"%u's asmartboy

Intelligence and Class

tn Good Will Hunting

Thomas E. Wartenberg

(/ frrurdeal ofthe interest ofGusVan Sant's 1997

popular and successful film, Good Will Hunting,r resuirsfrom its focus upon intelligence as an issue lor men.Three ofthe central characters in the film have superiorintelligence and the film presents this as a significantconcern in their lives. This is particularly true of WillHunting (Matt Damon), the fiim's hero, a young math-ematical genius who is laced with the question ol howand whether to square his intellect with his working-class identity. But both Sean Maguire (llobin Williams),the therapist who eventually helps Will find a balm forhis psychic wounds, and Gerald Lambeau (StellanSkarsgird), the MIT mathematics professor who "dis-covers" Will, also have had to figure out how to copewith their intelligence and its impact on their lives.

But Good WjlL Hunting is nol jusr a film ab99t

.intelligence and men; i.t also loregroundq iggues ofS.le$,-iq_1. .a.s L1-4vq -s

di d, wJ_ll-belonss re .1he w. q q.\ i n g

O 2003 by Thomas E. Wartenberg

like you doing ina class like this?":

t5

.lrrr. il. question that the film presents 5,-ghether Will's superior intelligence !: el"gidl*iitl htJ membership in the working class.- -'' lb ;;t ui.*.ii, it may seem as if Ilm belaboring the obvious. After all, the film

presents Wili as showing up the pretensions and elitism of a pseudo-intellectual Harvard

graduate student as *elias his erstwhile mentor, while coming to a deeper understanding

lf hi, o*n psychic compulsions. what glse could the fi1m's view of class be viewers might

- b_9_ilcliqed-to think, bul that workinglcliss men are more authentic, less pretenti"ous*an-.d-

S1r_Cibt ittan upper-ctuss rngni On sulh an interpretation of the film, Good Will Hunting

*outa fit the model of the populist romances of the 1930s with their affirmation of pop-

ulist values over elitist ones.

A more nuanced interpretation of the film will show, howevet, that Cpod Will Hyy1111g

fC--q1G "."t;ivileng[ltgdepictiqn of the working class,than this interpretation all-or,'rs.

Using an as_cent narrativefilhe !!.qr-prgqents the behavi-qr -of most working-class me! 9s-i9.:.-

tituino if nor rhe .li.r".netsithat ott.tr show them, thes,3f*]c4sltheir inferior-.soqtalp-pfi-,tifyilg, iGot the disrespetithat otters show them, tbglalie4st their inferjor social posi-

liunlOnty the exceprional Will Hunting is seen gf@$gf-tggJdescape from the vicious=-i- ' - -l-:-::::J-- ^^...^n ^.. :..L.,L:+i-^ D^rl' -r

Will Huntin[ endollql4*lht,.Inry.by, plgIi4ed that those exceptional individuallwilh luge-

iji,i die;i *ind "p

in tffii"it.gid-soJiil positions they deserve. lslag lnleiligence,4$,-a,-

-irk i of class, Goocl Will Huntjng-Ire,a\9 rnembership in the working class as a lorm ql {1'?i6ility

from which "brails" pqovfde one of the few avenues of escape'

?nvf;onment that the film depicts working-class men afdilting as weli as inhabiting. Rather

than offering a sympathetic portrait of the difficulties faced by working-class men, t]o911

scent Narratives

My interpretation of Goorl Will Huntingplaces it in the context of films that i have called

"unlikely couple films."2 The narratives of unlikely couple films focus upon the devel-

opment of romantic couplings that are transgressive in some socially significant way'

One important sub-category of the unlikely couple film includes films that depict cross-

class romances. There are many films that fit this category, from Frank Capra's 1934 com-

edy It Happenecl One Night to Erick Zonca's tragic i988 filn't,The Dreomlife of Angek (La

Vi'e r€vle-ies anges). These films often feature asce-lt nar!.gtives,that is,,p,lots depicting a

in whiih one,of the partn-erg-isiG?itia-io th. oih..r privileged social position.- h'n. -.r. pr.i"n.e of an ascent narrative does not determine the political perspec-

tive 3f a film,'however. Although many theorists uf Hollywood cinema have contended

._Eh; p"tu-lar riirrativb fiftirs of this type-from It Happened One Night to Pretty Wo.man-

ui. puril.uturly disigned to denalig s]g1!ficance of the social differenqe*tlrat the suc-

lessfuf-oupie tianscends, such a broad generalization is not valid"The story of a

'character's 'uttt"fu1

sociai?icettt'c9u1d be useS;u-i+js*u5the first hl6lf of Anthony

e..1uith;, 1938 film version of Pygmalion, to atta( the validitJy'f a sociai hierarchysuch

u, the class structure by demonstrating.ttrat there-i3-nrrlc-$mate reason why mem!!rs

-of the lower class are relegate$ to inferior social position..lOl,!h! other hand, as Gary

Marshall's 1990 film Pretty Woman clearly demonstrates,a-character's social ascent can

be used to validate class hierarchy by showing that justicJ demands that an exceptional

member of the working qla;s a5cend to her rightful social location'a As we shall see, I

.i

&

t6 Popping Culture

believe Goodjustify a class

Will Hunting falls into the latterhierarchy based on intelligence.

camp, i.e., it uses an ascent narrative to

ntelligence Trumps Class

It is against this background of unlikely couple films employing ascent narratives that iwant to look more closely at Good Will Hunting. Let's begin by considering a scene thatmight be lele.It !o e-s-t_eb-!ish fh,e filmbvalidation o*fu[e*rgorki:rgclass.Tlrat the wor[il&_Esi=

ffiselq-il-Ig*giy.fr-a"q* e16n, i,'t,toward the qpestion of ryhat role the film sees for itself in regard to the class hierarchy.AsrFwe shall see{\tlrSfiJn_Uresents a simpl.ifie*! set oioptiona ffi #;ii;hii poiiiii;nstEbinf'Lthe ry91!5inglass,*having alcgnde{ o-r1g*of

-the working class. or being in the upper class. )

U-ppgr*lasi-r:fenire.prcsillt'qd.as having condes titud.es toward thelg\ila_:F:d!lg], as this scene illustrates, so lhg-gg3d_-b-r-.a*re$Bonss,-s-'getn-s,-n.a.-tutal, called forbyjf,i:pompous attitudes.of the upper class itself. Will and his friends have gone to the Bow and

A?.o*"Ptib,-a"ai;;aaA H;;;.d bt.'Wiltis best friend, Chuckie (Ben Aifleck), tries to pickup Skylar (Minnie Driver), a Harvard undergrad, by pretending to recognize her from a

class. At this point, a pretentious male graduate student, Clark (Scott Winters), tries to pub-licly humiliate Chuckie by showing that he has no idea what the course in question wasabout and thus establish that the working-class Chuckie is not the sort of person who couldpossibly have taken a course at Harvard:

CLARK: What class did you say that was?

CHUCKIE: History.CLARK: How'd you like that course?

CHUCKIE: Good, it was all right.CLARK: History? |ust "history"? It must have been a survey course then.Pretty broad. History of the worid? . . .

CHUCKIE: To tell you the truth, I wasn't there much. The class was ratherelementary.CLARK: Elementary? Oh, I don't doubt that it was. i remember the class-itwas just between recess and lur.rch.

CHUCKIE: All right, are we gonna have a problem?CLARK: There's no problen-r. I was just hoping that you could give me someinsight into the evolution of the market economy in the early colonies. Mycontention is that prior to the Revolutionary War, the economic modalities,especially of the southern colonies, could most aptly be characterized as

agrarian precapitalist and . . .

()a_)<\\L A LJ /

Clark attempts not only to catch Chuckie in his lie, but to use the knowledge he, Clark,gained in that class to put Chuckie down, to demonstrate his, Clark's, class superiority byhumiliating Chuckie.

Things will not turn out the way Clark intends, however, for Will steps in to rescueChuckie and shows that the ideas Clark has been spouting are all derivative and do notdemonstrate that Clark possesses superior intelligence.

Chapter 2 Thomas E. Wartenberg 17

{

WILL: Of course that's your contention. You're a first-year grad student. You just

finished reading some Marxian historian, Pete Garrison prob'ly, and so natu-

rally that's what you believe until next month when you get to James Lemon and

get convinced that Virginia and Pennsylvania were strongly entrepreneurial and

capitalist back in seventeen forty. That'Il last until sometime in your second year,

then you'll be in here regurgitating Gordon Wood about the prerevolutionary

utopia and the capital-forming effects of military mobilization'CLARK: Well, as a matter ol fact, I won't, because Wood drastically underesti-mates the impact of--WILL:

-Wood drastically underestimates the impact of social distinctions

predicated upon wealth, especially inherited wealth. . . . You got that from Vick-ers's Work in Essex County, was it pages ninety-eight to one-oh-two, what? Do

you have any thought ofyour own on the subject or were you just gonna pla-

giarize the whole book for me?

To finish things off, Will hands Ciark this judgment of him:

WILL: The sad thing is, in about fifty years you might start doin' some thinkin'on your own and by then you'll realize that there are only two certainties in life.

. . . One, don't do that. Two, you dropped a hundred and filty grand on an edu-

cation you coulda picked up for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library.(25-27)

By the end of the exchange, Ciark limps away, tail between his legs, having been shown up

by the working-ciass genius whose victory in this intellectual contest has perked Skylar's

interest, too.Throughout the scene, while our attention is riveted by the conversation between the three

men, the camera rarely focuses upon them alone. Most of the shots, even the close-ups, also

include other characters as well: Clark's fellow Harvard students, eagerly anticipating Clark's

humiliation of Chuckie; Skylar, the undergraduate who occasions the exchange in the first

place; Will, watching Clark carefully as he sizes up the situation. The exchange between these

three young men takes place in a highly public space of contestation. The fiim thus makes us

aware that the men are all acting before their various audiences, but it also caiis attention to the

role we piay, bystanding as the film's actual audience, in the creation of this drama.

What does this scene actually establish? First, it shows that Clark is a poseur who does not

really possess superior intelligence to Chuckie. This is established by Will's ability to walk cir-

cles around him intellectually and to show that all Clark really possesses is some second-hand

knowledge he has acquired in his courses at Harvard. Such knowledge, however well it might

serve him in graduate school-and the film is unremitting in its negative portrayal of gradu-

ate students, especially Lambeau's and these in the bar-does not reflect his possession of supe-

rior intelligence. But this means, secondly, that Clark's position of social privilege in relation to

Chuckie is not justified by his possession of superior intelligence. Whiie Clark believes it is, his

inability to contend with Will invalidates that belief. The superficial knowledge that he does pos-

sess is simply the result of his privileged access to Harvard and can't be used to justifi that priv-

ilege. Only Will, lacking as he does Clarks privileges, has the sort of intelligence that, in the

film's eyes, justifies a superior social position, for Will not only possesses a great deal of infor-mation garnered from his wide reading but knows how to assess it and deploy it in an argument.

t1:

&

l8 Popping Culture

Since this scene demonstrates that Clarkt arrogant pretense is nothing but that, the ques-tion remains open as to whether superior intelligence such as Will's justifii a privileged socialposition. As we shall see, the film winds up endorsing this idea and, in so doing, natur-alizes theclass structure as based upon genuine differences of intelligence, itself something the film seesas genetic.

I characterize this scene as pseudo-populist. Such scenes can be found in a variety ofrecentfims. Pretty woman, once again, will function as my paradigm. There, vivian ward (IuliaRoberts)' a prostitute who has been snubbed by a saleswom* in u Rodeo Drive boutique,returns to the scene of the crime laden with bags full of her many expensive purchases from otherstores and intones, "You work on commission, don't you? Mistake. Big, big, mistake," as shertrrns around while displaying the goods she has bought that cost u r*ull fortune. By puttingdown the saleswoman,Vivian makes up for the rejection she suffered at the saleswomuntnunaialthough her doing so, ironically, makes her guilty of the very same crime, something the filmseeks to keep us from noticing. Snobbery suffers an inversion as the saleswoman recognizesthat Vivian deserved to be treated with respect, her hot pants and go-go boots notwithstand-ing' The populist moment of a snob receiving her comeuppance is mitigated by the filmb asser-tion that Vivian-because of her great beauty-really belongs among th1 priviieged and shouldbe treated as such. It is interesting to note that both films aitempt {o nanralizi class position,but do so in different ways. Pretty Woman focuses upon a woman and treats her exceptionalbeauty as requiring her social elevation. Good Wll Hunting, dealingas it does with men, usesnot beauty but intelligence as the supposedly natural rnu.k , that Jught to be reflected in theclass hierarchy. Although both films exceptionalize their hero in orderio justifr a heroic ascent,the terms they use reflect diflerences in how we think of men and women in relation to classposition.

full Y'yl"',lt- l: G o o d Yltt. !! * i

: g'

1: :un see th at th', b" ls"' i'

r endorsingthe popuUslidsa*qhat-el|"hunrarl_"hcipes-fu-.jy'e*cspalilm;ij[ p.dli;comes from Will's abilitv to defeat Clerlr'q 2rremhr rn ch.r,^, rh.r L^ :. ^,,,-^-:^- a^ -L-- -r,: -

i.,;o;,,i:j,-.;+--;--r":*z4Fr-1"_a-Y4v?r!::,--L;

ty to defeat Clark's attempt to show that he is superior to Chuckie.Thp prejeniip-n.of a falscs.lite,to"deserve its_spghlpg.-r.l-:g. because of superior intelli$q!c9

is is acco-mplishiiffii;i€€i, cjnijniv tjv:ubtlv p.qs_[rlg aw! te.ec,!'r1s{e!l.rdqd. US-113SSeIpb!.d, tidil*e;ai,"d;it !tlubiii pgr_tt,rrg-lfi e !o v.vh ic h wi I I be I o ngslesauie-aflfcen i u r. r n d..d,rtlffi.* nJ;;; t s wi r r

6!irl," for Skylar approaches him at the end of the scene, thus reinforcing our sense ofhim as the "victor" in this battle for recognition.s

. This ssge'$g;uccp$$"fuL4!--{ldiu.-fuellp*estue!*hsi.eqs-r-trqn-nr-ax-no-treftecr"his

-hruryf]lces.e. Edut.a[on is a lrjyjtg_ge grgltgq

!9_ fgi j;fhe upp.rcru:1, and that th{San use to demean members offie worliins ciaii. d;iffiii-iirirl-ttr;jino nFrhe Hqrrra"J .-^,can use to demean members offie worliing ciaii. ButWiii-+ux-19"9'::-gTT9-.T.9r$.9.y9_*r!,e:]-u"p'. Bi"iff*ruqls fr-i6s:Hilva;a;;?ffi i."

1",l l,issi,;. a b ne t_ qq L'til-E ithi1q.;-d['l, n c t io.n neip, t e i t s

exceptionalizing of will, *i]y-:tilr.eems headeJ or , ,*;*"ty,r.'., *iiLi*por" ti. irr.-ft I1.*elrsfi eiJi$il's*lce.!"bieiA,-{ffish all see, thjr qpf gg.. qlg-e-! q,{e,_cgggve.

Central to GoodWll Hunting's narrative is Will's ascent out of the working class. An impor-tant question to ask is why this ascent is necessarv. Even though Will is shown to be a math-ematicalgenius,tuffiu.a-fu;ij*t-.o-lea-u*e'i'i's..l-u.qr.hi.qg.sJeqsenvironment

lathologizing Class

Chapter 2 Thomas E, Wartenberg l9

tr

and friends, as he does when he decides to follow Skylar to San Francisco where she has

gone to pursue her medical education.

Theanswer to this question, unfortunately, isthatGoo4Wi!llunyingpgth,ologizesWii]1-

.qlqpgo_litrgl. D:gp,i1q$e facq $a1Wif.l was bqq lnto !he,wo-rki",gllr.!9,.9 film treats his pt'rsi-

ii"" i. ih;r .lr.r-u,.a otir.. p.op1.r' position ih".. ii *.il-u. {ai9a!-tf tt*trat requires a qtlid-

-*That this iS the:a^se amerges in iwo stige.s. In the first stage W"e sie Will engaging i9 gelf--

destructive behavior with his working-class pals, behavior that winds him up in jail' Because

Ltm$iradTias dfii6vered Will's mathematical talents, he bails Will out under the proviso that

he undergo counseling. As a last resort, Lambeau turns to his old college buddy, Sean Maguire'

a therapist whose career has been sidetracked by the illness and subsequent death of his wife.

During Maguire's therapy sessions with Will, the second stage of the film's pathologizing of

Will and the working class emerges' i!lgl!!_C,lt-th-at Will suffeas,fronr.self--doulrts-and*ils-e-

cqIt!-g! g9lbg ryqql1 of the vicious +bus. !t-. lgff!1g!- a! the haldq.o!!i91t9t']-:fl!!l:r'

--ltd,_.-tr.lr iiw-iut pry.hologicil.probi.-i rn th. p;t p.y.hirlo[iial ie.m.. itiihisned uy

fUaguG during Willi analysis, Will b. ellgygg !q dgee1ves.th,e mi,s!-realment he suffered I 1 5]1i1d.

This phenomenon is actually quite common: a young child internalizes his own mistreitmeni,

seeing it as a result of some defect on his part, rather than a flaw in his or her caretaker. As a result'

Will iepeatedly relives the scene of his own victimization, seeking out confirmation that he is

a "bad boy" from whatever authorities he can find. Hence, his misdeeds and his trouble with

the police. He puts himself in jail, as it were, to confirm his negative self-image.

1.:' Will's position in_1lre_work-ing class is thus, from the point of view of the film, an injus-

gc-qla t*o'score,s. F!3i, h[ infe.T.risoClut position belies his superior intelligence which s]rould

!,.* f,m u-o"€ gtt. tiiuileged- members of rcciety. But Willt iemaining in the working class

iiio t.R..t, his perduring iack of self-esteem as a result of the mistreatment he suffered as a

child. His ascent out of the working class will therefore simultaneously right both wrongs: it

_.will pu? him in ihe class that is appropriate-for his intelligence while at the same time redu:--- g.;irr_g,hi' !gl-s_q!_{-*911$d allowing him t6'ercape the pri.son of his own childhood.- -lb;;hia"; tfrr prylh"f"gical "asient," however, Wiil has to learn i lesron from Maguire,

for it won't b" enough if Will simply decides to respect his intellect and go to work for one of

the firms that Lambeau has selected. HS ngg4-r_t!) disco-ver thal-despite his intelligencg, hur4g,1

relationships ghguld $9 the prima.ry focus of his life.

This lesson comes across most clearly in a story that Maguire tells Will about htlw he met

his future wife. He had slept out on the street to get tickets for game six of the World Series in

1975, the game in which Carlton Fisk hit a home run in the bottorn of the tweltch inning to

give the ned Sox the Series. Maguire was sitting in a bar with his friends, waiting for the game

io .turt, *h.n a woman walked into the bar. Maguire explains: "l just slid my ticket across the

table and said,'Sorry fellas, I gotta go see about a girl."'Will is astounded and asks how

Maguire's friends could let him give up that ticket for "a girl." Maguire explains again:

If I had gone to see that game I'd be in here talkin' about a girl I saw at a bar

twenty years ago. And how I aiways regretted not goin' over there and talkin' to

her. I don't regret the eighteen years we were married. I don't regret givin'up

counseling for six years when she got sick. I don't regret being by her side for the

last two years when things got real bad. And I sure as hell don't regret missing

that damn game.(86)

Popping Culture

q

20

Maguire is tellingWill a number of things here. First, he is suggesting that moving from a focus

on male bonding to an intimate relationship with a woman is a mark of socio-psychologicaldevelopment. Secondly, and more importantly lrom the point of view of my argument here,

he is explaining that achievement does not bring happiness, for that can only come from inti-mate human relationships no matter what their "cost." These lessons conflict deeply with Lam-beau's urgent desire that Will simply accept his gift and dedicate himself to pushing back the

frontiers of knowiedge.

The contrast betvveen Maguire and Lambeau is instructive here. (The filn-r script even refers

to Maguire, but not Lambeau, by his first name, establishing our intimacy with him and ourdistaste for Lambeau.) Although both men seek to mentor Will, Lambeau's interest in Will is

portrayed as highly suspect. It is as if Lambeau's career as a mathematician will finally be vali-dated by his discovery of this young genius. His interest in Will is based on attention to notWill himself but only his amazing facility with math. Although Maguire clearly benefits fromhis relation with Will-he is freed from his own depression over the death of his wife throughhis interaction with Will and makes his own decision to leave town at the film's end-he is

motivated by a genuine desire to help Will overcome his destructive impulses and discover the

nature ofhis real desires.

While I find this aspect of the film's narrative less problematic than its ciass politics, let me

point out that the fiim here plays on anti-intellectual attitudes that are very c()mmon, it seems,

in contemporary society. Maguire's decision to use his intellect to help people cope rather thanto advance knowledge is presented as simply the correct thing to do. Indeed, the film explicitlyclaims that Einstein-one of Lambeau's models for inteliectual achievement-was an unhappyhuman being who made a wreck of his intimate relationships. Clearly, this is a naive and sim-plistic view of how intelligence can be used to benefit life on the planet.

So let us now consider the film's representation of the working class. I believe that the film'suse of an ascent narrative undermines its earlier support and affirmation-if only partial-ofthe working class in the face of intellectual snobbery. If Will's being in the working class is the

result of his pathology, his lacking an adequate self-image, what does this say about his friendsand other members of the working class? How are we to understand theirbeins in the work-ing class?

As we will see, the film treats their membership in the working class as inevitable, some-

thing from which they have no means or hope of escape, for it is onlyWill, with his exceptionalintelligence, who has the option of ascending out of the stulti$'ing environment the film char-acterizes as that of working-class males. Good WilI Hunting simply uses the working-class menwho are Will's friends as foils lor his ascent, treating the self-destructive and demeaning lives itdepicts themliving as simply their natural lot. Instead of actually valorizing the working class,

Good Will Hunting ultimately presents working-class men as deserving their inferior socialposition because of their pathologies.

The scene that exposes this aspect of the film's class politics takes place between Will andhis best buddy, Chuckie. They are drinking beer after work, standing in front of the construc-tion site where they 1abor.6 The tlvo seem to be catching up, for Will tells Chuckie that Skylar

has left some time ago to go to medical school. As the tlvo continue to talk, it becomes clear thatWill and Chuckie have different ideas about Will's future.

CHUCKIE: So, when are you done with those meetin's Iwith Maguire]?WILL: Week after I'm twentv-one.

Chapter 2 Thomas E. Wartenberg 2l

CHUCKIE: Are they hookin'you up with a job?

WILL: yeah, sit in a .oo- urrd do long division for the next fifty years'

CHUCKIE: Yah' but it's better than this shit' At least you'd make some nice

bank.WILL: Yeah, be a fuckin'lab rat'

CHUCKIE: It's a waY outta here'

wlLL: what ao t *Jrrt u *.y o.rr,u here for? I want to live here for the rest of

mylife...CHUCKIE:Look,you'remybestfriend'sodon'ttakethisthewrongway'butin twenty years, if you're livin'next door to me' comin'over' watching the

fuckin'Patriots,gameandstillworkin'construction,I'Ilfuckin'killyou.Andthat's not a threat; that's a fact, I'll fuckin'kill you'

WILL: Chuckie, what are you talkin' ' ' 'CHUCKIE: Listen, you got somethin' that none of us have'

WILL: Why is it always ihi'? t o*t it to myselfi What if I don't want to?

CHUCKIE: Fuck you. You owe it to me' Tomorrow I'm gonna wake up and

I,llbefiftyandI'llstillbedoin'this'Andthat,sallright,causel,mgonnamakearunatit'Butyou,you'resittingonawinninglotteryticketandyou'retoo much of a pussy io .urn it in. Andlhat's bulishit 'cause I'd do anything to

have what you gottit'a so would any of these guys' It'd be a fuckin'insult to

us if you're still here in twenty years'

( I 33-34)

The logic of this discussion is somewhat elusive. It begins with the.assumption that will's

exceptionaltalentgiveshimaticketoutofthe*orkir'gclass.Chuckie-concludesthatWillhas an obligation to ur..na a a position of social privilege because all working-class men

desire such ascent, but o.rtyWitt t u, the exceptional capabiiitles that are necessary for it' Why

the others,desire for * "r'."ri

itr.t they cannot, but Will can, make should place him under

the obligation to make ii, ..-ui.r, .rrr.l.u., though chuckie clearly.believes this to be true.

Therefore, Will,s nor -;i.i"; the ascent that is ivailable only to him would' according to

Chuckie's logic, degrade him as well as the others'

Chuckie,s reasoning here seems a clear case of projection. Since he cannot ascend out

of his working-.tur, .nui?o.rment, and since will can, chu.kie projects an obligation.fol *lt1

to do so. It is as if cir.,.r.i. ini.,ks thatwill's doing so will satisfyhis,.chuckie's' desire to

ascend. But whatever pry.n.i.gi."r pleasure Will's aicent will give Chuckie' it certainly won't

change the basic terms of his existence'

Nonerheless, th. ".;;;;-;iogic that the film uses to place a burden on will-he must

flee from the working class in ord"er to validate the pain ihat characterizes Chuckie's daily

existence-condemns chuckie and ali of his non-exceptionalworking-class mates to a life that

Chuckie himself claimrio U. onty slightly short of hell. And this problematic life is made to

seem somehow right *Jp.op..lf oitywitt saves himself by escaping from it' But if Will is

portrayed as engaging in siif-destructve behavior characteristic of his milieu because of psy-

chologicalscarringfromhisabusivechildhood,theotherworking-classmenaresimplybehaving in accord *irn ii.lr "nutures." No redemption for them-psychological or social;

simply lives lirred out in not so quiet desperation. Tieir cond\tion is represented as something

22 Popping Culture

that is not ameliorable, as if what in Will is the result of destructive parenting in them is sin.r-

ply the result of their natures as working-class men.The film's emphasis on Will's exceptionality as the grounds for his elevation out of the

working-class into a position of social privilege thus has its mirror in its representation ofworking-class men as deserving their social subordination and disempowerment. Will'schildhood wound and his outstanding intellect both mark him as diflerent, render himcapable of ascent. Good Will Hunrlng, despite its sympathy for its main character and the cir-cumstances of his life, paints a negative portrait of the lives of working-class men. Comparedto Will, they are stupid, and they lack the sophistication provided by social privilege as wellas that special wound that n-right entitle them to it. If their only hope for validation is Will'sescape from the life they are destined for, that is less a problem with their lives than with thisfilm's own elitism. A film that allows its main character to best an upper-class studentfor attempting to demean a working-class rival ultimately enacts a similar humiliation ofthat rival. While Will can save Chuckie from unfairly being shown up, he can't keep Good

Will Hunting from enacting its own deeper humiliation of Chuckie and working-class menin general.

I A11 subsequent quotations lrom the film are taken from the published screenplay: MattDamon and Ben Affleck, GoodWill Hunting (NewYork: Hyperion, 1997).

2 This term is explained in Thomas E. Wartenberg, Untikely Couples: Movie Romance as

Social Criticisn (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999).

3 For an extended discussion of this claim, see my Unlikely Couples, chapter 2.

4 I delend this interpretation in Unlikely Couples, chapter 4.

s Skylar's class position is interesting: She is a trust-fund baby, but she announces that she

only has the money because her father is dead and she would gladly give it all back to see

him again. Although this fact is intended to distance Skylar from those who accept theirprivileged position as their just desert, she has not actually renounced the privilege thatshe has and that allows her to attend Harvard and then medical school in California. Butthe film wants to protect her from the same critique of elite pseudo-intellectuals that itis in the process of assembling.

6 Incidentally, Will now talks as if he has chosen constrnction as his life-long career goal.

But earlier in the film he had been employed as a custodian at MIT. His profession seems

to switch to satisfr the momentary needs of the narrative. Earlier, Will's mathematicalgenius turned out to also result in his reading difficult historical studies of the prerevo-lutionary economy in the United States. These inconsistencies point to the film's lack ofcare in articulating a coherent narrative.

Chapter 2 Thomas E. Warteilberg