Author Topic: Jack and the Ranch Foreman  (Read 11832 times)

Offline tpe

  • Moderator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 96691
Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« on: Mar 06, 2006, 08:50 AM »
When I saw BBM again last Friday and Saturday, I focused some attention on Jack's comment that he had this thing going with a ranch foreman's wife.

Previously, I had assumed that this was from the very start just a cover-up to hide Jack starting an affair with the ranch foreman himself.

In my last viewing, I speculated that at the start, perhaps Jack was actually telling the truth -- that he was increasingly unhappy with Lureen and, mindful of Ennis, started something going with the ranch foreman's wife, instead of the husband (who actually was interested in Jack.)

Perhaps it was only later, after the fight on their last meeting, that Jack decided that it would be too difficult for him to ever convince Ennis to share a life together and hence started becoming serious with the ranch foreman himself.

Would this scenario hold water, or do you think it was most likely that Jack was hiding an affair with the ranch foreman from the onset?


Offline jimmypage

  • Lureen
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
  • Gender: Female
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #1 on: Mar 07, 2006, 01:16 PM »
Jack and LaShawn having an affair? ...no way  :)

OT. What kind of name is LaShawn? ...it sounds so strange to me.

Offline dalemidex

  • Alma
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
  • Gender: Male
  • Friend that's more words than you spoke in 2 weeks
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #2 on: Mar 07, 2006, 02:39 PM »
When I saw BBM again last Friday and Saturday, I focused some attention on Jack's comment that he had this thing going with a ranch foreman's wife.
Previously, I had assumed that this was from the very start just a cover-up to hide Jack starting an affair with the ranch foreman himself.
In my last viewing, I speculated that at the start, perhaps Jack was actually telling the truth -- that he was increasingly unhappy with Lureen and, mindful of Ennis, started something going with the ranch foreman's wife, instead of the husband (who actually was interested in Jack.)

My firm belief is that Jack was with Randall, not LaShawn.  But he sensed, correctly, that Ennis would blow up at the thought of Jack with another man.  Ennis clearly showed it was okay for Jack to be with another woman since he talked about Cassie.   

I think there's a reason that Jack starts out with "Truth is..." after he talks about his affair with the ranch foreman's wife. 

Perhaps it was only later, after the fight on their last meeting, that Jack decided that it would be too difficult for him to ever convince Ennis to share a life together and hence started becoming serious with the ranch foreman himself.

I think there's a chronological issue with this, too.  Here's the order of events as I see them.  Let's say this conversation was on Sunday night May 1st:

Sunday May 1st:  I'm having an affair with Ranch Foreman's Wife (LeShawn)
Monday May 2nd:  I'll go up to see the folks for a day or two
Monday  May 2nd:  November, what ever happend to August? (this must be their spring get-together, hence I'm guessing early May)

Tuesday May 3rd:  Jack tells the folks that someday he's going to bring up this other fella (Randall), a ranch neighbor from down in Texas, up to Wyoming...build a cabin....

Summer:  Jack dies

Late Summer:  Ennis visits the Twist's, and John Twist tells Ennis "Then this spring, he gonna bring up this other fella, ranch neighbor of his from down in Texas..."

So if his affair really WAS with LeShawn and not Randall, then he'd be telling his folks about this other fella he's gong to bring up instead of Ennis *before the affair even happend*. 

I think that based on the chronology of events, it had to be Randall and not LeShawn that Jack was talking about. 

Offline tpe

  • Moderator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 96691
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #3 on: Mar 07, 2006, 03:03 PM »
Perhaps it was only later, after the fight on their last meeting, that Jack decided that it would be too difficult for him to ever convince Ennis to share a life together and hence started becoming serious with the ranch foreman himself.

I think there's a chronological issue with this, too.  Here's the order of events as I see them.  Let's say this conversation was on Sunday night May 1st:

Sunday May 1st:  I'm having an affair with Ranch Foreman's Wife (LeShawn)
Monday May 2nd:  I'll go up to see the folks for a day or two
Monday  May 2nd:  November, what ever happend to August? (this must be their spring get-together, hence I'm guessing early May)

Tuesday May 3rd:  Jack tells the folks that someday he's going to bring up this other fella (Randall), a ranch neighbor from down in Texas, up to Wyoming...build a cabin....

Summer:  Jack dies

Late Summer:  Ennis visits the Twist's, and John Twist tells Ennis "Then this spring, he gonna bring up this other fella, ranch neighbor of his from down in Texas..."

So if his affair really WAS with LeShawn and not Randall, then he'd be telling his folks about this other fella he's gong to bring up instead of Ennis *before the affair even happend*. 

I think that based on the chronology of events, it had to be Randall and not LeShawn that Jack was talking about. 


Hello dalemidex.

There is a detailed thread I started some time ago about the differences in chronology between the story and the screenplay.  In that thread, I pointed out that if we were to believe the dates of the screenplay scenes, it would appear most likely that the last meeting occured in fall 1981, that Jack passed by his parents house twice: after the last meeting and in the Spring of 1982, that Jack died in early summer of 1982, and that Ennis visited Jack's parents in the fall of 1982.

The implication of the above timeline is that Ennis was proposing to Jack in the fall of 1981 that their next meeting was to be November of 1982!  This translates to a year's wait for Jack.  Hence, between the fall of 1981 and his Spring 1982 visit to his parents, Jack had a few months to possibly get more involved with the ranch foreman.

I actually agree with you that Jack was probably hiding his affair with the ranch foreman from Ennis by saying that he was having an affair with the wife.

I think your comment about 'Truth is...' is absolutely magnificent.
« Last Edit: Mar 07, 2006, 03:17 PM by tpe »

Offline tpe

  • Moderator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 96691
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #4 on: Mar 07, 2006, 03:06 PM »
Jack and LaShawn having an affair? ...no way  :)

OT. What kind of name is LaShawn? ...it sounds so strange to me.


I share your disbelief, actually.  :)

Offline Toadily

  • Mod-ChickY Brigade
  • Jack + Ennis
  • *
  • Posts: 2777
  • Gender: Female
  • "Friend, we got ourselves a situation here"
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #5 on: Mar 07, 2006, 03:16 PM »
Yeah I feel as a story telling devise they make LaShawn so unbearable the audience would just know
Jack wasn't telling the truth. 
"it's Love, Blockhead!"
-Pierre Marivaux  The Triumph of Love

"To love an idea is to love it a little more than one should."  -Jean Rostand

Offline dalemidex

  • Alma
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
  • Gender: Male
  • Friend that's more words than you spoke in 2 weeks
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #6 on: Mar 07, 2006, 03:22 PM »
There is a detailed thread I started some time ago about the differences in chronology between the story and the screenplay.  In that thread, I pointed out that if we were to believe the dates of the screenplay scenes, it would appear most likely that the last meeting occurred in fall 1981, that Jack passed by his parents house twice: after the last meeting and in the Spring of 1982, that Jack died in early summer of 1982, and that Ennis visited Jack's parents in the fall of 1982.

The implication of the above timeline is that Ennis was proposing to Jack in the fall of 1981 that their next meeting was to be November of 1982!  This translates to a years wait for Jack.  Hence, between the fall of 1981 and his Spring 1982 visit to his parents, Jack had a few months to possibly get more involved with the ranch foreman.

Hi tpe!

Sorry I must have missed the earlier thread on chronology.  It doesn't seem to make sense to me that it is Fall of 1981 when Jack says "what about August".  That would mean that if Ennis had met Jack's planned, acceptable timeline it would have been nine months to their next meeting, and instead it was now going to be twelve.  That just doesn't seem to match the pattern of their visits as I saw them.  Maybe my impressions are wrong, but that is out of place to me.

But my impressions aside on the frequency of their visits, I think it also doesn't make sense that in Fall of 1981 Ennis would say "it was hard enough getting this time off, and the trade off is August."  A week in fall of 1981 would mean no time off in August of 1982? That seems rather unlikely.  Much more plausible is that a week off in May means no time off in August of the same year. 

Not to second-guess the script, but it those dates just don't seem to follow.



I think your comment about 'Truth is...' is absolutely magnificent.

Thanks!  It really hurts when I see the change in his face in that scene.

Offline dalemidex

  • Alma
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
  • Gender: Male
  • Friend that's more words than you spoke in 2 weeks
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #7 on: Mar 07, 2006, 03:24 PM »
Yeah I feel as a story telling devise they make LaShawn so unbearable the audience would just know
Jack wasn't telling the truth. 

Good point...a comic device to be sure, but it also make sure we don't see any "spark" between she and Jack.

Offline tpe

  • Moderator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 96691
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #8 on: Mar 07, 2006, 03:31 PM »
There is a detailed thread I started some time ago about the differences in chronology between the story and the screenplay.  In that thread, I pointed out that if we were to believe the dates of the screenplay scenes, it would appear most likely that the last meeting occurred in fall 1981, that Jack passed by his parents house twice: after the last meeting and in the Spring of 1982, that Jack died in early summer of 1982, and that Ennis visited Jack's parents in the fall of 1982.

The implication of the above timeline is that Ennis was proposing to Jack in the fall of 1981 that their next meeting was to be November of 1982!  This translates to a years wait for Jack.  Hence, between the fall of 1981 and his Spring 1982 visit to his parents, Jack had a few months to possibly get more involved with the ranch foreman.

Hi tpe!

Sorry I must have missed the earlier thread on chronology.  It doesn't seem to make sense to me that it is Fall of 1981 when Jack says "what about August".  That would mean that if Ennis had met Jack's planned, acceptable timeline it would have been nine months to their next meeting, and instead it was now going to be twelve.  That just doesn't seem to match the pattern of their visits as I saw them.  Maybe my impressions are wrong, but that is out of place to me.

But my impressions aside on the frequency of their visits, I think it also doesn't make sense that in Fall of 1981 Ennis would say "it was hard enough getting this time off, and the trade off is August."  A week in fall of 1981 would mean no time off in August of 1982? That seems rather unlikely.  Much more plausible is that a week off in May means no time off in August of the same year. 

Not to second-guess the script, but it those dates just don't seem to follow.



I think your comment about 'Truth is...' is absolutely magnificent.

Thanks!  It really hurts when I see the change in his face in that scene.

Hello dalemidex.  The screenplay dates do give me a headache.  The problem is that the screenplay sets the year of the last meeting to 1981 (which is different from the story, I think) and Ennis receiving the returned postcard (with 'Deceased' stamped on it), calling up Lureen, and visiting Jacks parents in 1982.  The screenplay also indicates that the visit of Alma Jr. to Ennis's trailer was in 1984!!!

You can follow the old thread about the timeline of the last scenes.  It is quite an involved discussion.

As for Gyllenhaal's face when he says 'Truth is', yes, it makes me feel all the pain and hurt of a life spent waiting...

Offline Jack_ME

  • My philosophy
  • Lureen
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
  • Gender: Male
  • Jack in Maine
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #9 on: Mar 10, 2006, 04:18 PM »
This is an interesting question/thread to me, because I have held a theory form the beginning (and discussed it on some board) about the innate sexual orientation of our Ennis and Jack and I thnk that subject enters into how one interprets this scene.

I'm not sure of the time line mentioned here and how that does or does not support the interpretation of WHO Jack was referring to when he said he was having an affair, but actually I think Dale was just responding to some other projected possibliities.

Personally, I can see both arguments,
but tend to believe that we are shown Jack asking LaShawn to dance,
as a general indication of Jack's interest in women, and possibly of a specific interest in this woman.

Coincidentally with this couple, we are also later shown Randall coming on to Jack on the bench.
To me, Jack on that bench is very much surprised by what he his hearing from Randall.
Although some have said there were "knowing looks" between them at the table before this, I don't see that.

So who then is Mr. Twist referring to when he tells Ennis about this "other one" last Spring?
Everyone has generally assumed it must be Randall.
Because we are shown there was some potential between them by that bench scene.
Because Mr. Twist says "rancher neighbor"
Because Mr. Twist says "gonna leave his wife"

That all makes sense and it is likely that Randall is the man in question, but must it be?

What if you subscribe to the murder as a fact viewpoint?
Doesn't that imply that Jack was not carefully closeted about his attractions to men?
And from that, doesn't it follow that in fact THERE WERE OTHER men in the Childress Texas area?

Or do you believe Randall was all a setup just to lure Jack somewhere to be killed? I don't.

My point here is that we do see Randall, so we assume Randall is the guy in question when Mr. Twist speaks.
Well, we also see LaShawn. Jack says Rancher's wife. Why couldn't it be her? OR why couldn't it be even some other wife?

My point gets back to what do you believe is Jack's innate sexual orientation?

If you subscribe to the belief that Jack IS gay,
and thus his marriage,
and sexual experiences with Lureen is all a sham and false....
then you disregard the possibility of any other woman too.

But if you subscribe to the belief that Jack is BI-sexually oriented,
then you have evidence for that,
 by his sexual experiences and marriage to Lureen,
and by his own statement that he was having an affair with a rancher's wife.

If you say at that point that Jack was LYING to Ennis....
what evidence do you have ELSEWHERE in the film that Jack is a liar?  To anyone? or to Ennis?

If you use the "Truth is...." comment to support the lie comment...you miss a point I feel. And it is this:
Jack is in love with Ennis.
Ennis is in love with Jack.
Jack would like to give up all and be with Ennis.
Ennis can not do that.
Jack has to settle for less than a full life to keep and please Ennis...and he does.

Ennis has other involvements. Alma. Cassie.
Jack has other involvements. Lureen. ?Rancher's wife. Randall. Mexico. Others?

So.....here we are now, nearly 20 years on,
and Jack and Ennis are at camp again after years and years with painfully long periods of separation and only these short times together. They are both in reflective moods.
Remember, it is Jack who starts this topic and says to Ennis:
"all this time, you never found no one else to marry?"

So Ennis speaks of his affair.."putting the blocks to"
.
Then Ennis says "How about you?" and Jack spontaneously speaks of his affair with the Rancher's wife...and adds Lureen might shoot him, rancher might get him....
There does not seem to be any hesitation or forethought in that response.......
BUT this whole exchange points up again to Jack the emotional lack that Jack has in his life.
 He WANTS to be with Ennis,
and has always wanted to be with Ennis.

So, once they get in this reflective mood,
it is natural that Jack's thoughts would turn to the lack Jack has long felt,
and so he WOULD say something like "Truth is.." ....sometimes it gets so hard...... To continue living Ike this, to be without you....and so forth.

I don't feel that Jack is about to confess to Ennis that the affair he mentioned was really with a man.
I think as I said, it is just a natural emotional reflective comment coming from an awareness of being separate and having these other involvements, when in fact Jack would want and has always wanted to be with Ennis daily. It seems natural to me from going to the subject of marriage and other partners.

So I don't think it is evidence that Jack was about to "confess" to Ennis, which of course implies he had lied to Ennis. I don't see any evidence in the movie that Jack lies. In fact, he seems so honest and comfortable with his bi-sexuality  that he may take risks around that by exposing it and not furtively keeping it concealed. And that got him the tire iron in the end.

Jack in Maine

MY PHILOSOPHY DISCLAIMER: All my comments concern the MOVIE and the content and inferences obtained there. All interpretations, projections, speculations, and opinions about plot and characters are based SOLELY on the content of the movie. They can not be argued or debated by quoting the printed short story. A comparison of the two media is an interesting discussion but must be a separate discussion.

Offline tpe

  • Moderator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 96691
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #10 on: Mar 10, 2006, 05:11 PM »
Thanks Jack in Maine.

I do have to agree that 'some ranch meighbor of his from down in Texas' does not necessarily mean that the gender of the partner is male. 

However, 'build a cabin...help run the ranch' seems to suggest that the partner is males as one could not expect LaShawn to help do ranch chores.

But your questioning the standard interpretation makes sense.  There is quite a lot of ambiguity here to keep us busy thinking...

Offline dalemidex

  • Alma
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
  • Gender: Male
  • Friend that's more words than you spoke in 2 weeks
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #11 on: Mar 10, 2006, 05:55 PM »
Thanks Jack in Maine.

I do have to agree that 'some ranch meighbor of his from down in Texas' does not necessarily mean that the gender of the partner is male. 

However, 'build a cabin...help run the ranch' seems to suggest that the partner is males as one could not expect LaShawn to help do ranch chores.

But your questioning the standard interpretation makes sense.  There is quite a lot of ambiguity here to keep us busy thinking...


Doesn't Mr. Twist say "another fella" when he speaks of the ranch neightbor Jack is going to bring up to the folk's ranch?

Offline tpe

  • Moderator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 96691
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #12 on: Mar 10, 2006, 06:20 PM »
Thanks Jack in Maine.

I do have to agree that 'some ranch meighbor of his from down in Texas' does not necessarily mean that the gender of the partner is male. 

However, 'build a cabin...help run the ranch' seems to suggest that the partner is males as one could not expect LaShawn to help do ranch chores.

But your questioning the standard interpretation makes sense.  There is quite a lot of ambiguity here to keep us busy thinking...



Doesn't Mr. Twist say "another fella" when he speaks of the ranch neightbor Jack is going to bring up to the folk's ranch?

Yes, this is true.

Offline Jack_ME

  • My philosophy
  • Lureen
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
  • Gender: Male
  • Jack in Maine
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #13 on: Mar 10, 2006, 06:34 PM »
Thanks Jack in Maine.

I do have to agree that 'some ranch neighbor of his from down in Texas' does not necessarily mean that the gender of the partner is male. 

However, 'build a cabin...help run the ranch' seems to suggest that the partner is males as one could not expect LaShawn to help do ranch chores.

But your questioning the standard interpretation makes sense.  There is quite a lot of ambiguity here to keep us busy thinking...


Hi tpe,

Thanks for the response.

But I'm sorry to say, I must not have been clear, for you have misinterpreted something I was saying (not sure what part) but I didn't mean to imply that there was any question about Jack ALSO having an affair with a man, which is whom Mr. Twist is referring to.

No, I believe that Jack was also having this affair with a man, and frankly it makes sense that this man would be Randall.

My comments intended to say that just because we have seen LaShawn, we automatically assume that this "Rancher's wife" Jack speaks of to Ennis either IS LaShawn or must be a deceptive way of actually describing Randall.

I'm saying Jack is BI-sexual, and so he IS having an affair with a woman, AND also having an affair with, possibly and likely, Randall.

We have no real idea of the time frame involved in his comments.

For instance, Jack could have had an affair with a woman which was already dying down, or it might have become replaced by his affair with "a" Randall. So it doesn't mean he was lying, but it also doesn't tell us how active or current that affair was.


Don't forget that in the beginning and for about 8 years? both Jack and Ennis are married to women. And Jack is still married to a woman at the end. And Jack and Ennis are having their love affair. So it's not impossible for someone like Jack, to have had multiple affairs, short or long term, over these years. We KNOW he went to Mexico.

I'm just pointing that the possibility exists that Jack is married to Lureen, is having his long term affair with Ennis, is also having an affair, possibly one growing in importance with "a" Randall, and is also or had recently had an affair before/during with a woman, some rancher's wife.


Jack in Maine

ADDED EDIT: I see where I was not clear, lumping two a reference together.

Quote
My point here is that we do see Randall, so we assume Randall is the guy in question when Mr. Twist speaks.
Well, we also see LaShawn. Jack says Rancher's wife. Why couldn't it be her? OR why couldn't it be even some other wife?
What I meant to be saying here is we see Randall, so later when a guy is referenced we assume it must be Randall becasue we've already seen him. And I'm saying, in a different context, we've also seen LaShawn, so later when Jack references a Rancher's wife, why don't we make this same assumption, or if we DO make this same assumption, is that right? (NOT about going up to the parents, but about having the affair with a woman) Could not there be ANOTHER women to whom Jack is referrring when he speaks of his affair?

In other words, can't Jack be speaking the truth about having an affair with a woman, and does it then HAVE to be LaShawn, or could it be some other unknown woman?
« Last Edit: Mar 10, 2006, 06:41 PM by Jack_ME »
MY PHILOSOPHY DISCLAIMER: All my comments concern the MOVIE and the content and inferences obtained there. All interpretations, projections, speculations, and opinions about plot and characters are based SOLELY on the content of the movie. They can not be argued or debated by quoting the printed short story. A comparison of the two media is an interesting discussion but must be a separate discussion.

Offline tpe

  • Moderator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 96691
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #14 on: Mar 10, 2006, 06:40 PM »
Jack in Maine, sorry if I misinterpreted your post.

I agree, it is a possibility that Jack was BI rather than gay.  Note that marriage to Lureen and having sex with women does not make a person necessarily BI.  Many gay men have had sex with women out of societal pressures (such as producing offspring).  The BISEXUAL nature of an individual is deeper than the mere act of heterosexual intercourse.  All this said, we cannot say that Jack was NOT BI.

Offline Jack_ME

  • My philosophy
  • Lureen
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
  • Gender: Male
  • Jack in Maine
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #15 on: Mar 10, 2006, 06:45 PM »
Jack in Maine, sorry if I misinterpreted your post.

I agree, it is a possibility that Jack was BI rather than gay.  Note that marriage to Lureen and having sex with women does not make a person necessarily BI.  Many gay men have had sex with women out of societal pressures (such as producing offspring).  The BISEXUAL nature of an individual is deeper than the mere act of heterosexual intercourse.  All this said, we cannot say that Jack was NOT BI.

No problem tpe, I was unclear in my writing, and did lump two separate thoughts together.

As for (one's) or Jack and Ennis's sexuality:
I think that would be an interesting topic for discussion, and it has been discussed, and it can continue to be discussed.
Because there are no answers.
There can't be.
We are speaking about being human and so human nature and desire runs the gamut.

In  fact maybe I will start a new thread for that discussion.

Jack in Maine
MY PHILOSOPHY DISCLAIMER: All my comments concern the MOVIE and the content and inferences obtained there. All interpretations, projections, speculations, and opinions about plot and characters are based SOLELY on the content of the movie. They can not be argued or debated by quoting the printed short story. A comparison of the two media is an interesting discussion but must be a separate discussion.

Offline tpe

  • Moderator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 96691
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #16 on: Mar 10, 2006, 07:04 PM »
In  fact maybe I will start a new thread for that discussion.

Jack in Maine


That would be a good idea, Jack in Maine.

I will be out of touch for most of the day tomorrow, but I will try to follow this thread and the subsequent discussion.

As I have said often, I am a Jake Gyllenhaal fan, and I should note that I make a strict distinction between the character of Jack Twist and Mr. Gyllenhaal.  To echo what another forumer has said in another thread, I only wish Mr. Gyllenhaal his own happiness, and I am not keen to discuss his sexuality.  So I hope that any comments I give regarding Jack Twist would not be construed as applying to the actor in question.

I will wait for the thread...
« Last Edit: Mar 10, 2006, 07:10 PM by tpe »

Offline siredevienne38

  • Alma Jr.
  • **
  • Posts: 44
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #17 on: Mar 12, 2006, 03:57 PM »
I consider Jack's affair with the foreman - if it really should have happened - as a minor thing to get sexual relief without deep feelings involved. It is like the Tijuana hustler thing, an episode to get a dick up the ass more often than 2 times a year high up in the mountains (as Jack sais bitterly during their last encounter)

Offline tpe

  • Moderator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 96691
Re: Jack and the Ranch Foreman
« Reply #18 on: Mar 12, 2006, 04:02 PM »
I consider Jack's affair with the foreman - if it really should have happened - as a minor thing to get sexual relief without deep feelings involved. It is like the Tijuana hustler thing, an episode to get a dick up the ass more often than 2 times a year high up in the mountains (as Jack sais bitterly during their last encounter)

Hello siredevienne38.  Welcome to the forum.

I think what you said was true in the beginning.  But in the end, I suspect this affair became a kind of way out for Jack when he realized that he could never get Ennis to share a life with him (if indeed the affair was real).