MovieChat Forums > Midnight Cowboy (1969) Discussion > Why didnt Joe and Ratso just go to a Hom...

Why didnt Joe and Ratso just go to a Homeless Shelter or a Soup Kitchen?

posted 10 years ago by Tidewatcher
31 replies | jump to latest

That has always bothered me when watching this movie, i live in Pittsburgh,PA and there are a lot of Homeless people and drifters here and there are a lot of Homeless Shelters and Soup Kitchens and Charities for the poor and needy too, Why wouldnt Joe and Ratso just look those kinds of places up in the phone book or ask around and go there to get a free meal or shelter for the night when it got really cold outside? Then return to that abandoned building when they were finished there.

But you always see the poor and Homeless drifting around the Homeless Shelters and Soup Kitchens around here and in every other city and small town too, they always know where they are located and go there to eat and get clothes and a bath or other things, Ratso is not an idiot and would have to be aware of this too, he even had his property of the YMCA stuff that Joe Buck complained about him stealing in his apartment, that says to me that he knew that they could go to places and get help and food instead of starving for food every day like they did.

There is also the The Bowery Mission is a rescue mission located at 227 Bowery between Rivington and Stanton Streets in the Bowery neighborhood of Manhattan, New York City. It provides food, shelter, medical services and employment assistance to poor homeless men, In addition to these services, The Bowery Mission offers a long-term (6-12 month) residential program based on Christian Discipleship, providing homeless men the opportunity to rejoin society as working, contributing members. The Mission was founded in 1879 by the Reverend Albert Gleason Ruliffson and his wife, It was the third rescue mission established in the United States, and the second in New York City, The Mission is currently administered by The Christian Herald Association.

Joe Buck and Ratso Rizzo could have easily gone to a place like this and gotten help and food there too, or to Harlem which has homeless shelters and welfare for the poor and needy, i remember in The 25TH Hour with Edward Norton when his character tells a drug addict that is homeless and needs food to eat to go to Harlem because they have the shelter there that will help him out, so Ratso and Joe could have easily gone there too.

And one last gripe, we never see Joe or Ratso panhandling at all either, most Bums and Homeless people panhandle for money on the sidewalks and on the street corners and make easy money doing this all the time, Ratso should have been a king at this craft, and they never eat out of garbage cans which most Homeless people usually do, another trick that Ratso would have picked up after living on the streets for years.

[–] shipperly-groom 10 years ago

MC is partly a critique of the American Dream (just one of the ways it parallels Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men), and the way many individuals regard achieving some version of it as the only foundation for self respect. Even when they are patently delusional to think they stand a chance of being materially successful, or of 'making it', living in hope of that goal is what at root sustains them.

To Ratso, the dream took the form of Miami, of multitudes of rich widows just asking to be fleeced. For Joe his vision of being a modern frontiers man/ pioneer (like John Wayne's cowboys), became making easy money for sex. His steady dead end job wasn't ever going to give him material wealth, so in pursuit of the dream, he would trade on his assets, like any good entrepreneur. Before he gets there, NY is his land of opportunity, his Miami.

Though both were struggling desperately to survive in NY, in their minds they were on the verge of turning things around. In the narratives they had woven for their lives, they justified their situation as the rags phase of a rags to riches story. Stealing, conning people, selling sex, going hungry, sleeping rough - none of them particularly pleasant ways of getting by, but they allowed J & R agency. Asking for hand outs would be passive, admitting defeat, which would mean they were losers - and they didn't see themselves that way. They preferred delusional dreams to keep them going, rather than taking on the identity of bum, which would be the price of begging, soup kitchens, or hostel beds for the night.

[–] pturman-929-979676 10 years ago

Good reply, shipperly-groom. It's the same reason Joe didn't take a job washing dishes (which if you remember, he was tempted to do). And which obviously would have resulted in less physical hardship but would have voided his whole reason for coming to New York in the first place...

[–] Edward_de_Vere 10 years ago

Both Ratso and Joe were deluded in thinking that they could make it big (or at least get by) as a con artist and a hustler. In Ratso's case, there was also a lot of false bravado and pride in thinking that he could make it on his own as something other than a shoe-shine boy (his father's trade).

[–] agera 10 years ago

I'm going to make a wild guess here that the OP has never been homeless. Lots of homeless people don't just drop out of the workaday grind, they pretty much drop out altogether. Shelters, soup kitchens, etc. represent a kind of structure and authority they really don't cotton to. Same with panhandling. They can live their lives in public yet be invisible. They like it like that.

I know I did.

"I have had singing."

[–] Matthew7819 10 years ago

Thats because most homeless people are either mentally ill, drug addicts or drunks, generally the few that i have encountered fall mainly into these three groups, there are some that were just poor to start off with that managed their money badly, ended up behind in payments and ended up on the streets broke but most of these have family and friends to turn to, too many of the homeless are mentally ill and fall into it because of that, crazy people are not rational, and the drug addicts and drunks usually fall into it because they blow all of their money away on drugs or booze and cannot maintain a residence or normal lifestyle when it catches up to them.

Most Homeless Shelters and Soup Kitchens exist to help and serve the homeless and poor and needy, they give them a place to stay and get free food, a place to go when nobody cares much, instead of just begging on the street for money and food, its smart to seek them out and play by the rules just a little bit, only the idiots or criminal elements of it would reject the help and chance to have food, or the programs that help them get back on their feet again, not trying to be judgemental just sharing my view of it.

[–] Tidewatcher 9 years ago

I have never been homeless before, but my ex girlfriend was when she lived in Gadsden,Alabama with her old fiance, yes a lot of homeless people drop out of the daily grind altogether, and a lot desperately try to find food and shelter and get back to living a normal life again, she and her fiance did, most people dont notice the homeless even when they are begging, its not hard to beg for money or ask for handouts or to spend the morning or evening at a homeless shelter, you do what you have to do to get by and get through each day, Joe and Ratso cheated and stole while others panhandle and beg for money.

I just didnt understand why Ratso being as smart as he was never brought Joe Buck to a homeless shelter or coup kitchen to get a free dinner or blanket or something like that, my mother is from New York and she said that there were shelters and kitchens back in the 1960s, just in the worst neighborhoods and areas and hard to find and get into, but not impossible, the police or phone books would have them listed by street address and name too, not hard to find one in the 1960s and head down there, harder to get subway fare but i would take that route.

I do view Ratso in retrospect as being too proud to go down and stand in line for a free meal surrounded by Bums and Winos, too proud to sleep in a shelter surrounded by them, Joe Buck only viewed himself as being down on his luck and not as being a bum or homeless man, and Joe was ignorant and wouldnt think to seek such a place out, being a dumb Redneck wearing a Cowboy outfit that was trying to make it as a Hustler, Joe was severely out of touch with the real world and he wouldnt think to go to a Soup Kitchen or a Homeless Shelter.

Ratso probably had been to them before but didnt like the fact that such places had rules and nasty bums and people like that around them, stealing what little he had or trying to push him around, being tougher and more violent than Ratso was himself etc, Joe could handle these people easily but wouldnt have the knowledge to search for one, he just doesnt seem like he understands practical matters like how to survive on the streets.

Had Joe not encountered Ratso again he might have wandered around for weeks barely eating and asking people if they were going to eat their crackers in restaurants and diners, getting blowjobs for five bucks or less and barely having money to eat, sleeping on benches and in movie theaters, without Ratso i think that Joe would starve or get arrested for Vagrancy, he wouldnt even think to mug anyone for their wallet despite being strong enough to take one by force and he would eventually have the Police on his case for some reason.

As opposed to Ratso who seems like he can bump into people and lift their wallets at random all day long easily, buy cheap food and meals, sleep in that empty building and ask people for spare change if they have any, Ratso would last for years unless he got really sick like he did in the movie, Joe would run out of tricks and get arrested very quickly by screwing up or hustling in front of the police and end up in jail, which might feed him and help him short term but long term he would never survive unless he became a dishwasher again which he didnt want to do because he was now a professional Hustler by trade and by choice.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (49761343) 9 years ago

Oh, come on, man...is this post a joke?

There were no "homeless shelters" here in NYC in 1969. You know why? Because there was no "homeless crisis" back then. What we had at the time were "bums", for lack of a better word. "Bums" weren't like the homeless of the 1980s, perfectly functional working and middle class people who had lost their jobs and houses overnight and just needed some shelter and aid to get back on their feet. They were very small in number (compared to the thousands of homeless that flooded the streets in the 1980s), exclusively male and had completely dropped out of society, either due to alcoholism or some other problem that made them incapable of living a normal, functional life.

These type of people were technically homeless, but they were more like "drifters" aka tramps, people who had no interest in having a home or reintegrating into society. They were just interested in finding an alley somewhere and drinking and drugging themselves to death. Most of these guys mostly kept to an area of NYC called the Bowery. That was the unofficial place you went to if you fell on "skid row." But, I repeat, there were no "homeless shelters" there, just alleyways, stoops, and SROs (single room occupancies).

From CityLimits:

During the next half century the homeless population encompassed a narrow band of society, its numbers fluctuating as the economy cycled. Various studies across the country painted a similar portrait of the homeless. Out-of-work white males, often plagued by ill health, alcohol or drug addictions, made up for the greatest part of this socially quarantined community. A large majority was still confined to "skid rows" and the Bowery remained New York's homeless hub, where men would be found sleeping in the streets, the subway or tiny, windowless, 90-cents-a-night hotel rooms. Until the decriminalization of public drunkenness in 1966, police stations also became the shelter for hundreds of homeless people on any given night.

http://citylimits.org/2013/03/11/a-brief-history-of-homelessness-in-new-york/

It wasn't until the 1980s when we finally had real homeless shelters, in response to the huge homeless crisis that exploded, thanks to the economy and the release of thousands of mentally ill people from institutions.

This website gives a pretty decent overview of the history of homelessness in NYC: http://citylimits.org/2013/03/11/a-brief-history-of-homelessness-in-new-york/

---
Emojis=💩 Emoticons=

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Tidewatcher 9 years ago

atomicgirl24-894-130281

Oh, come on, man...is this post a joke?

There were no "homeless shelters" here in NYC in 1969. You know why? Because there was no "homeless crisis" back then. What we had at the time were "bums", for lack of a better word. "Bums" weren't like the homeless of the 1980s, perfectly functional working and middle class people who had lost their jobs and houses overnight and just needed some shelter and aid to get back on their feet. They were very small in number (compared to the thousands of homeless that flooded the streets in the 1980s), exclusively male and had completely dropped out of society, either due to alcoholism or some other problem that made them incapable of living a normal, functional life.

These type of people were technically homeless, but they were more like "drifters" aka tramps, people who had no interest in having a home or reintegrating into society. They were just interested in finding an alley somewhere and drinking and drugging themselves to death. Most of these guys mostly kept to an area of NYC called the Bowery. That was the unofficial place you went to if you fell on "skid row." But, I repeat, there were no "homeless shelters" there, just alleyways, stoops, and SROs (single room occupancies).

From CityLimits:

During the next half century the homeless population encompassed a narrow band of society, its numbers fluctuating as the economy cycled. Various studies across the country painted a similar portrait of the homeless. Out-of-work white males, often plagued by ill health, alcohol or drug addictions, made up for the greatest part of this socially quarantined community. A large majority was still confined to "skid rows" and the Bowery remained New York's homeless hub, where men would be found sleeping in the streets, the subway or tiny, windowless, 90-cents-a-night hotel rooms. Until the decriminalization of public drunkenness in 1966, police stations also became the shelter for hundreds of homeless people on any given night.

http://citylimits.org/2013/03/11/a-brief-history-of-homelessness-in-new-york/

It wasn't until the 1980s when we finally had real homeless shelters, in response to the huge homeless crisis that exploded, thanks to the economy and the release of thousands of mentally ill people from institutions.

This website gives a pretty decent overview of the history of homelessness in NYC: http://citylimits.org/2013/03/11/a-brief-history-of-homelessness-in-new-york/

You are just an arrogant know it all teenage bitch, i dont like the way that you responded to my OP or to anyone else, come back when you learn how to behave like a mature adult woman that has class and manners, until then dont post here.

[–] mplo (2372) 8 years ago

There always was homelessness here in the United States, but it took a steep increase, partly due to the tanking of the economy, and partly due to the de-institutionalization, which released thousands, if not millions of mentally ill people out onto the streets with no follow-up care. While sticking the mentally ill into the huge human warehouses isn't the answer (Many if not most of the state hospitals have closed, due to being really archaic and brutal.), just dumping them out into the streets to fend for themselves was a very poor way to handle this situation.

[–] Matthew7819 9 years ago

Okay that is your opinion and you might be right to a certain extent, i think that there is a little more to it than that though, a lot more, it was different to be homeless in the 1980s than the 1960s true but they were a problem then too, not just later on.

I dont rely on the words of idiots as a fact of anything, atomicwhore24 clearly is one of those people, she doesnt post facts or proof.

[–] InherentlyYours 9 years ago

In addition to whats been said, I think it's also psychological in the sense that Ratso/Joe getting by without a shelter/soup kitchen, made them feel like they haven't hit rock bottom, which would be more depressing and give them a feeling of hopelessness and resignment.

[–] riddick-11114 8 years ago

Homeless Shelters and Soup Kitchens have rules and structures, that includes no stealing from other people, Ratso stole something from the YMCA as Joe points out, so he did go to a place for poor people before and stole from other poor people prior, most likely Ratso would not have a lot of friends among other Homeless People and Drifters and might have ripped them off or stolen from them, so he wouldnt get a warm welcome, and you have to pay a fee to sleep for a night in most places and Ratso had his own place, it might be good for a free meal but the rules and regulations would be bad for him.

Not to mention there is a lot of violence and fights at homeless shelters, a lot of people dont want to stay there because of that, lots of stealing too, lots of crazy people and lots of rules, Ratso wouldnt fit in there and Joe certantly would not.

I can picture them going once or twice off camera but most places in New York are in Harlem, remember in the 25TH Hour with Edward Norton, the friend of his says that they would eat him alive in Harlem when suggested to go to the shelter there, so its probably a bad neighborhood and a rough area wherever one is to be found, Ratso is small and weak and he wouldnt last, Joe doesnt know the ropes and wouldnt think to go to a place like that on his own either.

So thats the answers, Ratso wouldnt be welcome and Joe wouldnt know enough to go, two idiots but still lovable idiots, it would also kill some of the essence of the movie too, wouldnt fit into the story.

[–] mplo (2372) 7 years ago

A lot of the homeless people don't wish to go into the shelters, or even into subsidized housing projects, because they don't feel safe, as the shelters have all too often attracted criminal elements, which intimidate, prey on, and terrorize other people.

[–] mplo (2372) 7 years ago

Excellent post, riddick-11114. You hit it...right on the head. Thanks.