Reply to comment

I couldn't help but notice that in our discussion of Jimmy Corrigan we didn't really discuss the socio-economic implications of Jimmy and his grandfather's lives.

So much of the masculinity presented in the text is linked inextricably to the class of the characters.

I find that the masculinities in general in working and lower-middle class men is much more rigid than that of more affluent classes. I live in a rural, conservative, and predominantly working class part of PA (kjmason can probably also attest to this...) and my sense is that, like in Jimmy Corrigan, there is so much more of a sense of detachment, emotional repression, insensitivity, etc. Not that this is necessarily manifested in a negative way, it's just different than so many of the masculinities we see here in this affluent liberal community we're all a part of.

Men are much less wishy-washy at home. I hope I don't offend anyone by saying that, but that's my opinion. But on the flip side, they're much less emotional and have a lot more trouble communicating and being perceptive about other people's feelings, etc. I'm generally conflicted about which of these two categories of masculinity that I think is more "healthy" (I can't think of a better word...).

In Jimmy Corrigan, we can definitely see especially in Jimmy's grandfather's life, how class is married to the father/son relationship.

This might not be a fully formed or coherent thought, but I felt like it needed to be said...