Topic: Friendship, sex, and love....what was the role of each?

[manhattangirl]

On the surface, I am sure that the Final Confrontation was along the lines of sex.  But I am sure you will agree, MG, that this only proved a catalyst for all the pent-up feelings that welled up inside of them over the years -- especially in Jack's case.  I think Jack's sexual need hid a deeper frustration of wanting more from Ennis -- something that he never really had and had always desired.  Hence the valedictory in the short story and the Dozy Embrace.

I do agree with you about Jack, he found that peace inside of him and it quiet the need, just being held by Ennis showed that.   Jack wanted so much more.

[tpe]

I do agree with you about Jack, he found that peace inside of him and it quiet the need, just being held by Ennis showed that.   Jack wanted so much more.

Beautifully dais, MG.  And you say it with such economy of words.

In a way (perhaps sadly), it was a separate peace.

[Tony]

  As I had said, Ennis's attitude is typical of many of us who take things for granted.  I am sure you have had the experience of taking someone for granted, up until that person or loved one died or went away, and you begin to realize that you could have done things a bit different.

   Darn, Thomas, you've put a lot out there this morning, for thinking over.  A lot of literary works are focused on memories of how things once were, and, in that sense, reflect the strangeness to our lives, in that we go with the flow of events each day (and have to) and yet discover there were times there before that were of great importance often for their very quiet or simplicity. Idylls reconstructed from the chaos of time raging on.  There's some of that in BBM.  Since it is a universal experience, we ought to be able to forgive the failures of Ennis, and the misery of his own remembrances.
  And then, a wildly different view on taking things for granted.  When the Olympics were out in the West, not too long ago, it was hilarious to see the black comedian assigned, supposedly as a reporter.  He had a lot of fun pointing out that the all-white locals, hadn't a clue they were....white.  Eddy Murphy did a comedy skit on a similar theme.
  The bottom line to that humor was that you don't exist, in certain ways, until someone else is different.  A group of men, do not exist as men, until....a woman walks into the room.  White people do not exist....until a black person shows up.  This sounds stupid and over-simplified, but I once saw a t.v. show where, in a province in China, there was no conception of being.....Chinese, until strange-looking journalists showed up.
  By extension, Ennis did not fully exist....until Jack arrived.  Not that he was a collapsed reality, as in modern physics.  More like his hurts and needs and traumas were not exceptional and lacked their fullest meaning, until the confrontation with ....the non-Ennis, the outsider, Jack Twist.  He didn't know what he was missing in his life until that something showed up and thereby forced a definition.
   If this is all too intellectual, it's your doings, Thomas.  And, by the way, I can't believe you snuck in a reference to "A Separate Peace", in small caps, in one of your replies.  So I refuse to take responsibility for the ramblings above.  I do believe, you are being gently provocative, to get us to do some thinking.
In my case, that will always produce a tangled, messy, over-thinky reply.

[FlwrChild]

On the surface, I am sure that the Final Confrontation was along the lines of sex.  But I am sure you will agree, MG, that this only proved a catalyst for all the pent-up feelings that welled up inside of them over the years -- especially in Jack's case.  I think Jack's sexual need hid a deeper frustration of wanting more from Ennis -- something that he never really had and had always desired.  Hence the valedictory in the short story and the Dozy Embrace.

Yes, that's it exactly!


You guys always say things better than I can.

[tpe]

   Darn, Thomas, you've put a lot out there this morning, for thinking over.  A lot of literary works are focused on memories of how things once were, and, in that sense, reflect the strangeness to our lives, in that we go with the flow of events each day (and have to) and yet discover there were times there before that were of great importance often for their very quiet or simplicity. Idylls reconstructed from the chaos of time raging on.  There's some of that in BBM.  Since it is a universal experience, we ought to be able to forgive the failures of Ennis, and the misery of his own remembrances.
  And then, a wildly different view on taking things for granted.  When the Olympics were out in the West, not too long ago, it was hilarious to see the black comedian assigned, supposedly as a reporter.  He had a lot of fun pointing out that the all-white locals, hadn't a clue they were....white.  Eddy Murphy did a comedy skit on a similar theme.
  The bottom line to that humor was that you don't exist, in certain ways, until someone else is different.  A group of men, do not exist as men, until....a woman walks into the room.  White people do not exist....until a black person shows up.  This sounds stupid and over-simplified, but I once saw a t.v. show where, in a province in China, there was no conception of being.....Chinese, until strange-looking journalists showed up.
  By extension, Ennis did not fully exist....until Jack arrived.  Not that he was a collapsed reality, as in modern physics.  More like his hurts and needs and traumas were not exceptional and lacked their fullest meaning, until the confrontation with ....the non-Ennis, the outsider, Jack Twist.  He didn't know what he was missing in his life until that something showed up and thereby forced a definition.
   If this is all too intellectual, it's your doings, Thomas.  And, by the way, I can't believe you snuck in a reference to "A Separate Peace", in small caps, in one of your replies.  So I refuse to take responsibility for the ramblings above.  I do believe, you are being gently provocative, to get us to do some thinking.
In my case, that will always produce a tangled, messy, over-thinky reply.

Well Tony, you also certainly put out a lot to think about here.  Jack as the non-Ennis.  Or perhaps the Alter-Ennis.  Let me think about this.

And yes, the reference to "A Separate Peace" was deliberate -- I am quite sure you understand.  It is in keeping with the subject of this thread, in fact.

[babytammy7]

On the surface, I am sure that the Final Confrontation was along the lines of sex.  But I am sure you will agree, MG, that this only proved a catalyst for all the pent-up feelings that welled up inside of them over the years -- especially in Jack's case.  I think Jack's sexual need hid a deeper frustration of wanting more from Ennis -- something that he never really had and had always desired.  Hence the valedictory in the short story and the Dozy Embrace.

I think that Jack was not bitching about having not enough sex. I mean, he sure did that, but only after Ennis asked about Mexico!! Jack was complaining about never having enough time with Ennis, about Ennis not being able to do it in August. Jack bitched about the few sex to explain Ennis why he went Mexico. What really did matter to him what that he missed Ennis and he was left with such a few time to share with him.

Maybe Ennis didn't know that that was love and maybe the confrontation scene was about sex, but for me Jack was full aware of what he felt was love. You don't keep two shirts for 20 years because you think you have great sex with your friend. You don't want your ashes up in a mountain because you had there the most incredible sex of your life, and you don't say that your favorite place is a mountain only because you had sex there.
Ennis had to see that Jack felt love, because Jack keep asking him for a life together over for over 20 years. We see Jack saying that after the reunion scene; then when Jack drove all the way up when he got that postcard about Ennis divorce; then when Ennis was cleaning things by the river Jack asked Ennis why he didn't move to Texas (no Colorado or other state, just Texas where Jack lived); and maybe during all those years Jack asked Ennis a few times more. Even a brokie said to me that Jack asked Ennis why he didn't marry again just to prove his point to Ennis, like trying to force to Ennis to say that he didn't re marry because he didn't like women, he wanted only Jack!!

I'm trying to say that Ennis had to be blind to not see that Jack loved him, that that was not only sex (who asks someone during 20 years to live together because he/she has great sex?); but then, I didn't understand why Ennis was so shocked. Thomas, you said that Ennis was so shocked because he didn't know how deep Jack loved him, and I agree...but I read that AP tried to make think that that was a very deep friendship with sex from Jack's part and she wanted to punch us at the end when we read about the DE and read about Ennis finding the shirts and Lureen talking about Jack's wishes.

Now I don't know if Ennis knew or not...but I think that the confrontation scene was not about sex but about love, even if Jack couldn't say it (after that he thought about the DE, a sexless moment) and Ennis didn't realize about it.

I know, what a mess I wrote...I have the ideas in my head but I don't know how to write them. Sorry.

[tpe]

I think that Jack was not bitching about having not enough sex. I mean, he sure did that, but only after Ennis asked about Mexico!! Jack was complaining about never having enough time with Ennis, about Ennis not being able to do it in August. Jack bitched about the few sex to explain Ennis why he went Mexico. What really did matter to him what that he missed Ennis and he was left with such a few time to share with him.

I agree with this.  Ennis bringing up Mexico made Jack bristle, because it probably struck him as a little petty, given what he truly desired.

Maybe Ennis didn't know that that was love and maybe the confrontation scene was about sex, but for me Jack was full aware of what he felt was love. You don't keep two shirts for 20 years because you think you have great sex with your friend. You don't want your ashes up in a mountain because you had there the most incredible sex of your life, and you don't say that your favorite place is a mountain only because you had sex there.
Ennis had to see that Jack felt love, because Jack keep asking him for a life together over for over 20 years. We see Jack saying that after the reunion scene; then when Jack drove all the way up when he got that postcard about Ennis divorce; then when Ennis was cleaning things by the river Jack asked Ennis why he didn't move to Texas (no Colorado or other state, just Texas where Jack lived); and maybe during all those years Jack asked Ennis a few times more. Even a brokie said to me that Jack asked Ennis why he didn't marry again just to prove his point to Ennis, like trying to force to Ennis to say that he didn't re marry because he didn't like women, he wanted only Jack!!

I'm trying to say that Ennis had to be blind to not see that Jack loved him, that that was not only sex (who asks someone during 20 years to live together because he/she has great sex?); but then, I didn't understand why Ennis was so shocked. Thomas, you said that Ennis was so shocked because he didn't know how deep Jack loved him, and I agree...but I read that AP tried to make think that that was a very deep friendship with sex from Jack's part and she wanted to punch us at the end when we read about the DE and read about Ennis finding the shirts and Lureen talking about Jack's wishes.

Now I don't know if Ennis knew or not...but I think that the confrontation scene was not about sex but about love, even if Jack couldn't say it (after that he thought about the DE, a sexless moment) and Ennis didn't realize about it.

I know, what a mess I wrote...I have the ideas in my head but I don't know how to write them. Sorry.

It is really hard to read Ennis.  And I suspect that he sort of knew and did not know the extent of Jack's love.  Again, this goes back to the thing about taking people and their love for granted.  We sort of know that our parents love us, but it sort of hits us differently when they are no longer with us.  I think the extent of Ennis's "knowledge" has many gray areas along these lines.  It is a very human thing to do: to know and yet not really know -- all at the same time.

 

[Tony]

  It is a very human thing to do: to know and yet not really know -- all at the same time.

 

    Dear Baby Tammy - I do understand what you are trying to say -- how could Ennis NOT know Jack loved him? So, am quoting Thomas as he said it so very well.  But also adding my own --- again, Ennis didn't know the depth of Jack's love and because he saw Jack liking sex with other guys as well, he'd always have had some doubts.
   And you are right, the confrontation scene was about love, very much so, but it started out on the issue of frequency of sex.  So it went:
      -Jack complains - not enough sex (and he explicitly says sex, rather than companionship)
      -Ennis makes excuses
      -Jack won't accept them
      -Ennis is enraged and asks if he's gotten sex elsewhere
      -Jack fires back and says he wishes he could break from the relationship
      -Ennis breaks down, emotionally
      -Jack gives in, up to a point
It starts about sex, but ends about the depth of love they had for each other.  What pisses me off is that enough emotion was shown for both of them to know there was more love there than had been expressed before.  Ennis had never wept before, in front of Jack.
   There was enough there for a revolution in their relationship as big as the one in FNIT and SNIT and the reunion.  It was all there.  And went wrong.

[tpe]

    Dear Baby Tammy - I do understand what you are trying to say -- how could Ennis NOT know Jack loved him? So, am quoting Thomas as he said it so very well.  But also adding my own --- again, Ennis didn't know the depth of Jack's love and because he saw Jack liking sex with other guys as well, he'd always have had some doubts.

Exactly.  He had been misled by his own doubts about Jack and Jack's needs when it came to him (i.e., Ennis).

   And you are right, the confrontation scene was about love, very much so, but it started out on the issue of frequency of sex.  So it went:
      -Jack complains - not enough sex (and he explicitly says sex, rather than companionship)
      -Ennis makes excuses
      -Jack won't accept them
      -Ennis is enraged and asks if he's gotten sex elsewhere
      -Jack fires back and says he wishes he could break from the relationship
      -Ennis breaks down, emotionally
      -Jack gives in, up to a point
It starts about sex, but ends about the depth of love they had for each other.  What pisses me off is that enough emotion was shown for both of them to know there was more love there than had been expressed before.  Ennis had never wept before, in front of Jack.
   There was enough there for a revolution in their relationship as big as the one in FNIT and SNIT and the reunion.  It was all there.  And went wrong.

The whole FC scene really takes off when Jack said "I did once."  I am not exactly sure why Ennis responded to this by bringing up Mexico, except perhaps it was the most convenient thing to bring up to "get even" with Jack, for bringing up Ennis's past refusal to live a life of love together.  Or perhaps Ennis doubted Jack's faithfulness in living a life of love together, and brought up Mexico as an example.

[Tony]

      By extension, Ennis did not fully exist....until Jack arrived.  Not that he was a collapsed reality, as in modern physics.  More like his hurts and needs and traumas were not exceptional and lacked their fullest meaning, until the confrontation with ....the non-Ennis, the outsider, Jack Twist.  He didn't know what he was missing in his life until that something showed up and thereby forced a definition.
 

    Am sorry to be quoting myself, but it was easier than re-writing.  I wonder how much it is true, that our hurts do not fully exist until we can tell of them.  That may even be part of delayed stress syndrome, where soldiers cannot confront trauma until later, when it is safe.
   Ennis, then, was not walking around with his ghosts fully activated, the lonely childhood, the murder of Earl, the unusual strangeness to his parents death (they found the one unusual place TO die, that was illogical) until there was someone who gave a damn enough to listen, Jack Twist.  And then the ghosts, the traumas materialized into a crippling reality, even as healing was there, at hand.
  Maybe we don't fully exist, each of us, unless meeting others forces self-definition.  Am not saying our lives aren't real, just that we often let them stay unexamined and vague, until we are in the company of another person.
  The meaning of Earl and Rich, then, didn't become central until Jack arrived.  The loneliness and discardability was bearable, until Jack arrived.  Aintfoolin wondered HOW they fell into such a deep love on the mountain.  Maybe, in the company of the other, isolated in the wilderness, they each found themselves and then from there went on to love the one that allowed that, accepted who they were, and showed the same need.
   This is NOT over-thinky.  It's probably true, we don't fully develop as a person, or materialize, unless there is the other, who brings that into being.
Consider a personal hurt in your own life, and then, see how much more it goes from vague to very definable, when there is someone who cares enough to hear.  That was there, then, for Ennis and must also have been there for Jack.  Especially as he sat on the hill at night, watching Ennis off in the distance,
Jack, it may well be, found himself, by seeing his need.

[FlwrChild]

Tony, that is not over-thinky at all, and it is beautifully expressed. I absolutely think you make a very relevant and insightful point there. And I also believe that it applies to all of us in some way.

This is what I meant about your posts being visual for me. I can practically see Jack and Ennis finding themselves in each other, and all of the pain and joy that went with that. Thanks.

[babytammy7]

    Dear Baby Tammy - I do understand what you are trying to say -- how could Ennis NOT know Jack loved him? So, am quoting Thomas as he said it so very well.  But also adding my own --- again, Ennis didn't know the depth of Jack's love and because he saw Jack liking sex with other guys as well, he'd always have had some doubts.
   And you are right, the confrontation scene was about love, very much so, but it started out on the issue of frequency of sex.  So it went:
      -Jack complains - not enough sex (and he explicitly says sex, rather than companionship)
      -Ennis makes excuses
      -Jack won't accept them
      -Ennis is enraged and asks if he's gotten sex elsewhere
      -Jack fires back and says he wishes he could break from the relationship
      -Ennis breaks down, emotionally
      -Jack gives in, up to a point
It starts about sex, but ends about the depth of love they had for each other.  What pisses me off is that enough emotion was shown for both of them to know there was more love there than had been expressed before.  Ennis had never wept before, in front of Jack.
   There was enough there for a revolution in their relationship as big as the one in FNIT and SNIT and the reunion.  It was all there.  And went wrong.

Tony, friend, thank you so much for your reply.

I think Jack complains about not enough time, not about not enough sex. Ennis told him that he couldn't make it in August and then Jack bitched about cold and then said that they never have enough time. Then Ennis made excuses and asked Jack about better ideas. Jack said "I did once" and Ennis started the Mexico thing, and Jack went on talking about sex, but about love too, because he said that they could have had a good life together in their own house but Ennis didn't want.

    Am sorry to be quoting myself, but it was easier than re-writing.  I wonder how much it is true, that our hurts do not fully exist until we can tell of them.  That may even be part of delayed stress syndrome, where soldiers cannot confront trauma until later, when it is safe.
   Ennis, then, was not walking around with his ghosts fully activated, the lonely childhood, the murder of Earl, the unusual strangeness to his parents death (they found the one unusual place TO die, that was illogical) until there was someone who gave a damn enough to listen, Jack Twist.  And then the ghosts, the traumas materialized into a crippling reality, even as healing was there, at hand.
  Maybe we don't fully exist, each of us, unless meeting others forces self-definition.  Am not saying our lives aren't real, just that we often let them stay unexamined and vague, until we are in the company of another person.
  The meaning of Earl and Rich, then, didn't become central until Jack arrived.  The loneliness and discardability was bearable, until Jack arrived.  Aintfoolin wondered HOW they fell into such a deep love on the mountain.  Maybe, in the company of the other, isolated in the wilderness, they each found themselves and then from there went on to love the one that allowed that, accepted who they were, and showed the same need.
   This is NOT over-thinky.  It's probably true, we don't fully develop as a person, or materialize, unless there is the other, who brings that into being.
Consider a personal hurt in your own life, and then, see how much more it goes from vague to very definable, when there is someone who cares enough to hear.  That was there, then, for Ennis and must also have been there for Jack.  Especially as he sat on the hill at night, watching Ennis off in the distance,
Jack, it may well be, found himself, by seeing his need.

I love this post!!! 

[myprivatejack]

Tony, friend, thank you so much for your reply.

I think Jack complains about not enough time, not about not enough sex. Ennis told him that he couldn't make it in August and then Jack bitched about cold and then said that they never have enough time. Then Ennis made excuses and asked Jack about better ideas. Jack said "I did once" and Ennis started the Mexico thing, and Jack went on talking about sex, but about love too, because he said that they could have had a good life together in their own house but Ennis didn't want.

Well said,Tammy¡  I think also that the main reason of Jack's complaining was the lack of a real time together,without the clock always as their main enemy.Sex in this confrontation is for me only an excuse,the peak of the iceberg of a situation that must be spoken about a lot of time before.Lack of time avoided them to feel each other body,yes,but also each other's soul,each other's feelings,each other's LOVE...I've always thought that this "couple of high altitude fucks once or twice a year" meant only that Jack was complaining about Ennis way of thinking; that he believed Jack had enough with the company altogether with some sex that he gave him few times a year.And Jack,of course(even with a greater need of sex than his fellow)needed indeed something else,much more else than that;he needed to know that his real love-not his more or less good lover,that he could find in other places...-felt the same for him,wanted the same than him and needed completely the same than he needed him too.Not little thing...

[aintfoolin]

Well said,Tammy¡  I think also that the main reason of Jack's complaining was the lack of a real time together,without the clock always as their main enemy.Sex in this confrontation is for me only an excuse,the peak of the iceberg of a situation that must be spoken about a lot of time before.Lack of time avoided them to feel each other body,yes,but also each other's soul,each other's feelings,each other's LOVE...I've always thought that this "couple of high altitude fucks once or twice a year" meant only that Jack was complaining about Ennis way of thinking; that he believed Jack had enough with the company altogether with some sex that he gave him few times a year.And Jack,of course(even with a greater need of sex than his fellow)needed indeed something else,much more else than that;he needed to know that his real love-not his more or less good lover,that he could find in other places...-felt the same for him,wanted the same than him and needed completely the same than he needed him too.Not little thing...

 I feel Jack was thinking of it as a continous affair. One that meant, even when they were'nt *together* they were together. The long periods of time in between meant nothing in terms of them not still  being a couple. No " out of sight, out of mind for him. Jack was constantly buliding on the relationship, making plans for a future and actually percieved  at times  as the one *driving* the relationship, keeping it going . Had he just stopped showing up, and stopped contact with Ennis completly, Ennis would  probably be totally lost. It would require him to travel beyond the coffee pot trying to find the handle , get in his truck and go find Jack. Maybe in a fanfic, but would Ennis really gear up to do this? I wonder. , go to Childress and find Jack? I'm not sure, but I seriously doubt it. Maybe I'm wrong, who knows? It took Jack's death for Ennis to go to LF.

[aintfoolin]

    Am sorry to be quoting myself, but it was easier than re-writing.  I wonder how much it is true, that our hurts do not fully exist until we can tell of them.  That may even be part of delayed stress syndrome, where soldiers cannot confront trauma until later, when it is safe.
   Ennis, then, was not walking around with his ghosts fully activated, the lonely childhood, the murder of Earl, the unusual strangeness to his parents death (they found the one unusual place TO die, that was illogical) until there was someone who gave a damn enough to listen, Jack Twist.  And then the ghosts, the traumas materialized into a crippling reality, even as healing was there, at hand.
  Maybe we don't fully exist, each of us, unless meeting others forces self-definition.  Am not saying our lives aren't real, just that we often let them stay unexamined and vague, until we are in the company of another person.
  The meaning of Earl and Rich, then, didn't become central until Jack arrived.  The loneliness and discardability was bearable, until Jack arrived.  Aintfoolin wondered HOW they fell into such a deep love on the mountain.  Maybe, in the company of the other, isolated in the wilderness, they each found themselves and then from there went on to love the one that allowed that, accepted who they were, and showed the same need.
   This is NOT over-thinky.  It's probably true, we don't fully develop as a person, or materialize, unless there is the other, who brings that into being.
Consider a personal hurt in your own life, and then, see how much more it goes from vague to very definable, when there is someone who cares enough to hear.  That was there, then, for Ennis and must also have been there for Jack.  Especially as he sat on the hill at night, watching Ennis off in the distance,
Jack, it may well be, found himself, by seeing his need.

 Wonderful post. Indeed , interacting with others can bring out the best or worst of us. Often we are self-defined by the way others see us.  This interaction also allows one to find their, infinite possibilites and their  limits. I love what you said about Jack and Ennis allowing each other to find themselves.Jack had the courage to reach out to Ennis and found that Ennis was capable of reaching back. He had something to say, feelings, and a story to tell that otherwise would not have been heard.  all because Jack was willing to listen to it.Jack told his story also and found that Ennis could relate to a great deal, an amazing, thoughtful post putting a lot into perspective . Thanx.

[tpe]

    Am sorry to be quoting myself, but it was easier than re-writing.  I wonder how much it is true, that our hurts do not fully exist until we can tell of them.  That may even be part of delayed stress syndrome, where soldiers cannot confront trauma until later, when it is safe.
   Ennis, then, was not walking around with his ghosts fully activated, the lonely childhood, the murder of Earl, the unusual strangeness to his parents death (they found the one unusual place TO die, that was illogical) until there was someone who gave a damn enough to listen, Jack Twist.  And then the ghosts, the traumas materialized into a crippling reality, even as healing was there, at hand.
  Maybe we don't fully exist, each of us, unless meeting others forces self-definition.  Am not saying our lives aren't real, just that we often let them stay unexamined and vague, until we are in the company of another person.
  The meaning of Earl and Rich, then, didn't become central until Jack arrived.  The loneliness and discardability was bearable, until Jack arrived.  Aintfoolin wondered HOW they fell into such a deep love on the mountain.  Maybe, in the company of the other, isolated in the wilderness, they each found themselves and then from there went on to love the one that allowed that, accepted who they were, and showed the same need.
   This is NOT over-thinky.  It's probably true, we don't fully develop as a person, or materialize, unless there is the other, who brings that into being.
Consider a personal hurt in your own life, and then, see how much more it goes from vague to very definable, when there is someone who cares enough to hear.  That was there, then, for Ennis and must also have been there for Jack.  Especially as he sat on the hill at night, watching Ennis off in the distance,
Jack, it may well be, found himself, by seeing his need.

I think it is true.  The analogy about soldiers si very apt, IMO.  It is pain that defines us in critical moments of life -- it brings us in touch with our own humanity/mortality.  But most of all, it is the presence of the other that makes such an expereince tangible.  As a philosopher once said, there is no "I" without the "other" when we speak of the human condition.

[tpe]

I feel Jack was thinking of it as a continous affair. One that meant, even when they were'nt *together* they were together. The long periods of time in between meant nothing in terms of them not still  being a couple. No " out of sight, out of mind for him. Jack was constantly buliding on the relationship, making plans for a future and actually percieved  at times  as the one *driving* the relationship, keeping it going . Had he just stopped showing up, and stopped contact with Ennis completly, Ennis would  probably be totally lost. It would require him to travel beyond the coffee pot trying to find the handle , get in his truck and go find Jack. Maybe in a fanfic, but would Ennis really gear up to do this? I wonder. , go to Childress and find Jack? I'm not sure, but I seriously doubt it. Maybe I'm wrong, who knows? It took Jack's death for Ennis to go to LF.

These are very insightful, AF.  I agree with you, but also note that it was also a continuing struggle for Jack.  He didn't want to stay within the "safe" zones when it came to friendship and love (the same goes for sex, obviously!).  As I said in another post, he was always stretching boundaries -- his own and others (i.e., Ennis.)

 

[lancecowboy]

Wow, so many wonderful comments. I haven't had time to catch up on all of them, but the few that jumped out, I just have to respond:

Tony, amazing insight again about the pain of loneliness being hidden until they were on the mountain, together, alone, and finding each of their own self, then each other. I love that. They did not feel the loneliness until they found someone who accepted themselves. Once felt accepted, they were able to bring it out of each other. Brokeback Mountain was the catalyst that broke down the walls of isolation, in the isolated wilderness.

Aintfooln, again wonderful insight. Jack drove the relationship, and Ennis reacted. Jack pushed the boundaries, in everything he did, and Ennis followed, making the dreams into solid reality. Without Jack, Ennis was stuck in the mud. Without Ennis, Jack was flying off in all directions. They were perfect for each other. They needed each other. Jack saw it, Ennis didn't until too late.

[atalley]

Wonderful insights fellow Brokies!

[lancecowboy]

Watching a couple movies made me think again about Friendship, Sex and Love.

Straight Boys, a short film about a college student having a crush on his straight roommate and best friend.

Gone but not Forgetten, a 2003 movie about the love that developed between a forest ranger who rescued a man who suffered memory loss.

L'homme que J'aime, a movie about a gay man's pursuit of a straight co-worker, and their ensuing beautiful love story.

It brought up an interesting question, if a man can change his sexual orientation. I won't give away the plot, but I have concluded for myself, that the old labels of gay and straight are simply inadequate when it comes to describing human sexuality. Even the new continuum of rainbow spectrum of 0 to 100% is not sufficient because it leaves out many other factors, from time and circumstance, to personalities and chemistry.

Most men are gay or straight and will remain so, no matter what.

Some men will change given the right circumstances.

I think the so-called "bromance" between straight men happens to all adolescents, but the gay men react with the desire to take it to a different level, while the straight men do not, for whatever reason (mostly biochemical).

And so goes the process of Friendship, Sex, Love. Gay men continues down the path, sometimes arriving at love. Many, like Ennis, suffers from the distorted view of their sex, and never arrives at love.

So, was Ennis gay? Was Lucas gay? Was Morgan gay? Was Mark gay?

Does the question make sense?

Only if the expected answer is important to the person asking the question. So, yes, to Jack, to Martin, to Ben, to Andrew, but no, to the rest of the world. I don't know if that makes sense, but it makes the most sense to me out of the ambiguity that surrounds this concept of love between Ennis and Jack, and now Lucas and Martin, Mark and Andrew, and Ben and Morgan.

[Tony]

I have concluded for myself, that the old labels of gay and straight are simply inadequate when it comes to describing human sexuality. Even the new continuum of rainbow spectrum of 0 to 100% is not sufficient because it leaves out many other factors, from time and circumstance, to personalities and chemistry.

Most men are gay or straight and will remain so, no matter what.

Some men will change given the right circumstances.

  I will get to Ennis and Jack, but by a circuitous route.  There has been a lot of progress in exploring potential for male-to-male sexuality and there does seem to be multiple routes to becoming or being gay, including biological for some, environmental (early formative years) for others, and then for another group altogether, some kind of rolling of the dice in a 0-100% continuum.  With just these in play, there is much squabbling, particularly if someone has an agenda.  Yet I still believe, person-by-person, there is a definable answer and we will know that after more serious research.
  But, it has occurred to me, all of that has to do with figuring out why a male WANTS sex with another male.  Last week, I had a major "Oy, vay" over adding in the opposite.  What about males who do not want sex with another male but do want to be desired by other males?  Where did I get this from? The new wave of athletes and celebs (soccer star Beckham comes to mind) who encourage and admit to enjoying being sex symbols for gays.  Developing this further, I would say a hefty % of straight men, who have no lust for other males, still find some enjoyment out of being sexually attractive not only to gays, but also to, say an admiring straight buddy.  And how much of the bodybuilding cult derives from that?
  REALLY digging deep, I think it is fair to say, a significant number of straight males, who are not going to have sex with another guy, still derive some happy/happy over....being wanted.  And it may even be the mark of healthy mental and emotional development. On Dirtbiker's thread - "Men in Uniform.." there is one particular photo of 3 soldiers and one is play-acting about oral sex with his buddy, who has a happy/happy grin on his face.  They aren't gay.
They're goofing off.  My point is that we also have to throw into the equations....not only a males desire for another male, but the 0-100% continuum on whether the OPPOSITE is going on, wanting to be wanted.  Even if straight.

     Now to Jack and Ennis.  This screws up the works.  If Jack was deeply in need of male ratification, and enjoyed being wanted, and might even provoke that, then there might be Andrew's rare possibility of, in FNIT, the gravitational forces of both continuums (desire for, and need to be wanted)...turning a very intimate friendship love into Jack going bi or gay.  The same, very likely occuring with Ennis but the continuums different (low desire for same gender sex, high need to be wanted), thus explaining Jack's promiscuity and Ennis sticking with only Jack.
  All I know is that it's probably easy to define gradations of a male wanting sex with another male, but the opposite, wanting to be desirable is really there, but has yet to be admitted or explored.
  A REAL easy way to simplify this is that many straights guys are not disgusted with being seen as "hot" by gay guys.  They don't want the sex, but they do appreciate being considered desirable. They may be the most mentally healthy of all straight guys.
  But Ennis and Jack? IMO, this factors in to FNIT and the subliminal flirting before then.  Friendship and love had developed. The 2 opposite continuums led to sex and from there, to their differing requirements.
  Phew.  Can I do a long post, or what?

[lancecowboy]

  I will get to Ennis and Jack, but by a circuitous route.  There has been a lot of progress in exploring potential for male-to-male sexuality and there does seem to be multiple routes to becoming or being gay, including biological for some, environmental (early formative years) for others, and then for another group altogether, some kind of rolling of the dice in a 0-100% continuum.  With just these in play, there is much squabbling, particularly if someone has an agenda.  Yet I still believe, person-by-person, there is a definable answer and we will know that after more serious research.
  But, it has occurred to me, all of that has to do with figuring out why a male WANTS sex with another male.  Last week, I had a major "Oy, vay" over adding in the opposite.  What about males who do not want sex with another male but do want to be desired by other males?  Where did I get this from? The new wave of athletes and celebs (soccer star Beckham comes to mind) who encourage and admit to enjoying being sex symbols for gays.  Developing this further, I would say a hefty % of straight men, who have no lust for other males, still find some enjoyment out of being sexually attractive not only to gays, but also to, say an admiring straight buddy.  And how much of the bodybuilding cult derives from that?
  REALLY digging deep, I think it is fair to say, a significant number of straight males, who are not going to have sex with another guy, still derive some happy/happy over....being wanted.  And it may even be the mark of healthy mental and emotional development. On Dirtbiker's thread - "Men in Uniform.." there is one particular photo of 3 soldiers and one is play-acting about oral sex with his buddy, who has a happy/happy grin on his face.  They aren't gay.
They're goofing off.  My point is that we also have to throw into the equations....not only a males desire for another male, but the 0-100% continuum on whether the OPPOSITE is going on, wanting to be wanted.  Even if straight.

     Now to Jack and Ennis.  This screws up the works.  If Jack was deeply in need of male ratification, and enjoyed being wanted, and might even provoke that, then there might be Andrew's rare possibility of, in FNIT, the gravitational forces of both continuums (desire for, and need to be wanted)...turning a very intimate friendship love into Jack going bi or gay.  The same, very likely occuring with Ennis but the continuums different (low desire for same gender sex, high need to be wanted), thus explaining Jack's promiscuity and Ennis sticking with only Jack.
  All I know is that it's probably easy to define gradations of a male wanting sex with another male, but the opposite, wanting to be desirable is really there, but has yet to be admitted or explored.
  A REAL easy way to simplify this is that many straights guys are not disgusted with being seen as "hot" by gay guys.  They don't want the sex, but they do appreciate being considered desirable. They may be the most mentally healthy of all straight guys.
  But Ennis and Jack? IMO, this factors in to FNIT and the subliminal flirting before then.  Friendship and love had developed. The 2 opposite continuums led to sex and from there, to their differing requirements.
  Phew.  Can I do a long post, or what?

Long or short, Tony, your posts are always thought provoking, and this concept of straight males WANTing to be desired by gay males is a great mind-opener.

I will have to think on it to respond fully. My first reaction is that you got something there. I think this desire is an extension of feeling validated, being desired by straight women. And you are absolutely right that these men are psychologically the healthiest, because they don't have hang-ups.

  (

[babytammy7]

What Tony said is true. I know a straight guy, 100% straight, who likes when gay men say that he's hot, and who likes being wanted. This friend of mine is a brokie too, and he loves when our other brokie gay friends say to him things about how sexy he is. 

Wonderful post, friend. 

[lancecowboy]

[...]
  I also see a triple hit: first real friendship; the sex...worked (FNIT), and romantic love roared out and over them (to use your words) in SNIT. One unexpected punch after another.
  As for the progression in each, individually, am not sure.  You mention when Jack wiped the blood off of Ennis' forehead.  And that tenderness looked to me like Jack had jumped from friendship to romantic love, before the sex.  That was a very tender scene, up close.
 But there still would be 3 separate categories through the years: friendship (riding through the streams), sex (always there, at every meeting up), and romantic love, breaking through, at times.  What was the mixture in each, I wonder?  Did Ennis tilt towards a sacred friendship, not trusting the other 2?
      

It's funny, how coincidence sometimes come when least expected.

I've bookmarked this thread ages ago, and sometimes come directly to it and signon at the same. Today, it just happened that i forgot to signon, and started reading right the way, not realizing the thread is displayed oldest first (the default order) instead of the newest first, my preference setting.

Reading Tony's initial start of the thread back in May, I thought it was a new post, and was about to respond to it, thinking it was insightful and funny, and was eager to comment on it.

Then I realized those very insights were from May, and still held true, but now I've seen other movies that made them even more universal and beneficial.

Four other movies can benefit from understanding this triple hit progression, to coin a phrase from Tony's description above. I will focus on two for now, to keep this brief. The movies are: Summer Storm, Gone But not Forgotten, Straight Boys, and L'homme que J'aime. Each movie involves two friends, or strangers who become friends, and either stay friends or progress into triple hit.

******** spoilers alert - plot details of Straight Boys and Summer Storm **********

 In Summer Storm and Straight Boys, the best friends did not progress further, because one of them was straight. In Straight Boys, the straight best friend even tried to take it to the next level, to kiss and become intimate, but could not. The two movies that I'd focus on, progressed to triple hit, and I'd say, home run, altogether.

********** end of spoilers ********************************************

What makes the coincidence even more interesting, is the post from Manhattengirl that addressed the question which bugged me since I watched L'homme que J'aime. How did Jack knew that Ennis was the one, or did he? How did Jack get up the courage to take Ennis' hand? Or, was it just taking a chance, as Jack was often apt to do. The same courage and risk-taking can be seen in the other two movies. For Ennis, Lucas,  Mark, and Andrew, love found them. But for Jack, Martin, and to some degree Andrew, they had to take up the courage and risk-taking, to embrace the love of their love without knowing how it will end, with no guarantee. They were lucky.

That's where I am at, nowadays, thinking this over. Or perhaps as Andrew said in Gone but not Forgotten,"...you are thinking too much."

[Tony]

I've bookmarked this thread ages ago,

    Well, I certainly hope so, since you were the origin of this theme.  Back when you first came to the forum, Andrew, I was also a newbie and had a thread:  "Ennis and Jack-Change and Redemption" and in a similar thread of your own, there was the beginning of the question of sex and friendship and love.
I am too lazy to review those two threads, however I do remember your directly or accidentally questioning the interplay of those three.
   Some issues lingered in my mind, and it just took me a long time to look in the direction you were pointing.  Think of the Joker glaring down the dark street, mumbling "This city deserves a better class of criminal....", keep the same visual image, but it's really me, saying: "This joint deserves a better class of plagiarist...." and....away...we....go!  The concept, Andrew, was originally yours.  And is much appreciated.

[lancecowboy]

Well, Tony, I trust your recall and judgment. I remember we both had discussion of friendship and sex and love. But no matter the source or origin, you started this thread with you insightful, and looking back, funny take, on the trailer scene. That never occurred to me at first reading, probably because I was too focused back then on the friendship and love sides of the triple play.

And Tony, it is your regularly consistent laser-guided comments with a view from out of this world perspective that keeps new insights fresh and always surfacing from time to time.

As I highlighted earlier, it never occurred to me that Ennis had his focus on the friendship and love part, and consequently was happy with a couple high-attitude f#$%s a few times a year, whereas Jack was more into the complete relationship, expecting every aspect to be a reflection of their love. In that sense, Jack is the more gay of the two.

********** Spoilers Alert ********* [ plot details of Straight Boys, and L'homme que J'aime ]

Just as straight men often have friendship and relationships, even with gay men, but never take that extra step, to consummate the sexual aspect, as Morgan in Straight Boys tried but failed to make love to Ben. Their friendship remained, but it never went to the next level. Morgan even said to Ben that he loved him, and in a way, his love was the motive force that led him to initiate the kiss with Ben. But he could not continue, said, "I am sorry." and walked away. So some straight men cannot change, not even for the love. Similarly, Lucas, in L'homme que J'aime, was in a long term relationship with Lise his girl friend, when he met Martin, whose relentless and aggressive pursuit, and chance encounter in the hospital led him to develop feelings of love and friendship that finally led to sex. As you recently posted, and Tammy elaborated, there are healthy straight men who find it ego-boosting and self-validating to have gay men attracted to them. It is perhaps a part of relationship between Ben and Morgan. Ben's almost hero-worship of Morgan gives Morgan the confidence he needs. Without Ben, Morgan would be just another guy; but with his side-kick, Morgan is the super-hero. The same dynamic was the basis of Lucas' relationship with Martin. I won't give away too much of the plot because the movie is simply too beautiful to be spoiled. Straight Boys was just a short 15 minutes exploration of the relationship between Ben and Morgan, but L'homme que J'aime is a much deeper and more profound exploration of the love between gay men.

*********** end of spoilers ***********************

To return to the triple hit, it occurs to me, after the coincidental rereading of your initial post, that perhpas many relationships are built on the Jack-Ennis Martin-Lucas model, where the motive force is from one side, and the other side simply respond to the sex as a result of their love, but the sex is not a necessary or even crucial part of it. It is simply the flame that sparks more fire of love. But the object of their real desire is the warmth from the fire of love. Ennis in the SNIT was experiencing the roar of love...as Manhattengirl so poeticly put it, and I recall your use of the train roaring by in the first scene, as the symbol of the force of nature. The word roar is beautifully apt here.

And as I pointed out earlier, the question is really what motivated Jack and Martin in their pursuit of Ennis and Lucas? That is the deeper mystery of love. How did they know?

I will stop rambling on...which I can do for pages at a time. 

Thanks again for your insights, bud. 

[tpe]

Watching a couple movies made me think again about Friendship, Sex and Love.

Straight Boys, a short film about a college student having a crush on his straight roommate and best friend.

Gone but not Forgetten, a 2003 movie about the love that developed between a forest ranger who rescued a man who suffered memory loss.

L'homme que J'aime, a movie about a gay man's pursuit of a straight co-worker, and their ensuing beautiful love story.

It brought up an interesting question, if a man can change his sexual orientation. I won't give away the plot, but I have concluded for myself, that the old labels of gay and straight are simply inadequate when it comes to describing human sexuality. Even the new continuum of rainbow spectrum of 0 to 100% is not sufficient because it leaves out many other factors, from time and circumstance, to personalities and chemistry.

Most men are gay or straight and will remain so, no matter what.

Some men will change given the right circumstances.

I think the so-called "bromance" between straight men happens to all adolescents, but the gay men react with the desire to take it to a different level, while the straight men do not, for whatever reason (mostly biochemical).

And so goes the process of Friendship, Sex, Love. Gay men continues down the path, sometimes arriving at love. Many, like Ennis, suffers from the distorted view of their sex, and never arrives at love.

So, was Ennis gay? Was Lucas gay? Was Morgan gay? Was Mark gay?

Does the question make sense?

Only if the expected answer is important to the person asking the question. So, yes, to Jack, to Martin, to Ben, to Andrew, but no, to the rest of the world. I don't know if that makes sense, but it makes the most sense to me out of the ambiguity that surrounds this concept of love between Ennis and Jack, and now Lucas and Martin, Mark and Andrew, and Ben and Morgan.

Interesting comments lance.

I watched last Friday the new film of "Brideshead Revisited."  I know that the freidnship between Charles Ryder and Sebastian Flyte have been analyzed to death, but it is interesting to note that many critics objected to the slight shift of emphasis in the movie: that Charles's love for Sebastian was purely platonic.

Well, I think Waugh was ambiguous enough to allow for such an interpretation, although what he termed as "Romantic attachments" formed at Eton, Oxford, and Cambridge between adolescent males was transliterated as a "phase".

It would seem from this movie that Sebastian was unambiguously gay, and that Charles was opportunistically straight.  It is interesting to compare and contrast their treatment of the theme of love, sex, and friendship in this movie, and friendship with that in BBM...

[Tony]

    Dear Thomas - I didn't know there was a new version of "Brideshead Revisited" but do, very much, think explorations of this, and the films Andrew brought up, all do return to the balancing act of friendship, sex, and love and are a great way to revisit Jack and Ennis and what was really going on there.
   "Brideshead" is kind of dangerous territory, though.  It was a breakthrough for gays, dazzling with the background of the British aristocracy, just as BBM dazzled with the raw, innocent beauty of the (allegedly) American West.  Waugh's central theme (as a Catholic convert) was that no matter what level of debauchery a person fell into, the fishing line of God would always find them and reel them back in.  In a way, the ending, where the agnostic Charles repeats the lines of an ancient prayer, giving in and finally believing, corelates very much to the ending of BBM, where Ennis also gives in, and believes in Jack's love and his prayer was: "Jack, I swear..."  They both end up believing in something greater after interplay with a very lively foil.
  In "Brideshead", there is a life-altering friendship, but am not sure I see any romantic love, and you have it so very right, the sex was left very much unknown. But what exactly do you mean, Charles was an opportunistic straight?  A social climber?  Thomas, what a phrase!
  Andrew's movies seem to be less dangerous territory for going off-topic.  But he is a bloodhound, heavily tracking the trail, and I think he's found it in a way that is useful to understanding Ennis and Jack, not to mention these very important implications in each person's real life.
  So far, am having trouble keeping up, so will finish by saying that, despite the desire shown in the SS, I tend to believe Ennis had found a friendship so very tailored to his jagged personality, that it advanced to romantic love.  He did get into the sex, big-time, but of the three elements, he could and did put sex as last. And he expressed himself in the language of faithfulness, year by year.  Jack spoke a different language, and as a more sensual person, needed sex and companionship to express what still was the most profund element for him, too, the love.  That's about all I can make of it.
  I notice the moderators have been tolerant, so, if comparing and contrasting are allowed to continue, it's something where I have little to offer, but would enjoy reading.
  Opportunistic straight?  Am still bogged down in that.  Thanks a lot, Thomas.

[tpe]

OT: Tony, you must see the movie to know exactly what critics have meant by "opportunistic" straight.    http://www.bridesheadrevisited-themovie.com/  But do you think you can take a guess?   I guess one can think of it in terms of the will to get what you want.

Back on topic, I wonder whether we could consider Ennis and/or Jack to be opportunistic straights?  I doubt it very much...

[lancecowboy]

Interesting comments lance.

I watched last Friday the new film of "Brideshead Revisited."  I know that the freidnship between Charles Ryder and Sebastian Flyte have been analyzed to death, but it is interesting to note that many critics objected to the slight shift of emphasis in the movie: that Charles's love for Sebastian was purely platonic.

Well, I think Waugh was ambiguous enough to allow for such an interpretation, although what he termed as "Romantic attachments" formed at Eton, Oxford, and Cambridge between adolescent males was transliterated as a "phase".

It would seem from this movie that Sebastian was unambiguously gay, and that Charles was opportunistically straight.  It is interesting to compare and contrast their treatment of the theme of love, sex, and friendship in this movie, and friendship with that in BBM...

Okay, at the risk of being totally off topic, I will try to understand the term "opportunistically straight".

If I understand your reference in the movie correctly, (and it is likely that I don't since I have not seen the movie, but only the trailer and the plot summaries), Charles convenient chose to be straight in order to have more opportunities, as Tony mentioned, as a social climber, or simply opportunities for intercourse with any gender. It is not love, but sex that is the key here. In fact, for those really vile opportunistic persons, even the sex is secondary, but is merely the means to the ends, whatever that may be. I cannot possibly see that as in the same group as Ennis and Jack. There is no friendship, no love. In fact, I think that kind of behavior would be anti-love, anti-friendship.

Please tell me I jumped off the deep end and totally missed the boat, because I can sometimes be totally off, and misunderstand people.