Kelly Blog 9

Kelly Gordon Blog # 9
1) Throughout the 20^th century, gay oppression fluctuated from decade to decade. The movies and film productions during this time reflect the level of acceptance, or rather the rejection, of such lifestyles. Before the 1920s, gay and lesbian characters in films were near impossible to find: “People who were bold enough to consider themselves gay and lesbian existed either behind locked doors or in the most ghettoized sub areas of the population.” (Barrios, 15) Because sound was not an option so early in the age, the few silent films that did address homosexuals were filled with subtle insinuations that a character might be gay. Mannerisms were certainly responsible for any revelations or implications: a flower in the breast pocket of a man’s suit, a minute mustache, the springy handkerchief. Lesbian giveaways were jackets and ties, masculine hairstyles, and the smoking of a cigar. Gender confusion was also popular in this age. It’s easier to concentrate on the visual differences between a man and a woman, along with their mannerisms, in silent films because the things they say and the way they say them cannot be interpreted by the audience. Charlie Chaplan’s famous silent films were responsible for most of the queer films before the 1920s. Additionally in the teens, women dressed as men was thoroughly accepted as interesting comedy, however, a double standard existed that prevented the same entertainment to arrive from a man dressed as a woman.

Contrastingly, the 1920s brought an era dedicated to the enjoyment of life and all of its luxuries. Alcohol and sex were newly discovered activities used to incite entertainment among the masses; with flapper girls and the boom in the economy, sex and personal pleasure were no strangers to moviegoers. Because of the state of America and its culture at the time, more homosexually provocative films were accepted and enjoyed by audiences than in the teens: “Some movies don’t appear to have a straight bone in their bodies.” (Barrios, 24) Same-sex couples were still rarely depicted, but characters maintained extremely effeminate portrayals that couldn’t possibly leave the audience guessing. Sexuality was a generally popular topic during this time, and it was no stranger to the cinema: “So it was also with some of the portrayals of gay/effeminate/sissified insert-adjective-here characters who started appearing onscreen in the mid-twenties.” (Barrios, 27) In 1927, audiences even had the pleasure of viewing the first on screen male kiss. In Wings, although the characters are in a very dramatic situation whereupon one falls to his demise, a great achievement has come about in Hollywood cinema. A same-sex kiss has occurred, and the people of America have witnessed it. You can only imagine the future of film as sound makes its bearing.

As we dive into the late 20s and 1930s, sound becomes a great tool for the directors, actors, and producers in the filmmaking world. Now effeminate actors are able to adopt a more feminine voice and manner of speaking in order to convey their sexuality. Contrastingly, sound also becomes a challenge for many homosexual actors playing heterosexual roles. Voice pitch and tone become a new aspect of the acting world that actors, directors, and producers now have to take into account. Essentially, sound revolutionized the world of Hollywood. Words began to have a specific connotation to them: “By 1929 the word lavender, like fairy or pansy, had one principal connotation. (Gay was also in use at that time, but not as widespread as these.)” (Barrios, 40) Sound also enabled Hollywood to go too far. People began objecting to the morals in films concerning alternative sexuality. In mid-1934, the Motion Picture Production Code and the Roman Catholic Legion of Decency created a barrier for films and their context. The Production Code Administration crackdown prevented anything “indecent” or “immoral” from reaching the red carpet. As a buildup since 1929, the code existed to as a strict and rigorous way to censor the American public from gay scripts: “The movies, this reasoning continues, were as shielded from gay forces as the rest of “normal” America; only a few slight hints of it crept in here and there to taint the respectability of clean pictures. Not until somewhere in the mid-1990s was there any sort of public (or cinematic) acceptance of it.” (Barrios, 59) With the code still loose in 1933, many lesbian and gay characters that were portrayed were used by conservatives as reasoning to create a stricter code.

In the 1940’s, the strictness of the code ensured that men and women depicting a homosexual disposition reached a pitiful demise by the end of the film. As seen in The Razor’s Edge (1946), House of Horrors (1946), and Rope (1948) shows the suffering of characters depicting homosexual qualities. Their oppression became a part of the plots -- whether or not this was a conscious intention is unknown. In a post-code world homosexuals were considered bad, and bad people must be punished. Thus many movies ended with the homosexual character or the character portraying homosexual mannerisms dead.

A decade later, in a time of post-war prosperity, despite the many injustices occurring, people maintained their positive outlook. In liberal cities, people even began discussing the need for oppression of the homosexuals to end and liberal equality to triumph. Concerns about what was on the film screens began to diminish as more important issues took center stage. For example, in the film Caged (1950), the MPAA allowed for intense homoerotic tension between two of the main female characters claiming that it was simply a reference to their friendship. In Johnny Guitar (1954), the women appear more masculine than the men as they provide for the main physical conflict throughout the film. Emma is dead-set on seeing Vienna dead. At Vienna’s hanging, the men refuse to follow through and Emma is forced to take the masculine role and attempt to kill Vienna. Of course Joan Crawford is saved just in time by her male counterpart who mainly listens to whatever she says – similar to the way a dog follows directions from its owner. The 1950s really allowed for a change up in roles of gender and masculinity/femininity. In 1955, teen culture emerged. Along with this era came the days of Elvis Priesley and drive-in movies. Sex exploded in the teenage film culture because at that age, hormones must be satisfied or else attention spans waver.

Again in the 60s, homosexuality on film became was difficult to find: “The sex in sixties comedy was disingenuous from the word go, gay sexuality most of all. Lesbians did not exist in this world, and male gayness served most conspicuously to highlight the red bloodedness of the straight heroes out for a conquest. Sometimes homosexuality would serve as a cheap disguise assumed by the hero, while at other times it was given over to supporting characters, expendable weaklings unworthy of penetrating the heroine’s enameled façade.” (Barrios, 275) Doris Day took the screen and altered the view of a once good girl into a glossed-up Barbie who was motivated by sex. The sixties were a liberal era for the younger generation of the time, and the movie industry took advantage of that. It was a time of change and confusion for our government, politics, social norms, and expectations as a country.

The existence of gay cinema generally changed along with the liberal/conservative fluctuations of the eras. The fifties involved looser reigns on the film industry while the 30s disabled their creativity and freedom to produce whatever type of film they wanted. Since the 1990s, however, portrayals of gay characters on film and even homosexual relationships have been much more accepted. Many recent TV shows and movies show positive portrayals of homosexuals where they are accepted in the society they are depicted in: “Will and Grace”, “The L Word”, and “Ellen.”

2)
The Uninvited (1944) managed to squeeze past the Legion of Decency’s radar. After the film was released, it raised question among the public due to its “erotic or esoteric implications.” Every scene that caused an issue among was centered on Miss Holloway and Mary Meredith’s relationship: “Miss Holloway gazes at Mary’s portrait and apostrophizes her beauty thus, ‘…her radiant hair, milk white skin, charm…’ and says something to the effect that it was in this room ‘…that the two of us dreamed and planned our lives…what we would do together.” (Barrios, 192) Miss Holloway’s character is more masculine while Mary’s character is very feminine. This plays into the whole butch/femme stereotypes that arise later in the century. Lesbians accepted the film with gaiety. They viewed the film as a support system; it was both something they could relate to and something that explained their inner emotions to the rest of the public. This film helped individuals identify and liberate their sexuality even though they were still in an oppressive environment. Viewers became more aware of their own desires, needs, and the lesbian community.

In Calamity Jane (1953) starring Doris Day, Calamity is a severely masculine woman living in the Wild West. She lives in an isolated cabin and has zero interaction with any female characters until an extremely beautiful “actress” by the name of Kate is brought to town to entertain the men by singing and dancing on stage. In reality, Kate is merely an actress’s maid and only impersonates the actress in order to have a true adventure. Kate helps Calamity to become a woman by providing “a woman’s touch.” After a couple of songs, Calamity is dressed up in the appropriate women’s attire and all of a sudden, the man who she doesn’t know she’s been in love with all these years marries her. Simultaneously, Kate gets married, and they all live happily ever after. Essentially, the point of the story is that Calamity’s unnatural masculinity is cured when a woman comes into her life and explains and of the things she’s supposed to find interest in, all the ways she’s supposed to dress, and all the way she’s supposed to speak. The audience then receives the idea that it’s unnatural and needs to be corrected if a woman is a tomboy or more masculine than she is feminine. For some reason, that woman is seen as less of a woman because of her attire, manner of speaking, and hobbies. All of this can be corrected however, with “a woman’s touch.” This also insinuates that homosexuality can be “cured” or “fixed” if done the right way.

In The Children’s Hour (1961), Audrey Hepburn and Shirley McLaine portray two school teachers who are accused of being lesbians by one of their students. Upon Audrey’s engagement, Shirley confesses her true love for Audrey: “I've been telling myself that since the night I heard the child say it. I lie in bed night after night praying that it isn't true. But I know about it now. It's there. I don't know how, I don't know why. But I did love you! I do love you! I resented your plans to marry. Maybe because I wanted you. Maybe I've wanted you all these years. I couldn't call it by name before, but maybe it's been there since I first knew you.” Shirley’s character eventually commits suicide. Her body is discovered dangling from a rope by Audrey. This film suggests that it’s disgusting, immoral, and inhuman to be gay. It suggests that it’s essentially evil to be homosexual, and evil people must be punished. The punishment that Shirley’s character receives is her suicide. The audience is then taught to believe that gay people are innately evil and should be punished. It encourages harmful actions and disrespect towards homosexuals. This film didn’t intend to support homophobia, but its intention was most likely overlooked by an audience that had been “protected” from gay cinema for years due to the Production Code Association.

3)

This image of two boys from Iran who were hanged for being gay is, obviously, my example of a negative portrayal of homosexuality. The two boys themselves have done nothing wrong to earn a negative portrayal, but the fact that they were killed for their sexual preference is the worst possible thing that could be done. For supporters of this awful crime, this image probably incites pleasure and victory over a "degenerate" group of people; a group of people who have chosen to be gay against the wishes of God (depending on their religion). For individuals who condone homosexuality, this picture inspires anger towards those who don't accept homosexuals. Why would someone commit such a hate crime simply because two people chose to live their life in a different way -- a way that harmed no one. Along with Barrios' theory and the theory explained in The Celluloid Closet, gay people are sinners and sinners must be punished. This was depicted through Hollywood films that commonly have gay or lesbian characters who die by the end of the film. This image is affective art: it inspires people in one of two ways. Either they become angry with the decision of those individuals to commit a hate crime or it inspires people to feel as if they've conquered the gay community that "deserves" to be punished.

This image inspires friendship, loyalty, and trust. It is affective art that shows how liberal and accepting our culture has become -- or is attempting to become. This is an example of positive homosexual art. The bonded hands could be brothers, a father and son, or two best friends. It is, however, intended to depict a homosexual couple grasping at each other for protection from the evils of an unaccepting world. In many of the films that Barrios discusses, simple hand-holding was enough to cause an issue with the MPAA. Today, many more people accept this action. The message is that two hands, of any kind, can hold each other and depend on each other the same way that a man and woman's hands can. It suggests equality among a group of people who have chosen an "alternative lifestyle" along with a community that has chosen a heterosexual lifestyle.