Fatema, post 9

Fatema Kermalli

1) Beginning all the way from Algie, the Miner (1912), gays were portrayed as “sissies”, with all the mannerisms identifiable with them to this day: “the dandified air, fluttering hands, pursed and apparently rouged lips, sly smile, and eyes that he bats while fondling the barrel of a pistol” (17). Such representation may well be attributed to the psychiatric myth prevalent in the day that gay women were men trapped in female bodies (16)… or perhaps, that gay men were women trapped in male bodies. Though different, these characters were nonetheless accepted within their own circles, as is depicted in The Matinee Idol (1928) where the “sissy” Barrymaine is valued by his own theatrical family (30).

This depiction became even more prevalent due the advent of sound in movies, such as in The Broadway Melody (1929): “for audiences to hear the wardrobe woman’s steely tones juxtaposed with the breathy outrage and harrumphing of the costume designer was a whole different and audible proposition” (38). Musicals, which arose from the sudden ability to utilize sound within the films, were another place where gays could thrive, especially considering the fact that the stereotype for such a character was being “excessively aesthetic” anyway (31),

According to Barrios, such depictions were “fairly matter-of-fact” (43), which would make sense since the ideas of gays at the time were actually rooted in reality and the idea at the time that they were simply trapped in the body of the opposite sex made them less foreign and different. Still, difference arouses curiosity… which accounts for the Dude Wrangler ads that drew attention to the “pansy” aspect of the story (52).

Adding sound, however, also erased any illusion or misunderstanding of what was intended in the films, thus making some people uncomfortable (56). The code which came into existence (though it was not strong) may be seen as a result of this. It in turn, along with the fact of the depression, made for starker, franker, and more subtle portrayals of gays in the media (60). This change can be seen in such films as The Sign of the Cross with its “alluring” (not at all comical) lesbian “Naked Moon” dance (87) in which the characters fulfill a serious role, and not one of a jester. This did not happen all at once, of course, and the comical genres of the past did still exist, but they were now coupled with a new, more real way of looking at gays. The change came about as a result of political forces: the national mood resulting from the country’s bad economic state, as well as the protesting of certain groups against the content of some films.

Looking at the films that address homosexuality, it is possible to find many such directors, actors, and actresses that may be said to have played a role in their own depictions on screen. One such example of this would be The Sports Parade (76-8). Overall, however, the trend seems to follow the current of politics. The people themselves, for most of history, didn’t actually stand up in opposition to the codes; they didn’t go against the current. What they did do was make sure the current didn’t run them down, by passing depictions of gays and lesbians through the codes themselves. The fact that these had to actually escape the view of those such as Hays ensured that the inclusion of gays would be subtle… and appear normal (because they could not stand out). An example exists in the scene in Cavalcade where “a pair of women… sit dreamily, one taking the other’s hand. The camera then picks up one young man clasping a slave bracelet onto the wrist of his young male partner” (98).

The year 1933 saw the return of a few more “womanly” men, such as Ernest in Our Betters (100) and certain cartoon characters, due to the high expectations for the country that came along with Roosevelt’s presidency (95). Following this, however, an even harder Code Administration struck due to the Legion of Decency, which was formed in response to the growth of explicitness in the movies (125). Barrios states that, indeed, “In some ways they were abusing their freedoms…pushing to see just how much they can get away with” (135). This strict censorship of material may be said to have helped ensure that the portrayal of gays stayed on the path of having a more serious, integrated role that was necessary in order to pass such characters through the Legion of Decency.

Once again, here, it is politics that is said to affect the movies. “Those insiders wishing or needing to locate [gays] in the movies would… need to work quite a bit harder” due to the political action of a group of Christians. This fact is also proven by the fact that pop culture at this time (and before) mirrored the lives of real gay people, both having to be hidden at the same time (146). The code had thus already seen to it that life would be more like movies… both being influenced by the same politics. If gays had taken their own strides in another direction, the two would not be the same.

The depictions of homosexuals were thus shaped through the need to be underground, as can be seen in the changes that were made to various films in order to get past the code. For example: “a costume designer shows a fabric… and he murmurs the surefire pansy signal, ‘Divine, simply divine!’” or the man in Bringing Up Baby who says, “I just went gay…I’m sitting in the middle of 42^nd Street, waiting for a bus!’”, 42^nd Street being “the primary cruising strip for the city’s male prostitutes” (154-5).

Then came the depiction as “stern women with a more gothic mien, willowy neurotic young men and acerbic, sexually ambiguous sophisticates” (168). Gays began appearing in film noir and having “scarier” roles. This may have been a result of the new way of understanding homosexuals. No longer were they simply in the wrong body; now, more complex questions were being asked, which led to “increased distrust, even demonization” (184-5). Such was the time period during which Rebecca (186) and The Uninvited (190-2) emerged, both showing lesbianism in the sense of one woman almost “owning” another, whether in life or death, due to the amount of attachment and control over them. And of course, in each there is death, for lesbians were not allowed to go uncured and unpunished.

In 1945, Will Hays retired, leaving in his place a new and less strict head of the MPAA (198). This coupled with the fact that filmmakers were learning more and more “tricks” led to more mature portrayals of gays. They were not merely the comics of before, but had an air of superiority. “He “was not a subject for ridicule in most cases. In fact, he did much of the mocking himself” (201). This superiority complex (and the negative portrayal of gays) can probably most clearly be seen in Rope (likely based on the case of Loeb and Leopold) where the two villains try to commit the “perfect murder” (211). Many other movies since then have also followed suit in showing homosexuals to be the evil people, such as Strangers on a Train and All About Eve and Suddenly, Last Summer.

Then in the 1960’s, the tone became a bit more synthetic and condescending towards gays, as can be seen in Stage Mother where the character must be coddled, coaxed, and even lied to (in order to work; 278). They were no longer even appreciated within their own circles; rather, homosexuals were to be pitied and brought back, as seen in A Very Special Favor (290).

Even though the negative portrayals continued, as people became more open in real life, and gays started to fight a bit more and organize, some films did show hope… such as The Gay Deceivers. In it, “there was the indication that maybe there would be a place where two men could live together and share a real, not a mock, relationship” (355).

2) Subtext of matinee idol (29): In its presentation of Barrymaine as an integrated and happy member of the theatrical company (even though he is slighted by others), the movie may be read to advocate the complacency of those who are shunned as outcasts. It promotes the idea of staying in ones “place” where you are safe, and being happy with where you are and what you have; it does not at all bring up the notion of change, or “fighting” against such prejudices. This is similar to the story that Adorno looks at on page 224 and says promotes the adjustment to humiliating conditions by presenting them as comical.

On the contrary, Barrios states on page 43 that even though gays were “used for occasional laughs”, they were usually in on the joke. The fact is, however, that they weren’t always. His manner of writing seems to actually support the subtext of this movie that, in its silence, advocates leaving things just the way they are. He says it was not done with malice (59), yet such portrayals may still be derogatory. Like the character analyzed by Adorno, it seems as though gays are told to accept being laughed at by the fact through the fact that the main character does nothing about it (and the others aren’t punished) and yet he is still shown happy at the end (to justify inaction).

Rebecca 186: The message sent is that lesbians will be punished in some way or another, just as Mrs. Danvers, who still retains a “relationship” with the dead Rebecca through keeping sacred all her things, dies in the burning building Manderly. If one really looks deep at this, the subtext, or message that could be given out here is not to just follow your hear, or love? Mrs. Danvers doesn’t fit in with society (remember that views had changed regarding what caused homosexuality, that made gay people seem even more strange). The message is now to do whatever it takes to be like everyone else, including giving up your love… or else you will come to a sorry end.

Stage mother 278: Here we see that the depiction has once again changed. The gay person is no longer simply funny, nor is he evil. He is almost to be pitied. “Leonard must be a target for the kind of condescension that would become increasingly frequent in the cinema of the 1960s. It’s necessary for Day to coddle him, coax him, and downright lie to him to get him to work” (278). The message being sent here is that of treating such people as children, and indulging them. What’s even more interesting is the last part, “to get him to work”. Reading into this could show that such films actually advocate using others to one’s own benefit, without regard to morality. It sounds as though doing as such to a gay person does not matter at all.

3) Find two contemporary images of a gay or lesbian person—one positive portrayal and one negative—and discuss how the images get their respective points across. Referring to Screened Out and the film The Celluloid Closet, as well as to Adorno and the class material concerning the Nazis, art, depictions of the body, and degeneracy, explain how your selected images can be construed as “positive” or “negative.” Are they “art” or “culture industry products”? How does this context affect their message?

http://www.artmajeur.com/?go=artworks/display_mini_gallery&image_id=15928&login=rafiperez&serie=1&artist_id=1285&mini_gallery_id=1320&disp_m=normal

This is an art image which depicts a couple in a room together, almost embracing. They are close, and not being held apart. The red colors/tones suggest passion between the two subjects, who are near the center and actually bathed in light (as opposed to being obscured in darkness. Because of this, it may be construed to be a positive depiction.

(Another example would be a poster for Brokeback Mountain, which shown the two characters almost "embracing". This would be a culture industry product positively depicting gays in the picture itself)

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250575,00.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHkoZ7ngAM0

This ad is a culture industry product which negatively depicts gays through the fact that being misconstrued as a gay is shown as something horrific and unmanly. In order to rid themselves of such association, the men (aften mistakenly kissing) actually rip out some chest hair (in an act of macho defiance).