I do feel it was genuinely a class statement or at least that a genuine class statement is contained in the film. I grew up in a small logging town, and I have met real cowboys and rodeo athletes. I thought the portrayal of this personality type was dead on: the material bleakness of rural life, the way that characters talked to each other, the kinds of things they boasted about, all brought back childhood memories. Before I had seen the movie, I was skeptical that it would have much to say to me. But one of my childhood friends who now works in Tokyo as a corporate recruiter describe the movie’s message as, “Imagine the troubles that 2 gay loggers would have to struggle with discovering their love for each other.”

It is a kind of urban pride to assume that everyone wants and can live life in the The Big City. But making that kind of move just isn’t possible for everyone who grew up in the kind of lives portrayed in Brokeback Mountain. It may be true that the, “thousands of Western gay boys” that took up urban life in the 1970′s and 80′s included some cowboys. I’m sure this is true. But I am just as sure that if you grew up a cowboy in a place like Merritt, British Columbia, you’d better not talk about homosexuality unless you’ve got something negative to say. And it may be that homosexuality is one of the few remaining aspects of life that makes it possible to talk about this kind of life clearly.

One final point. Am I the only one who finds it strange that our ‘cowboy’ anti-heroes are shepherd? I have never met a cowboy shepherd, although the film crystallized the fact that they must exist. I have never spoken to a cowboy about this, but my guess is that this is low class ranch work. But it could very well be that the introduction of factory beef farming has changed the reality of ranch work. Does anyone know anything about this?