San Jose State University SJSU ScholarWorks Master's Theses Master's Theses and Graduate Research Spring 2010 If I Could Choose: Internalized Homophobia of the Queer Cinema Movement James Joseph Flaherty San Jose State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_theses Recommended Citation Flaherty, James Joseph, "If I Could Choose: Internalized Homophobia of the Queer Cinema Movement" (2010). Master's Theses. 3760. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.tqea-hw4y https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_theses/3760 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses and Graduate Research at SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. IF I COULD CHOOSE: INTERNALIZED HOMOPHOBIA OF THE QUEER CINEMA MOVEMENT A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Television, Radio, Film and Theatre San José State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts by James J. Flaherty May 2010 © 2010 James J. Flaherty ALL RIGHTS RESERVED The Designated Thesis Committee Approves the Thesis Titled IF I COULD CHOOSE: INTERNALIZED HOMOPHOBIA OF THE QUEER CINEMA MOVEMENT by James J. Flaherty APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF TELEVISION, FILM, RADIO AND THEATRE SAN JOSÉ STATE UNIVERSITY May 2010 Dr. Alison McKee Department of Television, Film, Radio and Theatre Dr. David Kahn Department of Television, Film, Radio and Theatre Mr. Scott Sublett Department of Television, Film, Radio and Theatre ABSTRACT IF I COULD CHOOSE: INTERNALIZED HOMOPHOBIA OF THE QUEER CINEMA MOVEMENT By James J. Flaherty This thesis offers a critical examination of essentialist and constructionist theories of queer identities, with emphasis focused on portrayals of internalized homophobia in film. The thesis examines three films released at the latter part of the first New Queer Cinema movement (1991 – 2000) – American Beauty (1999), Urbania (2000) and Velvet Goldmine (1998). Using criticisms of Queer as performativity, as theorized by Judith Butler, in addition to the works of Gregory M. Herek, Harry M. Benshoff, Jeffrey Weeks, as well as other theorists and academics, the thesis analyzes the use of characterization, mise-en-scene, and spatial and temporal relationships in these films as consideration for social, cultural, and psychological influences on the development of internalized homophobia in queer identities. The thesis also examines how these identities under discussion may have sustained or bolstered commonly held perceptions, or stereotypes, attributed to the behaviors and mannerisms of homosexual men during the time period. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction I. Variations on a Theme: Social Theories on Queer Identities.............................. 1 II. Butching Up: How Hegemony, Heterosexism and Homophobia Induce Gender Performativity .................................................................................... 11 III. The First New Queer Cinema Movement (1991-2000).................................. 19 IV. Methodology................................................................................................... 23 V. Films for Study................................................................................................. 27 Chapter 2: Structure and Discipline: American Beauty and the State of Suburban Conformity I. Looking Closer: Screenwriter Alan Ball and Life Behind Things .................... 30 II. Character Analysis: Jim and Jim...................................................................... 37 III. Character Analysis: Colonel Frank Fitts, USMC ........................................... 40 Chapter 3: Hear Any Good Stories Lately?: Dissolving Myth and Reality in Urbania I. John Shear and a Study of Controlled Urban Sexuality .................................... 49 II. Character Analysis: Dean................................................................................. 57 Chapter 4: Velvet Goldmine and the Death of Glitter I. Todd Haynes and the Mythology of Gay Style ................................................. 66 II. Character Analysis: Arthur Stuart.................................................................... 73 III. Character Analysis: Brian Slade / Tommy Stone ........................................... 81 Chapter 5: Assessing the Critical Receptions of American Beauty, Urbania and Velvet Goldmine I. A Model For Social Reception: Benshoff’s Assessment of The Talented Mr. Ripley................................................................................... 89 II. American Beauty ............................................................................................. 93 III. Urbania........................................................................................................... 96 IV. Velvet Goldmine.............................................................................................. 99 Chapter 6: Conclusion.................................................................................................... 105 Works Cited .................................................................................................................... 109 v CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION I. Variations on a Theme: Social Theories on Queer Identities In a 1998 interview with The New York Times, Eve Kosofsky Sedgewick, one of the leading Queer theorists of the 1990s, stated that among the social, political and academic problems in accepting Queer theory was the debate that “one cannot understand desire and repression without understanding gender, [and therefore], sexual practice and sexual identity” (Turner 4). Sedgewick, along with Judith Butler and Teresa de Lauretis, laid much of the groundwork for the emerging field of Queer in the 1990s, noting its inextricable place among discussions of politics, desire, sexuality and representation. According to William Turner, author of A Genealogy of Queer Theory, it was de Lauretis who was first credited with use of the term “queer” while describing “her own [personal] intellectual endeavors [in juxtaposition with women’s political issues]” (4). She was questioning the ability of women to represent themselves through a language and conceptual framework created by men, but “in a social and political order, [that took] little account of [them]” (5). As such, Queer owes much of its derivation, if not the majority, to feminist political and scholarly activities as compared to gay political and scholarly activities. Queer is a conceptualization that takes the notion of grounded, centered identities and challenges how society arrives at such identities, all in an effort to question society’s preordainment of specified gender roles and orientation. In a sociological context, Queer describes an “oxymoronic community of difference” (Benshoff 63). The rapidly growing study of persons who self-identify as gay and/or lesbian, bisexual, transsexual, transvestite, drag queen, leather daddy, lipstick 1 lesbian, pansy, fairy, dyke, butch, femme, feminist, asexual, or other non- heteronormative identities, prompted “an [increased] deployment of the [umbrella] term ‘queer’” (Jagose 1). Queer theory “offers methods of imagining difference on its own terms” (Francis 74), yet traditional analytical models only succeed in “[dramatizing] incoherencies in the allegedly stable relations between chromosomal sex, gender and sexual desire” (Jagose 1). Additionally, Queer theorists are credited with “consistently [celebrating] the unformed, inchoate, provisional character [of ‘queer’]” (Turner 9). Queer theory lends itself to the defiance of heteronormative gender and sexual identity standards, and among some theorists, is considered the epitome of authentic resistance and nonconformity. Because the fundamentals of Queer are so diverse and undefined, several philosophical debates have been posited to come to an understanding of “queer.” Queer theorists view conformity as an acceptance of “straight” gender and sexual roles, and largely against the progressive nature of “queer.” By contrast, gay and lesbian studies predominantly involve the analysis of “gay” and “lesbian” social and anthropological models, and is also regarded by Queer theorists as more defined, less amorphous, and thus contradictory to the fluidity and ambiguity of Queer. Queer constitutes a challenge to the foundations of heteronormativity. This is the essence of Queer activism – a defiance, if not an unruly determination, set upon “dismantling the oppressive assumptions of heterocentrist discourse” (Benshoff 64). That which is embraced by Queer theorists is therefore empowered with unacknowledged values otherwise disregarded by what is considered “non-queer.” 2 The History of Sexuality, written by French philosopher and theorist Michel Foucault, is considered among the definitive studies of gender and sexual development, and has been critical to the development of queer and feminist thought. Foucault’s interest in the ordainment of personal truths led to the belief that “individuals governed themselves and each other using the truths that they so derived” (Turner 37). Therefore, personal truths, being unique to the individual, were seen as “an expression of an individual’s psyche” (Sullivan 3). Foucault’s writings on early sexual discourses suggest they were “imbued with age-old delusions, but also with systemic blindnesses” (Foucault 55), stemming from a refusal by doctors and authority