Brokeback Mountain Revisited, and LGBT Industrialization


Brokeback Mountain Revisited, and LGBT Industrialization.

Brokeback Mountain, released in 2005, depicts the love affair of two Wyoming Cowboys in the 1960’s. This critique reviews the LGBT current established in Brokeback Mountain. By paying tribute to the excellent stock, and sturdy bearings, the two main characters Jack Twist (Jake Gyllenhaal) and Ennis Del Mar (Heat

h Ledger) hold by their own intentions. We witness the sexual orientation, and their lifelong promise of romance to live within each other’s embrace as a testament to fertile soil. The first half of the movie establishes a firm foundation in the lives of the two gay young men Jack Twist, and Ennis Dela Mar. Both are examples of industrious stock, able to withstand, and survive the natural elements of the rough wilderness. They are breeding and herding an immense fold of quality livestock. Being removed from their community, and groups create a natural formula for a love affair of ruggedness and tenderness. Blessed to have such a rigorous beginning in their gay Garden of Eden. The plot and the characterization is one of a sturdy employ based on an honest intention and firm belief.

              The movie captures a risky expectation when the characters Jack and Ennis’ hopes fall futile of achieving an honorable finish in their employ and their newly established relationship. Intelligent, and skilled, but uneducated, the institutionalization of their homosexual relationship is denied. Misunderstood, and misdirected by their own families, their exploits on their own are demeaning. The characters are seen as taken for granted and unwanted by their own families. While in the midst of their living rejected, the birth of an LGBT life cycle does indeed permeate. If not in more, than at least in one of the offspring of the gay couple. The point is not that they have been ostracized by a community and a clique, but that they are denied being received and tolerated by their urban and rural societies. Conflicts of religious values are not the only implication that their heritage is denied. As is the case with word of mouth, and the self-affirming testimony, the two gay characters are seen leading a double life of domestic rejection: one that is troubling, and unnerving. Creating for them both a skepticism that makes it impossible to fulfill their dream of existing together as a couple. While entirely able to set goals, and carry them out, the couple in Brokeback Mountain (Jack Twist, and Ennis Del Mar) are so profoundly forfeited and rejected that they are not able to achieve the goals of their heart. The urban, and rural compromises they make, are ones that inevitably cost them their honor and ability to feel their motive of partnership.

                  The dichotomy is that both characters in Brokeback (Jack and Ennis) satisfy each expected role they engage in. Beginning with an industrious bearing, and engaging as husbands, parents and home builders. If not for their homosexuality they would seemingly be seen as proactive. However as their sexual orientation is the case, the couple faces a more than the tragic ending of being brutally victimized and subjected to a less than subservient means of existence. The implications are social rejection, economic compromise, loss of honor, and a virtual conflict with the aberration of doom brought on by an industrialized, urban, and rural society. While the stakes are what they are in the movie, the compromise and defeat are spellbinding as the couple is seen living entirely transitive lives. Bouncing around to avoid a posse, and returning to complete isolation no matter how bountiful.

                   Both characters are leaving their families to fulfill their ambition to live together as a lifelong couple. The social implications are a few: the first being primarily that heterosexuality will not work for serious gay couples.  The second being that gay men in relationships live a life of being compromised so deeply, that they are punished for hoping for permanence in employ. Learning adaptation and outcomes, and societies recruitment of their adjusted skills. In fact, the gay couple is so personally rejected by industrialized society, that their motive for decency and respectability in the lives they live are stripped from them intensely. Whereby, the movie ends with a rite of passage that displays the couple being sacrificed while becoming self-sacrificial.

The question is still raised as to what makes an industrialized economy so homophobic. With threads, and strands of homosexuality running inbred in our entire industrialized economy, and contained in a subculture of extreme felicity, and burlesque leisures, what we experience psychologically is so indicative of Oedipal beginnings, and inclusive of anal, and penis envy. Our industrialized economy that legalizes; gambling, pornography, and prostitution, and whose exploits are one of dating on adult sites, create this contradiction, and hypocrisy. As same-sex attractions become promoted, and on the other hand chastised, the LGBT population is still bereft of the sense that gays and lesbians. People who are indeed living wholly normal and highly functioning lives can uphold values that are completely bestowed on them. As it stands today, gay lives and the LGBT population is seen by the workforce as being more than expressive, the punishment by our industrialized economy is one of bitterness, rejection, and total sacrifice.

                  More telling of America and Industrialized America by the movie Brokeback Mountain is that two hard-working men (Jack and Ennis) who are gay do not only stop seeing their attachment as playful, but one of universal necessity to fulfill their life’s ambition.  Homosexuality, then as seen in the movie, is a personal honor, one that can be treated as dishonorable. The questions of Industrialized America’s LGBT population seems to be immense. Do we attribute all of what we know about America’s exploits of Gay and Lesbian lives as a curse for being public rather than closeted? One that is closeted, but can never be rewarded even privately? The answer is No, and the question then is why wouldn’t homosexuality be accepted publicly by industrialized America? Among those in consent not to sacrifice the expectations of the status quo of business and pleasure. The LGBT population shall be accepted for their ability to fulfill, and satisfy all of the societal roles, rather than being exploited for exploits that are one hundred percent a bias, and discrimination. In continuous scrutiny of their motives to live, respectably, and honorably, and in good stead with all given areas, of all walks of life. The LGBT population can be seen as the proof that their own lives provide this source of strength, with convictions that are reinforced, and re-established with varying degrees of victories, and defeats.



About Author

1 Comment

Leave A Reply