Show Me the Money

So the other day I was watching Jerry Maguire and I love this movie for a lot of reasons but when were talking about morals, ethics, cheating and money I made the connection between Madame Bovary and Jerry Maguire. I think the connection lies in value of money and lifestyle and Emma desires and the business world that Jerry dedicated his life to. I also think that Jerry represents Emma’s desperation when he is fired from his Job. He so badly want to hold on to his career and does not want to feel like a failure. 

When Dorothy decided to go with him and Rod remains as his only client he holds on what he has left. I think that Jerry’s need to hold on to his success can be related to Emma’s need to hold on to what every type of love she can find. Although her affair with Leon is desperately and her marriage is in shambles she knows desperately tries to hold on. Both Jerry and Dorothy share the lack of a stable or fulfilling relationship before they meet each other and fall in love. Jerry’s fiancé broke up with him and before Dorothy’s husband died their marriage was less than perfect.

When Jerry is managing his only client, Rod Tidwell who is unable to get a contract he tell him that he does not play football with his heart. Rod only cares about the money and his contract. This is where the famous line “Show me the Money Comes from.” Emma and Rod are consumed by money and wealth. Jerry tells Rod that if he wants a contract he should play football for the love of the game, rather than the love of money. Emma should take advise from Jerry about her spending and love for money.

I love this movie because it is the there is two parts of the story, Jerry’s career and his relationship with Dorothy. He wants to be passionate and committed to both like any person. This film shows the raw and real human emotions. Although Jerry and Dorothy do not cheat or go into debt, they do share with Emma Bovary the desire to find happiness and love, which is a natural human desire.

Charles, Charles, Charles

I still cant decided if Emma’s behavior is despite of Charles or because of Charles. Is she having these affairs because she desperately wants to get her husbands attention or because he is such a terrible husband that she is unfulfilled in her marriage? I want to think that she is trying to get his attention, because frankly he is obvious to her world. I find Charles fascinating because he is so in love with Emma that he is blind to her emotional pain, unhappiness and infidelity. He really is the worst husband for a woman who wants so much attention and has such high expectations.

So my questions still remain, is Charles to blame for Emma’s behavior? I would have to say that it is a major reason behind Emma’s actions, but Emma must still be responsible for her choices. I wonder if Charles were a better husband, more attentive and attuned to her needs would Madame Bovary fell the need to have affairs to satisfy her desire. In the case of affairs, I don’t think one person is to blame, Charles was unable to meet Emma’s needs but Emma chose to be unfaithful.

So is Charles a fool for not seeing the reality of his marriage, or is he so wrapped up in love that he is blind and will do any thing to satisfy his immature wife. I think no matter what, Emma will be unsatisfied and this makes both Emma and Charles tragic characters. I have sympathy for Charles where I do not have for Emma. She did many things to ruin her husband; she puts him into debt, is unfaith, and lies. Emma is guilty of so much where as Charles’ only crime is he is blissfully unaware. 

Gustave Flaubert and The Beverly Hillbillies

            Flaubert’s distain and criticism of the new wealth in French society is very clear in this work of Madame Bovary. He critiques their inability to dress and behave property at fancy events. Emma Bovary her self represents the strong desires to be perceived as wealthy and to move up in class. When I was thinking about their wedding and how Flaubert comments on the people that addend and the extravagance of the wedding I was reminded of the Beverly Hillbillies.

My dad used to love this show and I can remember watching the movie with him when I was younger. The show was created in the 60’s and then made into a movie in 1993. It is a story about Jed Clampett who is a hillbilly living in Arkansas, one day when he is hutting his shoots at a rabbit. He misses the rabbit but shoots the ground, which causes an oil to come up from the ground. He has instantly become rich. They decided to move to Beverly Hills. He brings his whole family along, his daughter Elly May, Granny, Nephew Jethro. They all pile into the back of Jed truck and move to the big city. They buy a mansion and live among the rich and famous. The rest of the movie follows their adventures living as Hillbillies in Beverly Hills California.

What makes their story like those Flaubert critics is that they are not accustomed to the lifestyle of Beverly Hills; they have money but still act like they live in the country. After seeing this modern example, I think that Flaubert should be less critical. Today we think that money changes people, but the Beverly hillbillies are unchanged by their wealth. It is funny to see them eat road kill for dinner when they have enough money to own a five star restaurant or to see them not know how to use a bowling ball. But I guess Flaubert did not find the new wealth of his society to be funny.