The Women of Brokeback Mountain
-
truetexian — 9 years ago(September 22, 2016 10:47 PM)
Are you responding to my post? From what you've said, it's unclear. If you are, I understand your points about 'wife talk' and all. However, I never said Lashawn ridiculed her husband. Nevertheless, she certainly did. Especially whenever she told them that he's not the least bit mechanically inclined. In this part of the world, during that period of time, it would have most definitely been taken (and given) as a disparaging remark.
-
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 23, 2016 05:46 AM)
TrueTX I was responding to Lester. which they way these posts are set up, that is why I usually put the name of who I'm responding to first. To avoid confusion.
Lester said Lashawn ridiculed her husband. Most of what she said was to Jack, so that wasn't
public
ridicule. Upon further consideration, you're absolutely right about not being mechanical would be disparaging. In rural Michigan too, being manly included fixing things, carpentry all the traditionally male pursuits. -
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 14, 2016 09:11 AM)
Was Lureen a good woman? She never once stood up for Jack, all she ever thought about was getting rich. She couldn't even call the school about getting their son a tutor. I'm not suggesting she was evil incarnate, but "good"? That is unsubstantiated speculation if we're going by the movie, in my opinion.
-
JayHysterio — 9 years ago(September 14, 2016 09:27 AM)
She was a good woman, Jack had all the issues. Why should he depend on her to stand up for him? He finally did it after years but an assured man wouldn't have put up with that abuse for years.
I'd also say it was Jack who married under false pretenses. He was obviously hitting on Ennis, Mexican prostitutes and rodeo clowns before he met Lureen. She at least was the one who showed interest first, helped him get a job with her dad's company, had their child, tried to make a normal life. Jack just couldn't cope because he not only wasn't honest with Lureen, he wasn't honest with himself or even his parents.
I will say of all the Brokeback Women she was the most complicated but I think she was all right. -
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 14, 2016 09:46 AM)
Jay - I never said Lureen had to play interference every single time. But she had the opportunity when he was demonstrating the combine and her father said he was an F/U to his associate. How was Jack to defend himself when he wasn't even there? The camera deliberately focused on Lureen and MADE us notice she didn't say anything. Completely ignoring her "defending Jack" she can assert herself and say "I would appreciate you not denigrating my husband in front of ME." By not saying anything, she was letting her father know it was okay to be rude to Jack. What is he going to do? Jeopardize his job, make things difficult for his wife and possibly create a broken home for his child?
Okay,I've said this fifty times on these boards. Society as much as anyone allowed AND "required" Jack to marry Lureen. There were no options for same sex marriage. In the 60s and even now, many feel homosexuality can be cured with counseling or prayed away. Some pyschologists/pyscyhiatrists even said "homosexuality is a phase and it would go away". Yes, Lureen got him a job with her dad's company but it was also said he was the best combine salesman they had. Yes, he was the only one, but that could be interpreted "at that moment." If he wasn't really good, there would be no point to say he was the best salesman. I wish this was my idea, but elsewhere on these boards, it is said Lureen was only interested in getting rich and taking over daddy's company. She may not have been completely honest either, in marrying Jack because she could control him. She knew he had nothing, and women then (and now) often either married for monetary alliances or to improve their own situation. -
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 14, 2016 11:15 AM)
Mostly I edited this for clarity but I am going to add this paragraph - you like "assured men" who don't take crap? I call BS on your post. You need to reply, not just assert. We don't have to agree and you don't have to go back and forth with me ten times, but you have kinda said whatever want including accusing me of having an agenda and that is baloney. I'm just having a discussion here. Or maybe I should say try to since you don't want to talk if you don't agree? Original post follows:
Much of what I have posted is directly to counter what you have said - eg. Lureen wasn't completely honest. How can you ignore this? (Edit - this doesn't mean I'm saying Jack was honest, he had more reason to lie and as I have said elsewhere, at that time gay was considered curable) (Again,) she KNEW he had nothing and she came from a very wealthy family. You don't think she had her pick of guys being pretty as well?
Why would she pick Jack?
I say she wanted to control him. This doesn't mean she had NO feelings for him.
Speaking of ignoring, even in your first response, you ignored that she wouldn't call the teacher, she was always at the adding machine
So if you don't want to talk now, despite this being your post and I haven't been rude to you, that is okay. But since most of what I'm talking about is undisputed history of the times or from the actual movie itself, what is my agenda? -
JayHysterio — 9 years ago(September 14, 2016 03:13 PM)
I don't know what your agenda is; gaystraight but a woman haterdoesn't matter. All I read is you're blaming Lureen where she is totally blameless.
Wanting to be in control isn't dishonesty. And she never misrepresented herself from the moment she met Jack. SHE MADE THE ADVANCES. She took the initiative in the car. No one Twisted Jack's armhe knew who she was, but did she know who he was?
Now, let's look at Jacknot only was he marrying knowing that he was gay, but also that he was cheating on Lureen with Ennis and other men. Did Lureen know this before? Do you honestly think she would've married Jack had she known?
Jack was weak and dishonest. Lureen was a strong woman who made a mistake, but she was misled by Jack 100% while she didn't mislead him at all.
Might I also mention how the second Jack found out about Ennis' divorce, he was right over there ready to move to Texas with him. Didn't give a damn about his wife and kid, and couldn't wait to replace poor Alma.
Jack was a terrible person. -
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 14, 2016 06:52 PM)
I already told you my agenda - I'm having a discussion. You said she was good, I said she wasn't evil but I disagree that she was blameless. PS trying to get you just to acknowledge another POV, on THIS subject, does NOT make me a woman hater. At any time in history, but especially in 1963 when a woman took a "weak" man, she knew what she was getting. When they got married Jack never thought he would see Ennis again.
Why did she pick Jack, knowing how important money was to her and knowing he had nothing?
Did he know who she was, how her father was? I doubt any two people really know each other until they get married! Do you really think Jack is terrible for being aware that if he is honest about being gay, he may starve or be killed? If you really think that, don't bother to read any more or respond.
As I also said, society is at least 70% if not more so responsible for this situation as Jack is. VERY few people live up to standards of honesty and integrity that you outline including (most likely) you. I work a government job. I really hate some of the policies they have, but they are voted on by the legislature and many are put in place by the Feds. Can I quit after this many years with numerous health problems? No way. Society plays a part here too. People could push for better non discrimination laws, but I can't fight that one all by myself. I think there are aspects of MOST jobs that people feel are unethical. You want Jack to pay with his life but are you asking the same of everyone else?
I don't think we know Jack was dishonest (for a long time anyway) - I thought he got married after that first summer on Brokeback and he didn't see Ennis until 4 years later. Since the first time fooling around without Ennis by Jack was mentioned was 20 years later, there is no way to know how much or when he started. At one point Jack said his marriage was "normal" and much later he said "their marriage could be done on the phone." It seems unlikely that this was 100% Jack's fault. Now to Jack rushing off after Ennis got divorced - He had been dealing with a non marriage 20 years and a father in law that hated him. He had little control in his own house or at the school about his son. So in many ways he was absent and overlooked already. I also think you could make a case that a happy father part time would be better than a miserable father 100% of the time. Isn't that one big reason divorce is allowed now?
At this point, I have to wonder how old you are, since you show no mercy at all about Jack marrying a woman, knowing he had feelings for men. I wonder why you even watched this movie. You apparently have no understanding how hard it was for Gay men then. I don't know for sure about the USA, but it was less than 100 years ago in Britain that you could go to prison for LIFE for being Gay. And with hard labor. Contrast this with people who ignore safety regulations and people die on the job. Not one CEO has gone to prison in 70 years of OSHA for the death of a worker. -
Phydeaux50 — 9 years ago(September 15, 2016 02:03 AM)
Without getting too immersed in roles within sexual relationships, I think Lureen chose Jack because he was the sort of man she was looking for- submissive, reactive, able to let her take the lead, willing to be second fiddle. I also believe that she was angling to take over her daddy's business in a time when women just didn't do that sort of thing.
When I was a kid, there was a girl in school who was the only child of the biggest land holder in the district. She was going to be worth a fortune
to the man who married her
. There was no thought that she would take over the farm on her own.
Jack's personality was suitable for Lureen's purposes. She was a dominant, assertive person- the 'assured' character that the OP respects. She was also a long-term planner, and truly Machiavellian. A generation earlier, and she would have manoeuvred Jack into the top job and directed him from 'behind'. For her generation, the pretext of marriage was all that was required for her to effectively take the reigns.
I see her as being just as cynical in her reasons for marriage as Jack.
All the little devils are proud of Hell. -
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 15, 2016 05:50 AM)
Phy - hear your points, things were different for many women in the past. A female relative of mine divorced her cheating husband in the 1950s or 60's, I'm not sure, Fairly unheard of. Ran the farm with her teen sons and a hired hand or two.
I agree that Lureen was manipulating Jack to get what she wanted. Is she more honest than Jack per Jay Hysterio? Probably. She wasn't in the same circumstances though.
So, do you think Jack was a terrible person and horribly dishonest? -
Phydeaux50 — 9 years ago(September 16, 2016 07:39 AM)
I think she was being a manipulative person, perhaps in the sort of way that Lester has contempt for. She would have crushed Ennis if he were her partner. I don't see that in Alma.
But Jack was happy to go along with it. She didn't need to manipulate him into taking a secondary/submissive role, much like the traditional female role in most societies. Jack wanted that with Ennis. What Lureen got was a wild card, a twist in her plot (pun intended) that she didn't see coming.
It didn't really affect her plan- in fact it may have fast-tracked it. But I think she ultimately felt double crossed. I guess she figured Jack was aware of her agenda, and happy for her to do it and he ride along. That he was not in love with her and wanted to be looked after while he dreamt his whiskey dreams about Ennis and others wasn't a motivation that she read in him, or saw coming.
I think she felt she'd been played by a player she was trying to play, and that she was played worse than she played. She offered Jack what he seemed to be happy with. What Jack put over on her was, in her opinion I think, far worse, totally unexpected, and undeserved.
I think she knew who Jack really was when she talked to Ennis on the phone, even if it were so that Jack's death was accidental in the way she describes.
All the little devils are proud of Hell. -
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 16, 2016 08:06 AM)
I think I need to not try to rush my replies or posts. Will start writing them in the evening only and then look them over again the next day before sending!
Yes, you're right, She didn't manipulate Jack in the usual sense of the word. You and I already discussed the rich girl in town where you lived so I thought my general meaning was clear enough if not technically 100% accurate. We do agree, I think that she took a (and I'm not intending to be harsh here) loser, from her perspective, with nothing, for what purpose?
The book still hasn't come and it supposedly shipped the same day I ordered it. So, the movie was way too vague and that is surely part of why there are so many opinions on everything here on these boards to say nothing of the writer's existing mindset. Meeting someone for sex in a car and then going from there to marriage doesn't explain anything. Even if Lureen needed a man to inherit the business, and got one who wasn't completely submissive, I'm sure her father would have been able to handle the situation easily. It was his company after all.
I got the feeling at the beginning Jack was a pretty decent, average guy. He was dealt a hard hand with his rigid, uncaring father. Very poor education and very disadvantaged economically. He would work, however, he wasn't out stealing. He was never portrayed as trying to hoodwink anyone or take advantage. If he was a player, and I'm not sure where you got that idea, he surely wouldn't have "almost starved" the year he made 2 or 3 thousand dollars. I never got the impression he tried to dump work on Ennis either. -
Phydeaux50 — 9 years ago(September 16, 2016 09:07 PM)
Well, on the flip side, Lureen didn't marry Jack because she wanted a strong man to fight her fights for her. Particularly in taking on her dad. At best, she could tolerate Jack occasionally running interference. But I see her as a trade-off person, reasoning that Jack was getting plenty of positive back his way, and could face off against her father any time he wanted. Truly Machiavellian- ambition and advancement by making others around her wealthy. She wasn't going to be told by her father to get rid of Jack, so he was safe in the relationship. Perhaps more so because he pissed her father off.
Jack, otoh, knew he was deceiving Lureen, and not for the better. He couldn't even pull a
Crying Game
excuse with Lureen (I thought you knew). As a betrayal, it's palpable enough for a 'Jack's death' scenario in which she finds out, is embarrassed, ashamed and outraged (same as Alma) and reacts by blowing his cover in town, either purposefully or by 'accident' of confiding in a 'friend'.
Alma spared Ennis that. She hated Jack Nasty, in that strange way that people do (blame the other rather than their partner- the one who actually betrayed them. The other is merely an accessory), but she didn't take Ennis' pride, his social status or his girls from him.
She could have destroyed him, but she would have had to bare the associated shame, given the times. Perhaps Lureen, given the scenario I offered above, found that she didn't get the 'poor victim' status that you'd expect from such a betrayal today, but instead got variously laughed at (how many townsfolk would have been able to see her rather obvious agenda), ridiculed and even hated for what she brought into the community. I've seen that happen.
All the little devils are proud of Hell. -
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 16, 2016 09:35 PM)
I'm assuming you read most of the posts here, so I think it is safe to say it has been alleged that Lureen married Jack to piss off her father, but do we really have proof? I don't know any stats, but it is surely a common enough theme in any movie that no man is good enough for "my daughter" to marry. And vice versa. Another theme that is common (and I have seen this in real life often enough) wealthy people feel very superior to those with less wealth than them. I'd even go so far as to say Lureen's father would be a not uncommon "Texas or southern" or maybe just a father-in-law attitude towards Jack.
Secondly, Jack never thought he would see Ennis again. You didn't respond at all to my ideas that Jack was a pretty decent fellow - for all we know he didn't send that post card for four years because he really was trying to make a hetero marriage work. Again, no proof that he deliberately deceived Lureen. (feel free of course to jump in with whatever your thoughts are on this) And he did seem to care about his son. They really didn't show a lot of Lureen, so she may have suspected, but what evidence do you have to say she knew about Jack and Ennis? The remark 'oh yes, the fishing buddy " could have meant just that or that she knew. Although remember Jack always drove to Wyoming. She was so busy with her adding machine, I doubt she had any idea Jack went to Mexico. Anyway, that is the greatness of this movie, so many opportunities for the viewer to imagine (parts) of his own story!
Yes, I have worked 30 years in offices. I have never ever understood why the woman is mad at the other woman, and not her husband who cheated. He made the vows, not the other woman. The other woman may not even know he is married! -
Phydeaux50 — 9 years ago(September 16, 2016 10:25 PM)
It's a fair point about Jack fooling himself, same as Ennis. Jack is portrayed as being far more accepting of his sexuality, to the point of being reckless. The first time we meet him he is checking Ennis out. He knew the fact of his sexuality going in to marriage, in contrast with Ennis.
But it is a fair comment that he was trying to be a good country boy. That is the mojo of the story, so it fits with the goal of the fiction. I can see that Jack represents someone who is far more aware of his sexuality yet still feels compelled to adhere to the existing norms. He doesn't get saddled with the job of expressing/representing homophobia by Proulx- he is just playing the game that his society demanded of him.
That makes Jack cynical in his decision. Ennis is initially naive, but as his self-awareness grows his naivety turns to ignorance. I don't see any of the characters as being manipulative in a knowing, or 'evil', sense. I do see Jack as trading off in the same way as Lureen.
I think that the 'whiskey dreams' idea suggests that we are to take Jack as falling into situations rather than engineering them. It's difficult to imagine that he didn't realise his sexuality and the lie he gave in making his wedding vows. But it's not so difficult to imagine him ignoring his sexuality and his lie to Lureen and focusing on the trade-offs, all in a subliminal way.
Iow, he and Lureen had a fundamental compatibility in ignoring the downsides of their morally dubious commitment to each other while focusing vaguely, intuitively on the upsides. It could be said that both knew in their hearts that what they were doing wasn't truly sincere, but they were listening to their mind's appraisal of their social situation too intently to hear their hearts.
I side with Lureen marrying Jack for reasons of gain. Marrying the sort of man that her dad would approve of would have meant that she would have to effectively hand over her inheritance to her husband when the time came. It was her inheritance, and she was going to have it for herself- misogyny be damned. Her dad could only despise a man who would let a woman be the stud duck. I say that because 'stud duck' is a strong theme in the story, and the in-law relationships are there primarily to represent that idea.
All the little devils are proud of Hell. -
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 16, 2016 11:55 PM)
Forgive me for beating this to death, but I take away from your answer a bit of contradiction. In one place you say Jack was compelled by society (I'd say he didn't have any options - he did say he nearly starved to death rodeoing), you say none of the characters were evil, then you twice say "his lie to Lureen." I think of it more as not telling the whole truth, rather than a bald faced lie; but then who does tell all? No one would ever get married!
If Jack is making an honest effort to make a hetero marriage work, then his wedding vows weren't lies, at the time and for four years, anyway. He seemed a lot more into Lureen when they met and in the car (sexually I mean) than Ennis did with Alma. The simultaneous plus and minus of this film is the viewer has to read between the lines so much and there aren't many to digest. -
Phydeaux50 — 9 years ago(September 17, 2016 05:50 AM)
I'd counter that with Jack saying to Ennis that Ennis doesn't know what it's like for Jack to have to go without sex for a year at a time. He seems to consider sex to be an act done with a male, and can't get no sexual satisfaction with Lureen.
The lie is the promise of fidelity. I don't see any reason in the movie to believe that Jack told Lureen that he had to have sex with men to feel sexually fulfilled- that he was gay. It's not a small thing to keep from your significant other prior to making those promises.
I'd accept the idea that Jack wasn't exactly the religious type, and didn't see the vows as serious enough to force him to question his decision, or feel compelled to disclose to Lureen. Whether you see it as a little white lie (before God) or a great big stinker, or somewhere in between, he lied. I'd also accept your idea that he was lying to himself first, but not foremost.
I think Lureen got the foremost, and regardless of motivations or beliefs, she has to suffer the consequences of Jack's behaviour. One merciful omission by Proulx is a discussion of STDs. But Lureen risked more than embarrassment by marrying Jack. He lied to her daily. He lied about going to Mexico. He lied about Ennis.
He could have nipped it in the bud by being honest with Lureen, but that would have required not conforming to the norm pressures. Without that there is no BM, no story, no no Ennis without Jack, and no SNAFU-FUBAR.
All the little devils are proud of Hell. -
jaroslaw99 — 9 years ago(September 17, 2016 02:17 PM)
When Jack told Ennis "you don't know what its like", that was 20 years later. At another earlier visit, but still many years after J/E met, Ennis asked Jack was everything "normal" in their marriage? Jack answered yes. Sure sounded like he was referring to Jack having sex with Lureen. Apparently their sex life changed between the "everything is fine visit" and the "we could do our marriage on the phone" visit. We also don't know when Jack started to go to Mexico but it doesn't seem like right away. I say it was years, because I don't think Jack was foolish enough to jeopardize his marriage AND his job immediately. Life has been too hard on him prior to this. I don't know if you can say Jack thought only sex with men was "valid". But at any rate, we agree it was no small thing to keep his homosexual desires from his wife. But (a) I don't know how you would have brought that up in 1965 or whenever and (b) Maybe he thought he could beat it. (no pun intended)
I know people who make promises and never intend to keep them even the same minute they are saying the promise. On what basis are you saying Jack did this? I still say he is basically a decent guy and tried to make his marrige work with Lureen. To be fair, maybe he was hoping. Either way, not a lie. He knows the risks of actively pursuing homosexuality. He didn't look up Ennis for four years. Doesn't that say something? (when I was in love, a day or two seemed like an eternity..)
Breaking a promise years later is infidelity, absolutely, but it isn't a lie at the time of the wedding vows. Personally, I have every intention of keeping my promises, and I do keep the vast majority. But if I don't, I'm human. Not a liar. -
Phydeaux50 — 9 years ago(September 21, 2016 08:11 PM)
I guess I have to admit that I have a friend who lied to two women about his sexuality, marrying them and having a total of four kids. He was conflicted, having grown up in a small town and having to hide his sexuality, but he knew all along that he was far from sincere. The effect on the women was devastating. His kids won't speak to him; not because he is gay per se, but because he lied about it in such a monumentally significant way.
I find it difficult to believe that someone in that situation isn't aware that they are deceiving their wife, and knowing of that when they make their vows. Jack seems to me to be representative of such men; that is the point of his character. Ennis represents men who genuinely reject their sexuality and have overblown fears, while Jack represents men who accept their sexuality but chose to follow the hetero path for reasons other than (strictly) fear.
All the little devils are proud of Hell.