But it’s a valid criticism of your attempt to turn this into a semantics discussion. I am not interested in your line of discussion.
Or just, in general. It’s interesting how up in arms people can get over this age discrepency, but almost no one takes issue with a similar age difference between characters in Attack of the Clones with the genders reversed.
Setting aside changes in mores between the 1930s (when the movie takes place) or 1920s (when the affair is presumed to have occurred), it should be pointed out that Henry ‘Indiana’ Jones is a cad and a mercenary, largely out for his own interests, and this particular tidbit of his personal history just reinforces that notion. This is, after all, a guy whose escape route in the opening sequence of the film was only sufficient for himself and not the three helpers who were following him. He also doesn’t seem very concerned about Forrester (the ‘competitor’ whose body he finds impaled on a mantrap in the cave), leaves Marion to fend for herself in the German army camp in Egypt, and is pretty free about shooting and whipping people throughout the film. He’s not a ‘nice’ guy; he’s a soldier of fortune and kind of a jerk, really.
As for Marion, at the time of Raiders she’s a hard-drinking bar owner who seems very worldly even though it is shown that she’s actually kind of naive. It is plausible that even at the time that Jones had an affair with her (sometime in the mid-'Twenties) she was a well-travelled, likely self-educated archeology brat who probably seemed more mature than she actually was, hence her feeling that she was “a child” even when Jones insists, “You knew what you were doing.” Jones may well have taken advantage of her, not out of ephebophilia but convenience; she may have been the only English-speaking woman available to him at wherever ass-end of the planet he was conducting an excavation with Abner Ravenwood, and when her adolescent attentions turned to him he didn’t do the honorable thing and keep her at a distance, perhaps not even understanding how inappropriate the relationship was.
In any case, Marion doesn’t seem to have held much of a grudge, or treat him as a rapist. She’s pissed for being stranded in Nepal and a life wasted following her father around (“Abner was sorry for dragging me all over this earth, looking for his little bits of junk. I’m sorry to still be stuck in this dive. Everybody’s sorry for something.”) and she clearly views Jones as a way to get her life back on track, but she also demonstrates actual affection for and loyalty to him (even when she probably shouldn’t).
But hey, let’s remake Raiders of the Lost Ark and make Jones a castrated milquetoast who won’t even look at a woman or shoot someone just because he’s too tired to run away. Also, let’s change his whip to a pom-pom and his S&W Mk II Hand Ejector to a squirt pistol.
Stranger
You realize there’s an enormous difference, legally, morally, and creepily, between a 25 year old fucking a 12 year old and a 35 year old fucking a 22 year old, don’t you? Regardless of the gender of any of the participants?
:dubious: Is anybody here suggesting that any of this would be an appropriate response to the recognition that the character of Indiana Jones in Raiders apparently has a possibly-statutory-rape relationship in his backstory? Is anybody here suggesting that contemporary changes in the perception of the seriousness of statutory rape in any way require us to censor or denounce this movie?
Why, no, actually.
AFAICT, there aren’t anywhere near as many shrill and oversensitive “SJWs” as there are shrill and oversensitive butthurt folk melodramatically squealing about what a terrible impact the alleged shrill oversensitivity of “SJWs” is having on media and communication these days.
As Small Hen noted, there’s nothing wrong with having a discussion of popular culture where we note that a 1978 movie character would possibly be considered a rapist nowadays for actions that at the time were considered only marginally questionable, if that.
Resentful fantasies equating such a discussion with imaginary “SJWs” allegedly generalizing about “how horrible white men are” (on the part of RikWriter) or allegedly demanding that the movie ought to be totally remade in a more PC version (on the part of you) are based on exactly zero evidence from anything anybody’s posted in this thread.
So, as I remarked to RikWriter, how about saving your anti-“SJW” whining for a situation where there are actually “SJWs” actually doing any of the stuff you’re whining about?
To be fair, I believe it’s a 25 year old fucking a 15 year old (IJ), and a 24 year old fucking an 18 year old (AotC). The 12 year old thing was just an idea, and not a good one, that didn’t make it to the screen.
I was quoting Stranger, who was quoting RikWriter, who was referring to the original conversation between Kasdan, Lucas, and Spielberg as posted by Superdude. In that conversation, Lucas went from Marion being 11 to 12 to 15. In reality, there’s nothing whatsoever on screen to indicate what her actual age was supposed to be, besides the murky “I was just a child” line.
I knew exactly what you meant. I wasn’t disputing it. I was taking the 9-year age difference you’d mentioned and applying it to the actors involved rather than the age of the actors. I actually did it for a reason that I now can’t remember. I was trying to add info, not dispute. Harrison Ford was in his 30s when *Star Wars]/i] came out. I know he wasn’t 24 at the time.
See above,
I didn’t think you were interested in any of the actual discussion surrounding the thread topic. It seems you are only here to take pot shots at political adversaries / those opposite you in personal beliefs.
Been done. It’s called Return of the Jedi.
I thought people understood PSXer by now. He writes that shit as a parody. Granted, this wasn’t one of his better ones, but I’ve never seen any indication that he’s the type of person who would use “SJW” sincerely.
No one is saying the movie should be banned. No one is saying that Lucas should have something bad to happen him. No one is even particularly angry about the situation. Where the fuck is the “warrior” part?
The only people who seem to be angry about the discussion are the people who are supposedly not SJWs. Yet you have to fight against the injustice of a movie being discussed.
As for the topic, I know what the novel says, but I personally assume 16. That’s the year that’s both technically legal in most states, but also young enough to seem exploitative if he’s old enough. Making it illegal just doesn’t work for me.
But that’s under a modern interpretation. I have no problem believing she was intended to be 15, because I can definitely see that the same way some people see 17 today (when they assume 18 is the legal age).
I mean, I graduated in 2003, and I knew girls who dated college students when they were high school freshmen. And at least one was a popular girl. And I don’t mean “because she was easy.” I mean, in the popular clique. And she did not in any way try to hide it.
I think people sometimes forget how quickly things have changed on this front.
No, I was here because I was interested in what the OP was talking about. I made a comment about the fallacious statement that SJWs don’t exist. Then some guy who wants nothing but to argue started telling me that the fact I found Lucas’ quote skeevy means I am an SJW or something. I am not interested in that twisted line of reasoning. And I won’t be responding to you again either. Nice talking to you.
Yes, you got me! Next on my agenda is to comb through Empire Strikes Back for evidence that Yoda runs a slave trade of young boys. Then after that, I’ve been assigned to watch Golden Girls reruns to find ties between Blanche and blood diamonds. :rolleyes:
Ditto this.
Anyway, lots of great info in this thread I drunkenly started last night! Thanks guys! Also, quite a bit of…let’s say confusing, leaps of topic/logic…
Marion’s in Nepal because that’s where she and her father happened to be when her father … died? disappeared? … mind blanking here. And she’s clearly not happy about it, she’s “stuck” - she’s managed to carve herself out a niche there, but it’s too difficult for her to get herself back to America.
So - she’s mad at Indy for abandoning her. And one of the things she seems to be mad about is that she partly blames him for her being stuck in the dump she’s in - ie ‘well, if you hadn’t run off on us, I would have had some support and would have been able to get out of here’. That seems to be the point of the ‘we’re all sorry about something’ speech.
The affair makes more sense if it took place on some dig or other somewhere, where she’s just tagging along, and is bored and lonely, than back in America where she’d have her own friends and probably wouldn’t even have an opportunity to meet his dad’s students, who he’d see at the office. They’re archaeologists - they go everywhere! It might not have been Nepal - for all I know they said something to contradict that in the scene where Indy is recruited, and my mind just glossed over it.
How hard would it have been to let Anakin go back to Tatooine and buy his mother’s freedom???
Oh, thank God. Talk about dodging a bullet.
Eleven years old!? Now, that’s no time for love, Dr. Jones!
Indiana Jones was also a thief, vandal, murderer and a perpetrator of a whole laundry list of other crimes and transgressions. Not surprised he was a little rapey.
He also uses child labor in a manifestly hazardous occupational capacity, impersonates uniformed officials and government representatives, drinks cheap booze, and throws loaded pistols across the room.
On the plus side, he kills more Nazis in a single scene than Audie Murphy did at Colmar. However, if he’d been a real hero, he would have taken the Ark to Germany, drove straight up to Hitler, said, “Here’s your prize, dickweed,” opened up the Ark and proceeded to watch Der Furher’s face melt off and head explode.
Stranger
No.
Since Raiders depicts a more simplistic world of the 1940’s, the innuendos in Indy’s and Marion’s argument about “way back then” just seemed to me to be about an even simpler (than the 1940’s) time. My original and current interpretations – film-makers’ canon, and the above discussions not withstanding – has always been that Henry Jr. met Marion when he was around college aged and she was around High School or even Junior High School -aged. So I’d been thinking 18-22 boy and 13-16 girl involved in a relationship. I just figured lots of long walks and deep talks and holding hands and sharing dreams and aspirations - and maybe spit. To me, even in the late 1970’s, None of that, particularly if we’re looking at a movie where characters are talking about the 1930’s, ever implied SEX.:eek:
There are a couple threads around here that ask about the values/mores surrounding “Winter/Spring” romances. I’ve pretty much avoided them because I’m not inclined to even seem to pass judgement and the topic just seems rather gossipy in general. Nevertheless, the fact that such topics pop up around here on a regular basis tends to suggest people like to ask and to weigh in, quite frequently with a “it depends”% and anecdotes of successful relationships that started out with huge age gaps.
We know (now) that Indy & Marion can be considered one of those anecdotes since they got back together by the end of Raiders and got back together again – and married – at the end of Skull.
Marion’s argument is “I was a child back then…”
We also have an interesting thread (that recently popped back up) about a young girl flirting with a 30+year-old guy. Several female responders noted that they went through that kind of phase, and some fathers noted that their daughters did so as well – and eventually turned out okay (at least ‘okay’ enough to post intelligible responses on The Straight Dope).
But we in modern times know that the human brain isn’t done developing until a person is around 25 years old and the last portions to develop are those that help individuals resist peer pressure, emotional rationalizations, thrill-seeking, and risk-taking impulses. They in the 1940’s didn’t know that, and they certainly didn’t know it yet during Freud’s lifetime when psychology and neurology were just getting started. Nevertheless, it’s easy enough to imagine a young boy* being the object of a teen-aged girl’s ‘let me test my ability to flirt with and control men’ behavior and, lacking the kind of impulse control and emotional resilience that we venerable Dopers have developed, responded positively to the young girl’s advances and turned it into a romance. Marion’s crush# became Henry Junior’s Nth love – and still nobody’s talking about sex.
“…and you knew it was wrong.”
Invoking the neuropsychology argument above is the easy way out. Even if he knew it was wrong to court such a young girl, his brain wasn’t developed enough to control his heart. My interpretation, though, was always that Henry Jr. knew it was wrong to court his teacher/mentor’s kid, either because Professor Ravenwood said, “Stay away from my daughter.” [and we know how well that works with kids whose ability to resist thrill-seeking and emotional responses is underdeveloped] or because he should have known, at least in his brain if not his heart, that a relationship with his professor/mentor’s daughter could develop into a conflict-of-interest scenario for the elder Ravenwood.
“I’ve learned to hate you in the last ten years!”
The way this was uttered suggested to me that it had been more than ten years since Marion and Henry Junior were involved. I took it to mean that young Marion continued to love Henry for months or even years after his scholarly or adventurous pursuits pulled him elsewhere. Then her heart broke when she realized he wasn’t coming back. Then after a few months or years of having a broken heart her love-and-pain turned to hate. She had to learn (teach herself) that in order to cope and carry on.
—G!
%But, then again, most of our discussions lean toward “please provide more detail before we decide”
Indy’s response of “You knew what you were doing.” seemed like a feeble argument that also suggested Henry Junior wasn’t Marion’s first crush or conquest or even her first kiss. But even as he says it, he seems to know it’s a weak argument.
*I never watched the Young Indiana Jones chronicles, but I kinda got the impression from a few commercials about it at the time that Henry Junior tended to fall in love quite often as he traipsed around the world.