people you know. But for me, if an author says a character is gay, then the character is gay.

[Scott6373]

I firmly don't believe that an author/ artist can impose an interpretation on an audience member.  No one can control another person's reactions or response to an ambiguous work of art to that degree.  I would think it wouldn't even be an interesting thing to try to do... to impose a meaning (I mean).

I can agree with that when we are talking about subjective artistic issues.  As a performer, I would never impose how someone listened to the music I made, but, there can be no doubt that Schuman wrote those notes.  He made those dynamic markings...etc.

Also, when it comes to the film... Proulx is no longer the only author we're talking about.  Ang Lee, McMurtry, Ossana have all contributed to changes and nuances given to the characters and story line.  Even the way the actors play the characters (tone of voice, facial expression, etc.) contribute to variations in how scenes are interpreted. (**editorial note**- Jeff, I was posting this at the same time you were I think... so sorry for appearing to re-iterate some of your points!)

I don't even consider the film in this discussion, so I am always referring to Ms. Proulx's original characters, but even if I did include the film, the birth mother is the birth mother no matter who may raise the child.

[southendmd]

But for me, if an author says a character is gay, then the character is gay.

But, if the author said this years after the story was published...

Annie also said we finish the story in our own lives, with our own world views, prejudices, etc.

I believe readers are active participants and are entitled to their own opinions, projections, conclusions.  This is true of any art; in fact, great art invites discussion and isn't easily defined.

One of my favorite paintings is a Magritte:  it's a painting of a pipe with the lettering "ceci n'est pas une pipe" ("this is not a pipe").  So, is it, or isn't it?

[serious crayons]

In the end, though, it strikes me as presumptuous that a reader or viewer could claim to "know" a fictional character better than the creator(s) of that character.

I don't even consider the film in this discussion, so I am always referring to Ms. Proulx's original characters, but even if I did include the film, the birth mother is the birth mother no matter who may raise the child.

Well, Annie herself said that Heath "knew better than I how Ennis felt and thought." Heath is also a creator, of course, but before that he was a reader.

Art is a collaboration between artist and audience. Especially enigmatic works of art, like this story and film, which demand audience involvement. Why would an artist leave room for ambiguity if she wanted to impose only one rigid interpretation? I don't think it's like a crossword puzzle, where you put together the clues and come up with the "right" answer.

Deciding to interpret something by finding out what the creator says about it and then using that is a guide is as valid a way as any other, I guess, though it's still a choice. And even then, I'd be careful about basing a whole interpretation on a sentence from an interview, or even an essay. With an interview, you not only have to assume the subject said exactly what she thinks, but also count on her having been quoted correctly and thoroughly and in context. Right there, that's a big leap. Even in an essay, the creator may be using shorthand to make a point. For example, maybe Annie had heard a lot of people say they thought Ennis was a straight man who happened to fall in love with a man, and she wanted to correct that misconception -- or at least assert her own intentions!  -- so she said, no, Ennis is gay. Does that mean Ennis couldn't possibly have one iota of attraction to women? That he's completely at one end of the Kinsey scale? Not necessarily.

However, I happen to believe that he's at least close to one end of the Kinsey scale. That's based on the way Ennis behaves around Alma, Jack and Cassie.

[Jeff Wrangler]

I think one of the functions of Cassie's character is to demonstrate that Ennis is gay. ...  Cassie is presented as this gorgeous, friendly woman who practically throws herself at Ennis and he still is very, very reluctant to even dance with her.  He shows no enthusiasm for her while he's with her or in his comments about "some waitress" to Jack during the camping trip.

Nicely put explication of Cassie's purpose, Amanda!

I think Cassie is supposed to seem like a dreamgirl for most straight men. ...

In that tube top and Daisy Duke's? You betcha! 

[moremojo]

Katherine, I have now come to the same conclusion that Ennis and Jack were both much more gay than they were arguably bisexual, and they sure weren't straight! For the record, though, I reiterate that upon my first viewing of the film, I had the distinct impression that Ennis was an otherwise straight man who by some amazing fluke lost his heart to another man (incidentally, my exposure to the original story at this time consisted of cursory skimming). And my sister had the same feeling, and went on to add that she found this one of the film's most provocative and radical implications--that the heart can lead us onto paths that our mental/societal constructs had never prepared us to perhaps even imagine.

I still like the revolutionary potential within my sister's interpretation, even though my own reading of the film has since been modified. And as perverse as it may sound, I tend to cherish even a willful misreading that can produce such insight/contemplation over a more cut-and-dried approach that can seem overly reductive.

[serious crayons]

And as perverse as it may sound, I tend to cherish even a willful misreading that can produce such insight/contemplation over a more cut-and-dried approach that can seem overly reductive.

I agree, Scott! I mean, not specifically with your sister's interpretation. But with the idea that people should feel free to interpret art in whatever way they find most rewarding, including a willfull misreading.

[Brown Eyes]

I think one of the most interesting and difficult aspects of interpreting Ennis's sexuality is the clear point made in both the movie and story that Ennis is only attracted to Jack. I think Ennis describes this to himself as meaning that Jack is the only man he's been attracted to... and thus helps him maintain the idea in his head that he's not queer.  I think this also makes it harder for audience members to make the leap and say definitively that yes Ennis is gay in general.  But, I think that the probable truth of the matter is that Jack is the only person (male or female) that Ennis is really attracted to.  Again, based on the examples provided in the film Ennis seems very unenthusiastic about his relations with both Alma and Cassie... and I feel pretty comfortable in extrapolating that this means he's not attracted to women in general. (lol, unlike Scott... normally I'm thinking of the film as my main point of reference... and in this case the film simply provides more extended examples to examine as to how Ennis responds to various women... we don't really see him interacting with a lot of other men).

In a way, I think given an ideal situation (where he could be with Jack long-term) he would be fiercely monogomous.  So, if Jack is really the only person that Ennis is shown to be tremendously sexually attracted to and emotionally attached to... then yes I think he's gay.  But, really he's Jack-sexual.
 

[Jeff Wrangler]

Does that mean Ennis couldn't possibly have one iota of attraction to women? That he's completely at one end of the Kinsey scale? Not necessarily.

Sure enough! I've lost track of how many gay men I've known over the past two decades who at one time were married to women and fathered biological children. It's absolutely possible.

In the end, though, I guess what I really don't get is how anyone can feel that accepting that Ennis is gay because his creator says so amounts to having a rigid interpretation imposed on one. Recognizing my own bias as a gay man here, this issue just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me--not the issue of Ennis's sexuality, which has important implications for who he is, but the issue of what Annie Proulx has to say about her creation's sexuality.

But speaking generally, it still seems to me that to say that an artistic creation is not what its creator says it is, is not only presumptuous but even kind of disrespectful personally of the artist--like saying that he or she doesn't know what he or she is talking about when it comes to his or her own artistic creation.

Saying that an artist has convincingly created what he or she claims to have created is another matter. I think it's possible to discuss that in a way that doesn't disrespect the artist.

[Front-Ranger]

i'm here to tell you that gay people have sex with both women and men...most of them, anyway. In fact, the most torrid affair I ever had was with a gay man.

[serious crayons]

Quote from: latjoreme on Today at 12:39:33 PM
Does that mean Ennis couldn't possibly have one iota of attraction to women? That he's completely at one end of the Kinsey scale? Not necessarily.

Sure enough! I've lost track of how many gay men I've known over the past two decades who at one time were married to women and fathered biological children. It's absolutely possible.

Wait a second. I don't get what you're saying here. Of course it's possible for gay men to marry women and have children. I've known a few myself. That's not my point. My point was that Annie Proulx might not have meant that he was "totally" gay -- perhaps when she said that she was only clarifying that he's not a straight man who falls in love with a man. Maybe she just didn't get into the shades of gray. (Or is that what you were saying? I just didn't follow.)

But speaking generally, it still seems to me that to say that an artistic creation is not what its creator says it is, is not only presumptuous but even kind of disrespectful personally of the artist--like saying that he or she doesn't know what he or she is talking about when it comes to his or her own artistic creation.

Saying that an artist has convincingly created what he or she claims to have created is another matter. I think it's possible to discuss that in a way that doesn't disrespect the artist.

I agree with the last two sentences. As a book critic, I do it all the time. And I also agree what we're doing here is a different phenomenon. But I just don't think you need to use an author's interview as the Cliff Notes for a work of literature that was deliberately left enigmatic. Most good art is ambiguous on purpose; it demands the viewer's involvement and often can be interpreted more than one way.

I'm not saying this necessarily applies to Ennis' gay/bi/straight issue, more that it's a general principle. Still, if she'd wanted to spell it out and have it unequivocally clear she could certainly have done so in the story. (Though I would argue that she did!  )

[Jeff Wrangler]

Wait a second. I don't get what you're saying here. Of course it's possible for gay men to marry women and have children. I've known a few myself. That's not my point. My point was that Annie Proulx might not have meant that he was "totally" gay -- perhaps when she said that she was only clarifying that he's not a straight man who falls in love with a man. Maybe she just didn't get into the shades of gray. (Or is that what you were saying? I just didn't follow.)

I thought you were saying it was possible for Ennis to be gay and yet still feel attraction to women. I was agreeing with that, and offering as evidence the fact that I have known many gay men who, I'm presuming, at one time or another at least felt or thought they were attracted enough to a woman to marry her and father children by her.

[serious crayons]

I thought you were saying it was possible for Ennis to be gay and yet still feel attraction to women. I was agreeing with that, and offering as evidence the fact that I have known many gay men who, I'm presuming, at one time or another at least felt or thought they were attracted enough to a woman to marry her and father children by her.

Oh, OK, you're agreeing with me? Well then, I agree with you, too! You are absolutely right!

[Jeff Wrangler]

Oh, OK, you're agreeing with me? Well then, I agree with you, too! You are absolutely right!

Of course, with most--if not all--of the guys I know, the marriage and children happened before they understood that they were gay.

[Brown Eyes]

So, I'm going to re-open an old topic.  Would Ennis have been capable of describing himself as "queer" by the bus stop/ pie scene?  I mean in his heart of hearts (not out loud to anyone else)?

 

[Jeff Wrangler]

So, I'm going to re-open an old topic.  Would Ennis have been capable of describing himself as "queer" by the bus stop/ pie scene?  I mean in his heart of hearts (not out loud to anyone else)?

 

This doesn't answer your question, but if he did, that could be one factor in the deep unhappiness we see on his face after the conversation with Cassie.    That is, he could be admitting or acknowledging it to himself without necessarily accepting it or "being OK with it" about himself.

[Scott6373]

So, I'm going to re-open an old topic.  Would Ennis have been capable of describing himself as "queer" by the bus stop/ pie scene?  I mean in his heart of hearts (not out loud to anyone else)?

 

I think he could have (theoretically) done this two seconds after he said "I ain't queer ya know."  Ennis was not stupid, he was a very naturally intelligent man, albeit uneducated, and ignorant to a lot of things, but he was far more in touch with his own personal reality than people realize.

Ennis was one of those "knower of truth" individuals.  He instinctively knew not only his own personal truth (which he would never reveal), but knew the truths of others without the need of a lot of talking.  I think that is what I find most tragic in this character.  The loss of potential.  His potential was indeed great.

[opinionista]

I think he could have (theoretically) done this two seconds after he said "I ain't queer ya know."  Ennis was not stupid, he was a very naturally intelligent man, albeit uneducated, and ignorant to a lot of things, but he was far more in touch with his own personal reality than people realize.

Ennis was one of those "knower of truth" individuals.  He instinctively knew not only his own personal truth (which he would never reveal), but knew the truths of others without the need of a lot of talking.  I think that is what I find most tragic in this character.  The loss of potential.  His potential was indeed a great.

I agree with Scott here. In fact, I think it is shown in two specific moments. The scene right after the Thanksgiving scene, when they are at the lakeside, Ennis asks Jack if he ever gets the feeling that people look at him as if they knew he's queer. Jack gets mad at him and suggests him to get out of Riverton. To Texas maybe?

The second moment is when they have the last fight. Ennis says he knows what is in Mexico for boys like Jack. IMO those two moment somehow illustrates that Ennis besides being in denial, deep down knew who he was. That's the reason why he kept fighting with himself, because he didn't want to be gay eventhough he knew very well who he was and couldn't help being in love with a man.

[serious crayons]

he was far more in touch with his own personal reality than people realize.

I agree with Scott and Natali. I think he knew all along --even before he met Jack -- but was in deep denial. Once he and Jack started their relationship, he had to deal with it more directly, but he kept his oppositional beliefs in separate mental compartments. On the one hand, he knew that he was gay. On the other, he thought homosexuality was bad. Somehow, he managed to juggle this cognitive dissonance for 20 years.
 

[Scott6373]

I agree with Scott and Natali. I think he knew all along --even before he met Jack -- but was in deep denial. Once he and Jack started their relationship, he had to deal with it more directly, but he kept his oppositional beliefs in separate mental compartments. On the one hand, he knew that he was gay. On the other, he thought homosexuality was bad. Somehow, he managed to juggle this cognitive dissonance for 20 years.
 

We all juggle cd in one way or another.  His story, while eloquent and moving, is not so strange.  I tend to think of cd as socially imposed ethics and morality as opposed to persoanl ethics and morality.

[serious crayons]

We all juggle cd in one way or another.  His story, while eloquent and moving, is not so strange.  I tend to think of cd as socially imposed ethics and morality as opposed to persoanl ethics and morality.

Good distinction! 

[opinionista]

We all juggle cd in one way or another.  His story, while eloquent and moving, is not so strange.  I tend to think of cd as socially imposed ethics and morality as opposed to persoanl ethics and morality.

  Pardon my ignorance here, but what is cd? What do you mean by it?

[Scott6373]

Pardon my ignorance here, but what is cd? What do you mean by it?

Cognitive dissonance was too long for me to type and with my passion for typos, I though "cd" was better...LOL

[opinionista]

Cognitive dissonance was too long for me to type and with my passion for typos, I though "cd" was better...LOL

Oh! LOL I was thinking of an actual CD ROM when I saw that. But I knew it was something else, but still LOL Thanks!