Brokeback Mountain Forum @ ennisjack.com
The Movie & Story => Characters, Quotes & Scenes => Topic started by: lowpro on Feb 09, 2006, 11:39 PM
-
Joe's comment that if Jack cannot fix pneumonia he might as well stay up there, no sense going down to see about his uncle, parallels Ennis and Jack's relationship. And that look with the binoculars: you boys messed with the order of things. Joe said Jack was herder and Ennis was camp tender and they switched it around.
-
I wacthed the movie and it show that joe wacthes them have a little play fight and wrestle half nude.
This what the book said,
"They believed themselves invisible, not knowing Joe Aguirre had watched them through his 10x42 binoculars for ten minutes one day, waiting until they’d buttoned up their jeans"
What kind of man wacthes that?
If we think about it. A straight man would have walked away, Or not looked. Or busted there arses.
But he didnt he wacthed for ten Minutes.
I think the implecation in the book is thet Joe Aguirre had his own little Brokecak Mountain experiance himself. The mountain took over him as well once.
In the movie/book later he is really nasty to jack. He comes across as a another Homophope.
What do you Guys/Girls think?
-
I wacthed the movie and it show that joe wacthes them have a little play fight and wrestle half nude.
This what the book said,
"They believed themselves invisible, not knowing Joe Aguirre had watched them through his 10x42 binoculars for ten minutes one day, waiting until they’d buttoned up their jeans"
What kind of man wacthes that?
If we think about it. A straight man would have walked away, Or not looked. Or busted there arses.
But he didnt he wacthed for ten Minutes.
I think the implecation in the book is thet Joe Aguirre had his own little Brokecak Mountain experiance himself. The mountain took over him as well once.
In the movie/book later he is really nasty to jack. He comes across as a another Homophope.
What do you Guys/Girls think?
Hello melb_boy88, and welcome. :)
There are a few old threads dealing with Aguirre and this scene. You can refer to them via the Index thread at the top of the first page of this part of the forum.
As to your question, I think the movie was certainly different from the short story in this matter -- in the movie, Aguirre is shown looking away when the action became a bit more intimate, I suppose.
Yes, in the short story, there is something voyeuristic about Aguirre's syping on Ennis and Jack. It does hint at more than just a morbid curiosity, no? To be sure, it could have been just that -- a morbid curiosity. But I too find it hard to believe that one could persist on viewing such a scene unless one has some fascination with what was afoot.
-
Or maybe was the sort of manipulative person that watched and stored up information that could be made use of later if necessary?
-
Or maybe was the sort of manipulative person that watched and stored up information that could be made use of later if necessary?
Good point. A cold, calculating individual would be able to do this.
-
Aguirre had so little respect for any of these men who did the hard labor of sheep herding on the mountain, I think he just watched as he might watch two sheep mating, or two horses. I don't think it showed him to be a pervert, just someone who stumbled upon a situation and watched, probably thinking all along that these two dumbasses were so incompetent, but had managed to find a way to pass the time.
Is this why he called them down from the mountain so early?
We know this is why he didn't rehire Jack the following summer.
He didn't have high expectations of them, and what he saw just corroborated what he thought all along -- they were losers.
-
Real good summation of the J.A. story here lamusica. To him they're just a pair a' deuces. When he called 'em off them the mountain I believe he was only thinkin' of his G.D. sheep, if he really wanted to abuse E+J he'd have left 'em there during the storm.
From Wikipedia:
Lope de Aguirre (c. 1510 – 27 October 1561) was a Spanish Basque conquistador in South America. Nicknamed El Loco, 'the Madman', Aguirre was renowned for his treacherous and brutal exploits, before being executed for his rebellion against and defiance of the Spanish monarchy.
-
Or maybe was the sort of manipulative person that watched and stored up information that could be made use of later if necessary?
Well,I have never thought about Aguirre precisely as a pervert who felt pleasure in spying the sexual games of his workers,so I´d better inclined to believe this.Anyhow,we can´t forget he was protecting his own interets,he MUST controlling and overseeing what was his,no matter what opinion he got about the two boys.If coincidence made him realise what was happenning on the mountain as well as what was happenning with the sheeps,it´s possible that he must use this "information" against them if necessary,yes why not?.
However,I don´t see Aguirre in this way,but better as a metaphor of the real world Ennis and Jack would find when they went down from BBM;the crash between the shelter they had there,a kind of earthly paradise in which they felt free from their environment´ s intolerance, and the life under the mountain,when all this environment get all its strenght.Aguirre is this intolerance´s agent who sends them down from their paradise and give us,at least for me,the most brutal picture of the world they´ll find after when we see his face right after their delicious and at heart innocent love games.
-
Aguirre had so little respect for any of these men who did the hard labor of sheep herding on the mountain, I think he just watched as he might watch two sheep mating, or two horses. I don't think it showed him to be a pervert, just someone who stumbled upon a situation and watched, probably thinking all along that these two dumbasses were so incompetent, but had managed to find a way to pass the time.
Is this why he called them down from the mountain so early?
We know this is why he didn't rehire Jack the following summer.
He didn't have high expectations of them, and what he saw just corroborated what he thought all along -- they were losers.
This may very well be true. He really didn't treat both of them that well, and your analogy about sheep and horses might be quite appropriate.
I always thought that his calling them back so early had something to do with this. Perhaps it also hints of distaste as well as displeasure.
-
Real good summation of the J.A. story here lamusica. To him they're just a pair a' deuces. When he called 'em off them the mountain I believe he was only thinkin' of his G.D. sheep, if he really wanted to abuse E+J he'd have left 'em there during the storm.
This makes sense, in spite of the fact that I still got the feeling that what he say up there had something to do with his calling them back early... But perhaps he just didn't care, except for the sheep, as you said.
-
Well,I have never thought about Aguirre precisely as a pervert who felt pleasure in spying the sexual games of his workers,so I´d better inclined to believe this.Anyhow,we can´t forget he was protecting his own interets,he MUST controlling and overseeing what was his,no matter what opinion he got about the two boys.If coincidence made him realise what was happenning on the mountain as well as what was happenning with the sheeps,it´s possible that he must use this "information" against them if necessary,yes why not?.
However,I don´t see Aguirre in this way,but better as a metaphor of the real world Ennis and Jack would find when they went down from BBM;the crash between the shelter they had there,a kind of earthly paradise in which they felt free from their environment´ s intolerance, and the life under the mountain,when all this environment get all its strenght.Aguirre is this intolerance´s agent who sends them down from their paradise and give us,at least for me,the most brutal picture of the world they´ll find after when we see his face right after their delicious and at heart innocent love games.
Aguirre as metaphor -- excellent. I think you are right here. And what you said about him protecting his own interests does make sense.
-
Is this why he called them down from the mountain so early?
The more I think about it the more implausible this seems IMHO. This would assume that JA knew these boys were in LOVE and so to be a spoiler he would end it for 'em. I don't think he even knew what love was, let alone that it could happen between two men. I think he just thought they were perverts, based on his dismissal of Jack the next summer. He's just protecting what's valuable to him, his sheep. JMHO.
-
The more I think about it the more implausible this seems IMHO. This would assume that JA knew these boys were in LOVE and so to be a spoiler he would end it for 'em. I don't think he even knew what love was, let alone that it could happen between two men. I think he just thought they were perverts, based on his dismissal of Jack the next summer. He's just protecting what's valuable to him, his sheep. JMHO.
That's right,Jackster;the only interest he had was his sheep,a very logical thing,on the other side...What he watched that day was only an excuse for calling them down from the mountain before they´d finished their work.Of course,if they're "playing" they didn't look for this interest...Moreover,if we add the "shock" he must have by seeing them "!@#$" according to the words he could use,because he really didn't know what love was,and less between men-that was a pervertion,doubtless...-,lots of homophobia and stupidity,we'll get why he put this excuse for making them let their paradise.A beginning of what they'd find in real world,far away from BBM.
-
Of course it's ironic that he was the one who let them into the situation in the first place. He put them there. So is he angry with himslef for giving them the chance to form a bind?
In the real world it was apparently accepted that two men might when left alone together for long stretches of time up in the mountains have a relationship that would not survive their return to the real world. That's why I don't think he'd have been shocked by what he saw, unless it was that they kissed each other - sex OK but displays of affection not acceptable because of what they imply?
-
Of course it's ironic that he was the one who let them into the situation in the first place. He put them there. So is he angry with himslef for giving them the chance to form a bind?
In the real world it was apparently accepted that two men might when left alone together for long stretches of time up in the mountains have a relationship that would not survive their return to the real world. That's why I don't think he'd have been shocked by what he saw, unless it was that they kissed each other - sex OK but displays of affection not acceptable because of what they imply?
Interesting way of putting it, WW. I do think there was an article more than a year ago that addressed duch relationships and assumed that they happened implicitly.
-
I agree. I don't think Aguierre was shockced at all. Who knows? He might have done the same thing at some point in his life. Still, he used it against Jack the following season.
The thing about the kiss is what made it different. Maybe Aguierre didn't see any kissing, though. We don't know that for sure. If he did, that would have given the message that this relationship went way beyond a physical release for recreational purposes only. This will always be a mystery.
I just find Aguierre to be so distasteful. The big, blustery, shit-kicker turns me off on sight, and the minute he opens his mouth, you can tell he is a know-it-all who can't be told anything. Not a very pleasant guy. Consequently, when he rejects Jack, he once again, shows his ignorance.
-
I agree. I don't think Aguierre was shockced at all. Who knows? He might have done the same thing at some point in his life. Still, he used it against Jack the following season.
The thing about the kiss is what made it different. Maybe Aguierre didn't see any kissing, though. We don't know that for sure. If he did, that would have given the message that this relationship went way beyond a physical release for recreational purposes only. This will always be a mystery.
I just find Aguierre to be so distasteful. The big, blustery, shit-kicker turns me off on sight, and the minute he opens his mouth, you can tell he is a know-it-all who can't be told anything. Not a very pleasant guy. Consequently, when he rejects Jack, he once again, shows his ignorance.
I do think that Aguirre did see them kissing (he probably knew what was going on, even if the actual act was hidden by a hat, if you know what I mean). And I do think that may have made the difference. Perhaps he was not ignorant of what could be going on between the sheep herders, but I would guess that he was not prepared to accept signs of affection/intimacy as part of the reality.
I agree. I find Aguirre distasteful. Probably because he did not care for his subordinates. True: he didn't have to -- it was business. But I hate the fact that he did not have a humane interest with those who depended on him.
-
I resuscitate this old thread because few days ago a Brokie told me that,if Aguirre was so homophobic as we think,why he didn't denounce the boys when he saw them "playing".We begun then an,at least for me,interesting discussion about what homophobia really is.IMO,this can't be only applied to someone who acts aggressively or even with violence against who isn't "into what's normal":we can add who tolere it,let do the others,but doesn't understand nor respect them,although their behaviour never get a violent degree.It's in this denomination where we could place Aguirre,so then:what do you opine was the reason for not denouncing them?Maybe was he afraid that some of his fellows could joking at him for having as workers such a "degenerated"?I wonder.
-
I resuscitate this old thread because few days ago a Brokie told me that,if Aguirre was so homophobic as we think,why he didn't denounce the boys when he saw them "playing".We begun then an,at least for me,interesting discussion about what homophobia really is.IMO,this can't be only applied to someone who acts aggressively or even with violence against who isn't "into what's normal":we can add who tolere it,let do the others,but doesn't understand nor respect them,although their behaviour never get a violent degree.It's in this denomination where we could place Aguirre,so then:what do you opine was the reason for not denouncing them?Maybe was he afraid that some of his fellows could joking at him for having as workers such a "degenerated"?I wonder.
im not sure which brokie you mention but i talked about this one topic and i still stand by it obviously he didnt like it and you could still call him homophobic but not to a large extent he didnt tell anyone or physically harm them he rejected jack a job over it but... its not as bad as if somepeople had seen it. imagine if aguirre had been like ennis' dad he could have killed them :(
-
im not sure which brokie you mention but i talked about this one topic and i still stand by it obviously he didnt like it and you could still call him homophobic but not to a large extent he didnt tell anyone or physically harm them he rejected jack a job over it but... its not as bad as if somepeople had seen it. imagine if aguirre had been like ennis' dad he could have killed them :(
You're right. If Aguirre was as hateful as Ennis's father was, he would have killed them. He definitely didn't accept them, but at least he wasn't vehement and hateful enough to become violent towards them.
-
It was the bottomline, Aquirre was a businessman, and tight with a buck apparently. He had the abilty of not hiring them again when they came off the mountain, but how cost effective would it have been to get two more sheep herders up there, just complain when they came down, and not hire them next season. Aquirre was a businessman, he wasn't a soapbox moralist.
-
It was the bottomline, Aquirre was a businessman, and tight with a buck apparently. He had the abilty of not hiring them again when they came off the mountain, but how cost effective would it have been to get two more sheep herders up there, just complain when they came down, and not hire them next season. Aquirre was a businessman, he wasn't a soapbox moralist.
I do agree.
Homophobia is not always expressed in violence. It is in fact usually expressed via contempt, ridicule, and subtle slights. It's the same with racisim, or any other form of prejudice.
Aguirre was sensible enough to make sure that a contract was a contract. But he certainly found a way to end it early, and he certainly was not going to hire Jack (or Ennis) ever again.
-
I do agree.
Homophobia is not always expressed in violence. It is in fact usually expressed via contempt, ridicule, and subtle slights. It's the same with racisim, or any other form of prejudice.
Aguirre was sensible enough to make sure that a contract was a contract. But he certainly found a way to end it early, and he certainly was not going to hire Jack (or Ennis) ever again.
hsure enough. but i wasnt disputing the fact that aguirre was a homophobe he was but he wasnt as bad as some people where in those times is what im saying Ennis and jack are lucky for that.
-
hsure enough. but i wasnt disputing the fact that aguirre was a homophobe he was but he wasnt as bad as some people where in those times is what im saying Ennis and Jack are lucky for that.
Exactly. We definitely know he wasn't accepting of them, to say the least. Aguirre was definitely homophobic. But we've seen that some people are so filled with hate that nothing stops them from becoming violent. And had Aguirre been exactly like Ennis's father...we know what what would have happened. Fortunately for Ennis and Jack, he wasn't as fanatical and hateful as some people.
-
I do agree.
Homophobia is not always expressed in violence. It is in fact usually expressed via contempt, ridicule, and subtle slights. It's the same with racisim, or any other form of prejudice.
Aguirre was sensible enough to make sure that a contract was a contract. But he certainly found a way to end it early, and he certainly was not going to hire Jack (or Ennis) ever again.
And sometimes is almost better to be in front of an aggressive homophobe,because one knows for sure with what they're struggling.The more subtle ways of being it are deceptive,often disguised under the cloak of tolerance and,even,sympathy...A man like Aguirre,representative of a wrong and distorted image of what masculinity would be-the same than Mr. Del Mar,in another sense...-necessarily must feel disgusted for some practices he didn't understand,nor wanted to understand ever.But,as you say,a contract is a contract,although I think that the reason of being attacked in his interest played also a great role in his reject to hire them again; two workers who use their time in "other jobs" can't be useful to this interests,because Aguirre was,above all,a "his own business" man.
-
And sometimes is almost better to be in front of an aggressive homophobe,because one knows for sure with what they're struggling.The more subtle ways of being it are deceptive,often disguised under the cloak of tolerance and,even,sympathy...A man like Aguirre,representative of a wrong and distorted image of what masculinity would be-the same than Mr. Del Mar,in another sense...-necessarily must feel disgusted for some practices he didn't understand,nor wanted to understand ever.But,as you say,a contract is a contract,although I think that the reason of being attacked in his interest played also a great role in his reject to hire them again; two workers who use their time in "other jobs" can't be useful to this interests,because Aguirre was,above all,a "his own business" man.
that was an intresting post and i agree very much. :)
-
that was an intresting post and i agree very much. :)
Thank you,Matt.Yes,you know how people who is more demonstrative in their reactions-even if they're negative-are at the end more trustworthy,in spite of their violence,than these "wolves disguised with sheep's skin"...
-
Maybe he's just one of those people who hates to deal with awkward/embarrassing situations, specially when any kind of sex is involved, and finds it easier to get rid of them quickly on any pretext, after which he doesn't need to think of it again. Then Jack pops up next year and reminds him of what happened, which is perhaps why he's so unpleasant to him.
If his macho buddies say anything, he can claim that Ennis and Jack were poor at the job, and that won't involve him in any difficult explanations of what/how he saw the summer before. He wouldn't want them thinking he was the kid of weirdo who hired queers, or had them coming back and hanging round his trailer, would he?
-
hsure enough. but i wasnt disputing the fact that aguirre was a homophobe he was but he wasnt as bad as some people where in those times is what im saying Ennis and jack are lucky for that.
Well, he certainly didn't seem like a murderer, but I think he was bad enough. A worse enemy is someone who goes about things more subtly or not on the surface. It is harder to confront such people.
-
And sometimes is almost better to be in front of an aggressive homophobe,because one knows for sure with what they're struggling.The more subtle ways of being it are deceptive,often disguised under the cloak of tolerance and,even,sympathy...A man like Aguirre,representative of a wrong and distorted image of what masculinity would be-the same than Mr. Del Mar,in another sense...-necessarily must feel disgusted for some practices he didn't understand,nor wanted to understand ever.But,as you say,a contract is a contract,although I think that the reason of being attacked in his interest played also a great role in his reject to hire them again; two workers who use their time in "other jobs" can't be useful to this interests,because Aguirre was,above all,a "his own business" man.
Exactly. This was my point in my last post to zankou. I actually had such an experience, and the person was actually my superior. I will have to say that it was hell living through that, because you couldn't confront him about it.
In any case, Aguirre was certainly calculating, if not outwardly vicious.
-
Maybe he's just one of those people who hates to deal with awkward/embarrassing situations, specially when any kind of sex is involved, and finds it easier to get rid of them quickly on any pretext, after which he doesn't need to think of it again. Then Jack pops up next year and reminds him of what happened, which is perhaps why he's so unpleasant to him.
If his macho buddies say anything, he can claim that Ennis and Jack were poor at the job, and that won't involve him in any difficult explanations of what/how he saw the summer before. He wouldn't want them thinking he was the kid of weirdo who hired queers, or had them coming back and hanging round his trailer, would he?
I suspect that Aguirre was uncomfortable talking about it with others. But we really don't know whether he actually did. It was convenient for him to simply dismiss Ennis and Jack as totally incompetent, even though some of his restrictions were unreasonable.
-
I suspect that Aguirre was uncomfortable talking about it with others. But we really don't know whether he actually did. It was convenient for him to simply dismiss Ennis and Jack as totally incompetent, even though some of his restrictions were unreasonable.
I tend to agree with Welshwitch in that he preferred not to talk about the case in order to save his reputation and image while avoided gossip and jokes about that. It was better for him dismissing them alleging they were incompetents,what is not very far from truth in his mind,because they could spend more time "steam the rose" than looking for sheep.And that's was clearly against Aguirre's interests,more than the simply fact of being or not homophobe.
-
I tend to agree with Welshwitch in that he preferred not to talk about the case in order to save his reputation and image while avoided gossip and jokes about that. It was better for him dismissing them alleging they were incompetents,what is not very far from truth in his mind,because they could spend more time "steam the rose" than looking for sheep.And that's was clearly against Aguirre's interests,more than the simply fact of being or not homophobe.
But yet, I feel he was a homophobe. If he was'nt , he would've overlooked what he saw on Brokeback while *spying* on them. He hired Jack the previous summer, hired him again though 42 sheep got killed under Jack's watch in which he claimed incompetence. It was only when he discovered they were lovers did he feel the need to not ever hire Jack again, even without Ennis, but made it a point to humiliate Jack in the process when he asked about Ennis.. Sure he kept his mouth shut to avoid gossip which in their culture would possibly be bad for business, but I can't dismiss his tone to Jack saying "now get the hell outta my trailor". That was sorely his own personal homophobic feeling coming into play. MO.
-
But yet, I feel he was a homophobe. If he was'nt , he would've overlooked what he saw on Brokeback while *spying* on them. He hired Jack the previous summer, hired him again though 42 sheep got killed under Jack's watch in which he claimed incompetence. It was only when he discovered they were lovers did he feel the need to not ever hire Jack again, even without Ennis, but made it a point to humiliate Jack in the process when he asked about Ennis.. Sure he kept his mouth shut to avoid gossip which in their culture would possibly be bad for business, but I can't dismiss his tone to Jack saying "now get the hell outta my trailor". That was sorely his own personal homophobic feeling coming into play. MO.
Of course,I haven't said that he wasn't a homophobe,but that two workers "!@#$ in the corners" ended by not looking for their work the same than two workers who don't ;D ...And that this was against his economical interests, matters more to him than the simple fact of being homophobe,because I'm sure that he was more worried about his business than about their sexual life...As Thomas and me have remarked before,where're so many ways of being homophobe,among them the raw violence is sometimes the easiest to deal with.And,of course, Aguirre was homophobe when he humiliated Jack for being gay ,more than for being a bad or good worker;the same than maybe he wouldn't have contracted him for the problem with the mixed sheep even if he hadn't known his sexual tendency.
-
I feel that Aguirre just uses Jack's incompetence as an excuse. The real reason he didn't hire him again was not because of incompetence, it was because Jack was gay. I agree with manhattangirl in that I don't think Aguirre would have been ticked off as he was about losing his sheep if he hadn't known that Ennis and Jack were lovers. Sure he was upset that he lost some of his sheep, but he wouldn't have made such a big deal about it if were just that matter. I think he uses it as an excuse and the way he treats Jack lets us know that.
-
I feel that Aguirre just uses Jack's incompetence as an excuse. The real reason he didn't hire him again was not because of incompetence, it was because Jack was gay. I agree with manhattangirl in that I don't think Aguirre would have been ticked off as he was about losing his sheep if he hadn't known that Ennis and Jack were lovers. Sure he was upset that he lost some of his sheep, but he wouldn't have made such a big deal about it if were just that matter. I think he uses it as an excuse and the way he treats Jack lets us know that.
I tend to think that the problem with the mixing sheep would be a reason for not hiring them again,but in this case was agravated for the discover he did.And that this discover was enough as to humiliate and despise Jack at the moment of reject his new hire,in the way he did.
-
I think we here agree that there is an element of homophobia that motivates Aguirre (perhaps it is the central motivation behind his actions), but that it was convenient for him that he also disapproved of the way Ennis and Jack did their job, so there was no conflict here.
That they given him no excuse to be dissatisfied, we would have perhaps seen a more explicit expression of homophobia, although I prefer it ambiguous -- the way the film showed it.
Still, were they really incompetent? I think they did their best, according to the given circumstances in many situations. However, they did violate Aguirre's command that one always sleeps with the sheep. This was probably enough reason for him to consider them untrustworthy (even though what he was asking for was against rules, in any case.)
-
I think we here agree that there is an element of homophobia that motivates Aguirre (perhaps it is the central motivation behind his actions), but that it was convenient for him that he also disapproved of the way Ennis and Jack did their job, so there was no conflict here.
That they given him no excuse to be dissatisfied, we would have perhaps seen a more explicit expression of homophobia, although I prefer it ambiguous -- the way the film showed it.
Still, were they really incompetent? I think they did their best, according to the given circumstances in many situations. However, they did violate Aguirre's command that one always sleeps with the sheep. This was probably enough reason for him to consider them untrustworthy (even though what he was asking for was against rules, in any case.)
hmm this intrests me very much because its almost like they may have stayed both at cmp which went against aguiires request but then can aguirre really complain against this when his request was really doing the same to the people above him as the fact jack and ennis disobeyed. i do think aguirre was homophobic but i also dont think this is the main reason he didnt re-hire jack or ennis, i think the fact they disobyed him was his main reason even though he was being a hypocrit in this.
i think when he didnt re-hire jack the next year and he made the comment about him and ennis, i think this may have been aguirre's way of trying to offend jack knowing just commenting on the fact jack did the job badly wouldnt hurt him in the same way. one thing that is sure even if aguirre wasnt a strong homophobe he was not a nice person. this is just a theory of mine and i have many. i deffinatly know beleive he was homophobic but too what extent im not sure yet.
-
I don't really know what the primary motivation was for Aguirre not hiring them back. But I do think that he had mixed motibvations. Certainly he diodn't think that they were reliable, in the sense that they disobeyed his orders, even though they were unreasonable.
-
I don't really know what the primary motivation was for Aguirre not hiring them back. But I do think that he had mixed motibvations. Certainly he diodn't think that they were reliable, in the sense that they disobeyed his orders, even though they were unreasonable.
What a "business man"-let's call Aguirre in such a pleasant way...- wants and looks for are workers who obey their orders,they fulfill them and render in the end.He could feel angry because they disobeyed and because the result was clearly a lack of yield-to say it some way...-.But we must add that the workers were lovers,another situation that was in damage of this yield and that,moreover,Aguirre didn't understand nor respect(and didn't want to understand or respect either).Something that could easily make him loss "points" in his reputation and image.I think that all is enough for him.
-
hmm this intrests me very much because its almost like they may have stayed both at cmp which went against aguiires request but then can aguirre really complain against this when his request was really doing the same to the people above him as the fact jack and ennis disobeyed. i do think aguirre was homophobic but i also dont think this is the main reason he didnt re-hire jack or ennis, i think the fact they disobyed him was his main reason even though he was being a hypocrit in this.
i think when he didnt re-hire jack the next year and he made the comment about him and ennis, i think this may have been aguirre's way of trying to offend jack knowing just commenting on the fact jack did the job badly wouldnt hurt him in the same way. one thing that is sure even if aguirre wasnt a strong homophobe he was not a nice person. this is just a theory of mine and i have many. i deffinatly know beleive he was homophobic but too what extent im not sure yet.
Exactly, Aguirre was demanding they go against the law himself. A reason why he did'nt want it getting around . Sure, he was pissed that Jack and Eniis went against his rules but if word got back to the Forest Srvc., that he was going against their rules, he could be out of business fast.
It was only when he got one of them alone (Jack) did he let him know he knew. He never sited incompetence as the reason he would'nt hire Jack back or go into anything specifically regarding them both breaking the rules when he could have, as a reason for not hiring him. He seemed more upset about WHY they were in camp together. What happened the previous summer when 42 sheep were killed, he also ruled Jack incompetent in his job, blaming him for the loss, but he did hire Jack back again regardless. Aguirre was very aware how dangerous the unpredictable,mountainous weather could become. It's totally unreasonable to expect perfection under these circumstances. ( gawd, all that traveling in one day!)Truth is, he never thought highly of either one of these "two dueces" in the first place , two broke and hungry "ranch stiffs" whom he needed to do his dirty work and keep secret about it. They had rebelled against his his rules yes,but the idea that they "stemmed the rose" only added to his dislike for them. He was homophobic imo. I feel he should have been grateful that Jack and Ennis went along with this plan of his to tend the sheep apart, breaking the law under the circumstances.. Certainly, he was a businessman ,but a people person, he was not.
-
Exactly, Aguirre was demanding they go against the law himself. A reason why he did'nt want it getting around . Sure, he was pissed that Jack and Eniis went against his rules but if word got back to the Forest Srvc., that he was going against their rules, he could be out of business fast.
It was only when he got one of them alone (Jack) did he let him know he knew. He never sited incompetence as the reason he would'nt hire Jack back or go into anything specifically regarding them both breaking the rules when he could have, as a reason for not hiring him. He seemed more upset about WHY they were in camp together. What happened the previous summer when 42 sheep were killed, he also ruled Jack incompetent in his job, blaming him for the loss, but he did hire Jack back again regardless. Aguirre was very aware how dangerous the unpredictable,mountainous weather could become. It's totally unreasonable to expect perfection under these circumstances. ( gawd, all that traveling in one day!)Truth is, he never thought highly of either one of these "two dueces" in the first place , two broke and hungry "ranch stiffs" whom he needed to do his dirty work and keep secret about it. They had rebelled against his his rules yes,but the idea that they "stemmed the rose" only added to his dislike for them. He was homophobic imo. I feel he should have been grateful that Jack and Ennis went along with this plan of his to tend the sheep apart, breaking the law under the circumstances.. Certainly, he was a businessman ,but a people person, he was not.
hmm very good point :)
-
I do think that Aguirre was far more calculating than meets the eye. For me, he didn't seem to be a man ruled by emotions, although it is difficult for us not to see the contempt he had for subordinates who didn't meet his expectations, for one reason or other...