Hummmmmmm?

Posted by Michaelson from em12-686.utsi.edu on April 21, 1999 at 17:28:36:

In Reply to: Alternate Interesting Indy interpretations posted by Inbanana Jones on April 21, 1999 at 16:44:45:

: : " MARION: I was a child -- in love
: : INDY: You knew what you were doing

: : Their confronatation is a classic case of an adult male engaging in sexual activity with an underage young woman, then claiming he isn't responsible because he saw a flicker of desire in her eyes.

: : MARION: Do you know what you did to me? To my life?

: The above interp notwithstanding, the truth is that the film remains relentless in its ambiguity. Esteban Spielberg may be painting a portrait of The American Male ca. 1935, covered with a semi-opaque wash of cliche-ridden ADVENTURE!
: But the above scenes may be read in entirely different ways. To wit: Marion's youthful attempts to seduce a BMOC were frustrated by Indy's winning of the young man's heart: Marion leaves frustrated, as does Poppa Ravenwood, who had actually hoped for a union between the two. Perhaps Marion's crush was actually on sly Marcus; perhaps BOTH Marion and her dad were competing for Marcus' heart when dashing Indy waltzed into town.
: We can imagine whatever we want in these film's regarding the characters' histories, sexual preferences, and a lot else. The ability of a work to sustain repeated viewings and support repeated projections from the viewer is a commonly accepted aesthetic merit. In this case, there's no telling what goes on before and after the shadow plays we see on screen. I for one prefer it that way. Maybe some dyed in the wool fans want to see proof of Indy's paternity from Marion, maybe not.
: The many contexts in which this movie is reflected today: "adventure tourism", off-the-wall discussions in archaeology classes, the minor resurgence in hat and bomber jacket sales in the mid-1980s, and too much macho/grizzled posturing by prehistorians all speak to the power of this iconic myth. Perhaps Stevie and George wanted also to underscore Indy's treasure quests with allusions to a misogyny, and perhaps even hoped thus to echo the rampant colonialism just then in its death throes across the world. Maybe. And maybe YIJC was George's attempt to contextualize the creature they had created, and to build this creature a bride, so to speak, in the form of a dialogue with History.
: What do you think? Would Walter Benjamin write a perceptive account of Indy? Or would he just enjoy seeing the *#%!@ nazi scumbags get their asses blown off? Probably both.
: Forgive the length of post; it has been a long and dirty day. Cheers all.
:

Brother, we ARE running out of things to talk about. One other thing to consider is that the generation prior to Indy and Marion didn't think twice of daughters getting married at the age of 14 or even younger, and childhood was not exactly what we think of in terms of endearment for that generation. Most children had to help support families starting at the age of 6 in work gangs prior to U.S. child labor laws, so let's not hold Indy, Marion, her father and such to 1990 rules of social conduct. They would have been products of that age and era. Marion would have been considered "elderly" for her age at the time of her trist with Indy, as this would have occurred in the 1920's. But then I'm sure the writers are having a good laugh at our expense trying to psyco analyze these things, as these were only fictional characters on paper for an adventure movie. Regards. Michaelson

Follow Ups:

Hmmmm..... Indiana Jerico 00:26:19 4/22/99 (2)
- Re: Hmmmm..... nobody 10:49:48 4/22/99 (1)
  - Re: Hmmmmmmmmmmmm....... No one, as well 11:04:39 4/22/99 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: 
: : : "  MARION: I was a child -- in love
: : :    INDY: You knew what you were doing

: : : Their confronatation is a classic case of an adult male engaging in sexual activity with an underage young woman, then claiming he isn't responsible because he saw a flicker of desire in her eyes.

: : :    MARION: Do you know what you did to me? To my life?

: : The above interp notwithstanding, the truth is that the film remains relentless in its ambiguity.  Esteban Spielberg may be painting a portrait of The American Male ca. 1935, covered with a semi-opaque wash of cliche-ridden ADVENTURE!  
: : But the above scenes may be read in entirely different ways.  To wit:  Marion's youthful attempts to seduce a BMOC were frustrated by Indy's winning of the young man's heart:  Marion leaves frustrated, as does Poppa Ravenwood, who had actually hoped for a union between the two.  Perhaps Marion's crush was actually on sly Marcus; perhaps BOTH Marion and her dad were competing for Marcus' heart when dashing Indy waltzed into town.  
: : We can imagine whatever we want in these film's regarding the characters' histories, sexual preferences, and a lot else.  The ability of a work to sustain repeated viewings and support repeated projections from the viewer is a commonly accepted aesthetic merit.  In this case, there's no telling what goes on before and after the shadow plays we see on screen.  I for one prefer it that way.  Maybe some dyed in the wool fans want to see proof of Indy's paternity from Marion, maybe not.  
: : The many contexts in which this movie is reflected today:  "adventure tourism", off-the-wall discussions in archaeology classes, the minor resurgence in hat and bomber jacket sales in the mid-1980s, and too much macho/grizzled posturing by prehistorians all speak to the power of this iconic myth.  Perhaps Stevie and George wanted also to underscore Indy's treasure quests with allusions to a misogyny, and perhaps even hoped thus to echo the rampant colonialism just then in its death throes across the world.  Maybe.  And maybe YIJC was George's attempt to contextualize the creature they had created, and to build this creature a bride, so to speak, in the form of a dialogue with History.
: : What do you think?  Would Walter Benjamin write a perceptive account of Indy?  Or would he just enjoy seeing the *#%!@ nazi scumbags get their asses blown off?  Probably both.  
: : Forgive the length of post; it has been a long and dirty day.  Cheers all.
: :

: Brother, we ARE running out of things to talk about. One other thing to consider is that the generation prior to Indy and Marion didn't think twice of daughters getting married at the age of 14 or even younger, and childhood was not exactly what we think of in terms of endearment for that generation. Most children had to help support families starting at the age of 6 in work gangs prior to U.S. child labor laws, so let's not hold Indy, Marion, her father and such to 1990 rules of social conduct. They would have been products of that age and era. Marion would have been considered "elderly" for her age at the time of her trist with Indy, as this would have occurred in the 1920's. But then I'm sure the writers are having a good laugh at our expense trying to psyco analyze these things, as these were only fictional characters on paper for an adventure movie. Regards. Michaelson

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]