Last Scene w/ Ennis and Jack Together

[Ministering angel]

The motel convo and the final argument are the two big conversations which we get in full, and the second seems to be a continuation of the first. In the first, Ennis sticks to his "I'm not no queer" line and Jack remains unable to voice his own needs, the things they have been taught by their fathers. In the second, Ennis finally starts cutting fence, trespassing in the shoot 'em zone, and Jack starts standing up for himself and voicing his needs. (And by the end, when they torque things back, they presumably fall back into the old ways.)

There are at least five echoes of the reunion in the argument. The first is the rather obvious one of the Motel Siesta and the mention of Mexico; the second is the image of Ennis's father putting his head around the door and then getting his tire iron, and the image of Ennis leaning his head into Jack's truck window; the third is the talking "to" the horses - Ennis calls Jack "little darlin" which he also says to his horses, and he goes and says something to the horses in the trailer, possibly something soothing (these are the only two times we hear of Ennis talking to his horses); the fourth is once again the horses, which Jack mentions as a feature of the cow and calf operation, "your horses, it'd be some sweet life"; the fifth is Ennis shooting Jack's airplane out of the sky, and then entering the shoot 'em zone.

But beyond those, there is the biggie, that "I did once" is a direct reference to the C&C operation. This is the one which seems to kick off the recall by Ennis of the motel conversation.

I don't know that there is anything especially profound within all these echoes. What I do think they do is to draw our attention to the fact that nothing seems to have changed within the relationship over the sixteen years which has elapsed. (We later find out that Jack has been going downhill but the interaction between the two men has remained the same.)

So the argument kicks off because Jack has reached rock-bottom, and when it does they get back to the unfinished conversation from sixteen years ago. If Jack had had the ability to stand up to Ennis in 1967 things would have been different (although not necessarily better) and if he had had the ability to follow through in 1983 things would also have been different. But Ennis's collapse throws him, reminds him of his father, and thus sets him back into his feelings of low self-esteem (or whatever people see it as).

In the film we get to see how Jack is steadily going downhill, plus there is the added scene where they have the "move to Texas" argument which indicates Ennis's growing (?) sense of paranoia, but there is still a sense that nothing much is changing between them.


There's probably a lot more comparisons that can be made. This is just off the top of my head.

[CANSTANDIT]

That's good, mini..I had not thought of the lil darlin-'something only the horses could here.' In the SS, that seems a very direct echo. I also have always liked the idea of the 'leftover from an incendiary rage'-again, the fire image- that links Ennis with Jack's father, and perhaps since the campfire the night before is a lead in to the argument, we might say the 'whipping babies' comment ties directly in as well-he asks for love -sometimes I miss you so much- and he gets rejected-Ennis collapses, reminding him of the father losing it, in the bathroom scene.

(What's interesting, and this may belong in the character thread, is that without saying it, Jack is telling us what was missing from his father by tying it to what is missing from Ennis, as well-so it is clear evidence, to me, of what Jack cannot understand, but craves in the DE: Unconditional love one is supposed to get from a father, the 'shared hunger'. This is a rather broad humanistic statement I think the author is making.)


Sandy:
I think the primary thing that Ang Lee did to move the emphasis, was to give us the reactionary Ennis in the Last Scene, threatening Jack with death-for that is the essence of his own hang-up; what he is could get him killed. And that is one of the keys of the motel scene, the idea that his father looms over him continually, if as a backdrop. And when Ennis says,, in the film, 'all I got time for is makin a livin', we do see that echoed with both J and E saying they don't have enough time-Ennis to see Jack, due to work; Jack to spend time with Ennis-due to Ennis.

Also, the obvious missing factor is that Ennis does NOT do the whole shame/fear thing from the SS motel scene, which is a fundamental revelation about his character-'I don't want to be one of them guys.." (shame) " and I don't want to be dead.' (fear) All we get is the latter, with the fear of 'two guys living together' in the mountain scene of the Reunion. As Desecra said, the shame factor is more part of Heath's acting, than the scripted dialogue. So in a way, the twain never completely meets between SS and script, about Ennis's character. One poster once said, 'the Ennis from the book is not the same Ennis on the screen'-to an extent, that's true. But Heath Ledger's acting goes a long way to fill in the gap, IMO.

[Dagonet]

Heya everyone,

I'm not going to go into why it took me so long in the first place, but Sunday afternoon I crawled out from under my rock and watched Brokeback Mountain for the first time.  Now, I have always been a sucker for sad movies; AI, Legends of the Fall, Thelma and Louise--you name it, I probably teared up at least a little by the time the end credits rolled.  But this one just crushed me.  Two days later I'm still emotionally wobbly, and I'm hoping that talking about the film with all of you will help me get my equilibrium back.  Or at least get those eight notes of the theme out of my head.

Given that it's only been two days, I haven't had time to read through the entirety of any of the discussion threads, just the first few and last few pages of several. If the points I bring up have already been covered, my apologies. 

Nice post, Jo. I don't think he shuns love either, but I do think there is a part of him which is in self-preservation mode while he is in the realm of love. He doesn't commit fully because he knows what happens when you do - you get hurt badly, and in Ennis's case that bad hurt manifests as abandonment.

So he's a torn man. He seeks love - a wife and children, Jack - yet he never commits fully due to his sense of self=preservation.

Is it *self* preservation, here?  Is it himself that he's afraid for?  Ennis is the one who picks fights, almost certainly more often than just the two we see in the film, fights he can win, fights he can't win, fights that could conceivably get him killed.  It occurred to me yesterday that maybe he's looking for the guy with the tire iron, looking to find him before he finds. . . Jack?  How much of everything he does--the secrecy, the infrequency of their meetings, all of it--how much of that is a desperate attempt to keep Jack safe in the only way he knows how?

<sigh>  Which would, if true, open out whole new levels of tragedy to an already unbearably tragic situation.  Because running away from the things you fear only draws them after you.  And all those efforts to keep their relationship secret, all the wasted time and wasted pain--all for nothing.  Because everyone, *everyone* with any meaning in either of their lives, already knew or at least suspected.

Just a thought....

Ennis collapses with Jack's threat to quit and everything leading up to it...

I can't imagine that this hasn't been said elsewhere, so again, my apologies if this ground has been covered already. . .  But this isn't, technically, a threat to quit.  As we all know, AP (Annie Proulx, right?) was *very* careful with her use of language in the story.  The line could easily have been, "I wish I could quit you," but it isn't.  There isn't a threat here (although Ennis may have heard it that way)--the fact of the two shirts is, I think, proof that Jack never had any intention of leaving Ennis. 

This is all I have time for right now, but I'm sure I'll be back. . .

[Dal]

Weloome, Dagonet

Good to have you here.  Glad you have seen the flick at  last.  Glad you found this place.  And, glad you posted before you'd every page of every thread!   

[Sandy]

Welcome, dagonet, to our shared obsession.

I hope you poke around the threads to see what we have on the forum. You can also contribute, of course, by interacting with the members, so don't be shy.

There is a thread called, "How Brokeback Mountain Affected Me," which you may find interesting. A lot of people who saw the movie and/or read the short story got an emotional pummeling, and for many different reasons. This forum is the right place to be talking to people who have experienced something similar, and have tried to make sense out of it.

About your second point, there is also a thread called, "Did Jack quit Ennis?" which has debated at length how to understand, Jack's cry, "I wish I knew how to quit you." It is largely inactive, but contains a variety of points of view. The poll there, which suggests a majority of those who voted believe Jack did not quit, was locked.

[CANSTANDIT]

Welcome, Dagonet! How challenging it can be to come to terms with issues triggered by viewing this work of art; I know from my own experience. Glad you are joining us.

I think you bring up a good point as to whether Jack's line is an actual threat. I don't believe it is, either. But perhaps Ennis takes it that way-?

Thoughts??

Again, very glad you've joined us. I hope you find all the threads here in Themes and Scenes of value to your own journey, whatever that may be.

[Rosewood]

I'll add my welcome as well, Dagonet.
Glad you found us.
I can remember my first time viewing the film and how I felt.
I was walking wounded there for a few days.
This forum is the perfect balm.

[Desecra]

Welcome to the obsession .

[janjo]

Welcome from me too, Dagonet. I am so glad that you finally got to see the film. There are some of us that it hits like an express train. The effect doesn't really seem to wear off for a long time, and then not entirely.

[Dagonet]

Thank you all for the gracious welcome,

CANSTANDIT, you're absolutely right; the forum is helping.

Welcome, Dagonet! How challenging it can be to come to terms with issues triggered by viewing this work of art; I know from my own experience. Glad you are joining us.

I think you bring up a good point as to whether Jack's line is an actual threat. I don't believe it is, either. But perhaps Ennis takes it that way-?

<thoughtfully>  I think he would almost have *had* to take it that way; is there anything other than this possibility--of losing the only thing he's ever truly loved--that could have ripped him open so deeply?  Ennis spends so much of his life trapped between what he wants and what he fears, his (unacknowledged?) love and his (perceived?) duty, the idea that after all he's sacrificed he could still be left with nothing would have cut right through all the defenses he's put up.

Which actually leads me to the DE (Dozy Embrace).  I've read a lot of talk of parallelism on some of the other threads (between the Reunion and the Last Scene, etc.),but the DE is one of the only major scenes in the short story which lacks a counterpart.  I think one of the most brilliant choices made by Ang Lee/the screenwriter(s) was the insertion of the Ennis' Despair (ED, sorry, I know it's arrogant to coin a new abbreviation in my second post, but I couldn't resist) moment, where that bottomelss well of pain he's been carrying around for twenty years finally overflows, and all of us (including Jack) can finally see what all of this has cost him.  But. . .--how to put this?--I think my emotional response to all of this hurt is getting in the way of my thinking, and I don't know which connections I should be making.  Is that last embrace between Ennis and Jack supposed to be the logical (even inevitable) result of the DE?  That, even if the DE was not and could not be marred, its inherent flaws (never addressed or fixed) led step by step to this utter spiritual desolation for both of them?  Or. . .  The DE is, more than anything else, what Jack needs.  Jack the extrovert, Jack the initiator, wants to be held in silence, in stillness, in peace.  For Ennis, who keeps everything locked up so tightly inside, what he needs most is for someone to get past his barriers, past the defensive anger/lashing out, and comfort his very obvious anguish?  Or. . . ?

Cheers,

Dagonet

[CANSTANDIT]

Wow, great questions! I love the 'ED';

It's a pleasure when people come in for the first time and make us look at things in a new way. Gosh, now I have to go reread sections of the story; tough job but someone has to do it. 

[Sandy]

While the symmetry of DE and ED may be appealing on some level, I would guard against the easy "bookending" here. The DE refers to a memory of an event, while ED seems to refer to refer to a character trait. Other bookends noted by posters, typically on Symbolism and Imagery, tend to be pairs of similar things, events, phrases, etc.

This is another reason to minimize the use of abbreviations.

[Dagonet]

While the symmetry of DE and ED may be appealing on some level, I would guard against the easy "bookending" here. The DE refers to a memory of an event, while ED seems to refer to a character trait. Other bookends noted by posters, typically on Symbolism and Imagery, tend to be pairs of similar things, events, phrases, etc.

This is another reason to minimize the use of abbreviations.

My apologies for not being more clear. Or if I've strayed onto territory which more properly belongs to another thread.   By "Ennis' Despair" I was referring to the entire mini-scene, from Ennis' breakdown to the embrace (not present in the short story) where Jack comes to him and holds him as he weeps.  Which then fades into the DE.  Two embraces: the last and, possibly (depending on the exact timing of the DE), the first. 

[Ministering angel]

Hi Dagonet!  Please stay and continue to talk.

Have you read the short story? The Dozy Embrace is placed more or less in the same place in both film and story, although the effect is somewhat different. I like your film bookends idea. The beginning and the end of - what? - open intimacy? Could be a lot of ways of phrasing it.

Do you have a sense of when the DE took place? It's a much debated topic.

In the story, I have also noted there is no real pair to the DE except, perhaps, the prologue, where older Ennis in his trailer is rocked by the wind. The prologue tends to get discussed on the "Last Scene: Jack, I Swear" thread, just to be confusing.


In answer to your earlier comment, I don't think Ennis was after the guys with the tire irons in an attempt to somehow protect Jack. I feel his preservation was aimed at himself because he was sufficiently traumatised by his past to make him rather egocentric. This isn't a criticism of him, merely an observation.

[Dagonet]

Hi Dagonet!  Please stay and continue to talk.

Have you read the short story? The Dozy Embrace is placed more or less in the same place in both film and story, although the effect is somewhat different. I like your film bookends idea. The beginning and the end of - what? - open intimacy? Could be a lot of ways of phrasing it.

Heya Ministering Angel,

I went down to my local library (and then the nearest bookstore) just about as soon as I could see clearly after finishing the movie.  And I find the effect to be completely, almost jarringly, different.  In the story, the only possible explanations we're given for what's happening with/to Ennis are utter shock at Jack's words (i.e. heart attack) or "incendiary rage".  Either way, Jack has no opportunity to go to him, to comfort him, before he puts the walls back up.  And so it really is nothing ended, nothing begun, nothing resolved.  It seems such a great distance, from that, to how the moment is handled in the film.  Aside from the almost reflexive anger of "Get the fuck off me!" there's virtually no room in Ennis for rage here, only anguish, as we see his heart cracking open right in front of us.  And Jack comes to him, and holds him, which is just exactly what he needs.  Right before we cut to the DE, which is the first time (the only time?) Ennis gives Jack exactly what *he* needs.  I can't help but think that with a change of this magnitude, there's a connection we're supposed to be making here, or something we're supposed to be taking away, but I can't see it. 

Do you have a sense of when the DE took place? It's a much debated topic.

<sigh>  Difficult question.  Obviously, it would have to be after the FNIT (First Night in Tent, right?), and I think it presupposes a pretty thorough sense of comfort between them, which I suspect would place it after the SNIT.  But not much after--perhaps it occurs the next evening, occupying the space which would have been the TNIT. . . ?

In answer to your earlier comment, I don't think Ennis was after the guys with the tire irons in an attempt to somehow protect Jack. I feel his preservation was aimed at himself because he was sufficiently traumatised by his past to make him rather egocentric. This isn't a criticism of him, merely an observation.

But the thing is, someone pathologically obsessed with his own safety isn't going to go picking fights with random people.  Those are very real risks he's taking--not quite as great those taken by Jack, but significant.  Which of course leads me to wonder who's safety he's trying to protect, if not his own?


Cheers,

Dagonet