"You know, you let the woman go through the door first. Why? Because you're stronger, you're younger. It's your duty as a man. That's what you're here for, to take care of things. And nowadays I don't think men are taught that. It wasn't a macho thing; nobody felt they had to kick over the table and act tough to prove they were men. I'm fond of telling this story—I remember meeting Rocky Marciano. We shook hands. It was a real light handshake, like he was a concert pianist. I walked away and thought, Yeah, Rocky Marciano doesn't have to grab you. He knows he could kill you. He's a real guy. So be strong and protect yourself, emotionally and physically. But don't—you don't have to take any crap from the world, but at the same time, you don't have to go looking for crap, either. Don't let the feminist revolution turn you into an anti. Women really do want your help, and that's why we're on the same planet, the same level."
-Clint Eastwood (GQ Badass Of The Year 2009)
It's amazing when you look around and the people you identify with are three to four times your age. It is interesting to hear these words from this man's mouth, albeit not surprising, you’re talking about the all time bad ass of cinema: a legend, a king, somebody who could do whomever, or whatever, he wants and no one would have anything to say about it. This was one of the better interviews I've read in awhile. It examined Clint's take on America, modern college kids, feminism, meditation, war, the president, race...almost everything. In a society as fucked as ours, it is nice to see somebody hanging on from the old school, though I whole heartedly disagree with some of his statements, the vein in which he speaks I understand. He talks about old men come and gone, WWII vets who were molded in the fabric of a tough country with a strong set of male morals. This of course set against the backdrop of today's country where everything feels so scatter-brained and void of a mainstay for common morality.
During one point, Clint says
"The guys who won World War II and that whole generation have disappeared, and now we have a bunch of teenage twits."
In college, I used to despise anyone who uttered anything resembling a statement as that. I'm a tad bit older now, twenty-four, and I'd like to think a bit more mature.I find myself agreeing with statements like these more and more. I used to shutter at copies of "The Last Great Generation" and things of that nature, but now I'm faced with the end of my stubborn ideals--he is more right than wrong.
"People 50 years old acting like that.In Gran Torino, I play a guy who's racially offensive. But he learned. It shows that you're never too old to learn and embrace people that you don't understand to begin with. It seems like nobody else got that message, I guess."
I'm glad Clint understands this, as I enjoyed "Torino" it was quite an unpleasant and unforgiving trip to the movies. I remember going with a large contingent of my family and my girlfriend at the time, laughing our way through the racial jokes and absurd "old man" behavior, then trying to latch onto the common theme built up by the end. Myself, being someone that watches far too many films, failed to really grasp what Mr. Eastwood was trying to layout (Forgiveness, lessons learned, atonement etc.). I looked at Gran Torino (his self admitted final role) as his on screen redemption for all of his on-screen sins: a confessional booth with a final breathtaking act of selflessness to absolve him of every person murdered during his spaghetti western years, every prick blown away in the Dirty Harry series, every mistake overlooked in The Million Dollar Baby and the body count in the Unforgiven (The list could go on for years). That final scene is where any other Clint would have had the jump, a quicker draw, more bullets, a scene in which not any other actor could get away with in a realistic fashion. In Clint, most people are able to fully abandon reality and believe in the legend. In his final role, he gives himself up for the better of morality and humanity. Sheer brilliance if you ask me.
The problem with the film was that it reached audiences in a different light. People became so affixed with the racial slandering and "hilarious" scenes in which the old man got his "racist" on and pointed guns at Asian kids (if I had one knock on the film, it was the acting ability of certain characters. The family next door for example?--twilight worthy). It is here Clint makes a brutal and honest point. Here, in trying to make an honest film about a man overcoming his darkest fears and racial biases to triumph morally, he fails. Not to make a great film, not to make a serious point, but to connect with audiences on the same level. Connecting with an audience of today's youth and middle-aged, who Clint feels, fail to grasp what is going on.
Gran Torino was one of the "funniest movies of the year" if I was going to judge by audience reaction. The citations and quotes from the film were all during the old man's most racist and scathing of remarks. When it came time to discuss themes from the film, many had lost that part of it in the shuffle. This is what Clint see's, the future of this country failing to grasp the problems inherent with the society (especially racism) on both sides of the issue. (He rips Jimmy Carter a new asshole for attempting to silence Obama protesters as "racists"). He may be onto something here, I'm just saying.
"Jersey Shore" aired a couple of days ago and I admit I didn't watch. In fact, the only reason I knew it was even on was Facebook and it seemed like every person I knew's status update had something to do with watching the show (like OMG, funniest thing everrrrr!). I'm glad I didn't, for fear of being able to see the future. In an era where Twilight and Transformers rule the screen, and pieces of trash like "Jersey Shore" and "Sweet 16" own the tube, Mr. Eastwood stands absolutely correct.
The first quote of the article stands above like a great big lurking shadow:
"It wasn't a macho thing; nobody felt they had to kick over the table and act tough to prove they were men."
This is coming from the man that flipped countless saloon tables like pancakes and dispersed thousands of rounds into men on the screen. His take on being a man in this society is simple, even if surrounded by remarkable coincidence and circumstance. If Clint Eastwood, the most legendary bad ass in Hollywood history is speaking on his views of philosophy on women, men and masculinity in society, it can't hurt to listen. Males nowadays get all googly over fighting. Between MMA, college riots, overblown boxing matches and random occurrences of violence, I feel now more than ever standards have become blurred. It is no longer a requirement to protect, it is looking for trouble. Mr. Eastwood catches this beautifully. I joke around with my cousin all the time (He works at a bar with me) about how alot of guys nowadays would rather get into a fist-fight than hang out and speak with a lady (nevermind bring one home). My father seems to think this is more alcohol related as that is the mainstay for social interaction after twenty-one years of age in this country(and as we know, far lower than that). In my experience so many women have become fed up with fighting that when the need for physical action is reached and occurs, it is harder to appreciate or find attractive in any way, shape, or form.
Now, many women I speak with on the subject claim the idea of fighting is a turn off, which is understandable, however, if a man gets completely out of hand and is dealt with accordingly, the act of violence should not be commended, but the bravery or moral standing to deal with it should be. I seem to find more women that agree with that statement. A man that sticks up for a women is a nice feeling. It is a protective feeling. Clint mentions it "we are here to protect them" in the most basic of evolutionary processes, and it's natural to feel that way for both sexes. I recall an incident where another man stepped over the line (he was harassing my girlfriend) on several occasions during the course of a night before I stepped in to "tell him off". The problem resulted in a fight. I won (on moral grounds and physical well being, obviously!) and her and I both shared a renewed sense of each other--even if only for the moment. I felt like I had done something right, something that was both exciting and frightening--but the right thing to do. She mentioned some other ways that might have helped, other scenarios in which physical altercation could have been avoided, but appreciated the frame of mind I was thinking in. She felt
proud of me. She felt good that I was there to protect her. That is not something to be ashamed of for a man or a women. That is not the glorification of violence. That is not the glorification of males over females. If a male protects a female, that does not mean a women will always need a man around no matter what. I think men and women can appreciate having someone stand up for them, no matter what their sex is. I'm not sure I speak for every male, but ladies, it feels good when you let us know that you appreciate things from us. Obviously, random gestures of kicking someone else's ass in a gift-wrapped bow need not apply! However, you and I both know that at certain times things are necessary. It is really a good feeling to be appreciated and to be acknowledged that your strong defines masculinity from your significant other. You
want to be viewed as a protecting force, plain and simple.
In being the oldest of five, while watching over two sisters, I am disgusted on a daily basis in the ways women are treated (this is not to say I'm exempt from these declarations against). Even in college, in my most narcissistic "We are the future" feeling days, I always had a problem with the way most "men" treated women,
especially in that setting). I believe in the ways of chivalry and the things Clint speaks of, I believe that males are fundamentally stronger physically and that is just a fact (In a general sense--strength), and I also believe that women stand on equal plane as males despite the first two statements (and for a vast number of reasons).
Reading his views on women, and the responsibilities males fail to cover nowadays, reminds me alot of my father and grandfather. Growing up, my father explained to me quite clearly that women were to be treated differently and there would be no exceptions. He used to tell me this story about being the oldest brother: He would talk about a boat with our family on it and it sinking into the ocean. The weight of all seven in our family was making it go down faster, so people would have to jump off. The order would go as follows: Him, mother, myself, my sister, my brother, my brother and last little sister. I always was confused by this story, especially because of his hard nosed views on letting women "go first" and so forth. He explained to me that I would obviously go first because it is up to me to lead my brothers and sisters both when my parents are here and during the days they are gone. My sister J would go after because she is older and wiser than the rest. My brother D would go next if necessary, to leave the youngest alive in the boat. The final brother and sister are fraternal twins, one male and one female, who share the final moments. If necessary, the brother would jump first, the last remaining sister left alone.
I asked my father why my brother would go first and he always said the same thing: She is the youngest, she is a girl and he has to be the one to sacrifice himself for her to live, to go on and carry on the family and moral makeup. I was always perplexed and I'm sure many feminist classes would have a field day with his philosophy, but I always found it riveting. It was here where the gender came into play. At first I found it a bit ridiculous. I would often impose annoying questions like "Well, what if she is the better swimmer, or he is sick?". My father would laugh and explain the other side, one that I am now just getting. His belief was that in being the youngest (and being a girl) she had taken in many of the lessons her elders has taught her, and "probably all" of the lessons (knowingly and unknowingly) divulged to her by the four siblings.
In many ways, his view on the system was that it was not so much a gender issue as it was intelligence and morals. In his view, if everyone did their job, the best outcome would be available in the most dire of circumstances. Each gender gives, everybody gets. Males did their part. Females did their part. The future lives on. A bit Shakespearean, a bit misguided, a bit wishful thinking, but birthed in the right moral pool: a sensitivity for everyone and a yearning for the most complete and beneficial outcome.
I look forward to seeing how growing up treats me. I fear love and marriage as a sub-set of societal tendencies and influence, not as truly adoring someone and spending the rest of your life with them. I'm 24 years old and certainly have engaged in what people may call questionable behavior. Though I am not in a steady relationship, and at times engage in behavior with women (who sometimes know eachother) that would give them justifiable cause to castrate and be-head me, I always try my hardest in respecting women (Yes, I know, even if I fail miserably sometimes). The sharpest I've ever felt is during times with my family in discussions on the subject. It brings one back down to earth with regard to how people should be, could be, and must be treated. My grandparents we're together for fifty-years before my grandfather died.
Fifty-years. If there is ever a model of efficiency, excellence, true love and support to look up to? That is it. Even my parents, who just last year reached half of fifty years, through problems I myself witnessed, is insanely impressive.
I guess identifying with Mr. Eastwood shouldn't come as a surprise after all. In truth, he speaks more in this article on these subjects than my grandfather did in a lifetime. My grandfather was more of the "lead by example" type. He did exhibit a quiet look, as if he knew everything, when others spoke on such subjects. It was these eyes I remember the most, and a faint smile that would cross his face as if he'd already done it all before, and mastered it. My grandmother still weeps everyday for him, partly because she cries too much and also because he really did do such a wonderful job building a family with her, respecting her, and caring for her. Obviously, the treatment of women and men should not always correlate directly with the morals of a healthy marriage, but it certainly cannot be a bad starting point.
One of my biggest fears is that such a majority of men will begin to forget about old ways of life, living, and the treatment of women. In turn, the women will forget what used to be a commonality. I tell my sisters all the time to expect certain levels of treatment. Not in an entitlement fashion, or bratty sense, but an intelligent and respectable level of standards for treatment that they are comfortable with. Some women despise the ways of chivalry and when women are turned off by it, I guess it is a major turn off for me too. I'm interested in women that like having me around, that appreciate little things from me, that more or less serve as reminders of the things we constantly forget about. I'm sure some of these same feelings go for them as well. Clint Eastwood touches over these subjects very broadly, however, reading his statements provide me with a profound feeling of nostalgia and warmth. I see a lot of my grandfather and father in Clint's words.
A couple of weeks ago I took a young women out on a date. I was driving around in my grandfather's 1998 Grand Marquis that I received from my grandmother after he died. His picture still sits behind my steering wheel everywhere I go. Over the years, several things have gone wrong with the car: The window behind the driver fails to go down sometimes, some of the foot carpets are gone, one of the hubcaps is missing and the automatic locks don't work. I entered the car first, reached over and unlocked the car door (alah a Bronx Tale), then shoved the car door open so she did not have to open it all. She entered the car and smiled and said "Can I ask you something?". I said "Sure". She replied "Why do you open the car door for me every time I get in your car?". I chuckled and told the truth. "Well for starters, the car auto locks are broken, but even if they weren't, I'd probably be doing it anyways". She smiled, nodded and we pulled out of the parking lot. I thought in my head about how my father would commend such a statement or action, and then I gazed into those familiar, quiet, knowledgeable eyes of my grandfather, as a faint smile crossed over my face.
