The Less Traditional Rom-Com: Imagine Me and You, and But I'm a Cheerleader.

This essay will conduct a genre analysis of the popular film genre romantic comedies (or rom-com for short), specifically looking at the way this genre has chosen to approach the representation of homosexual relationships. This kind of increasing on-screen representation has been widely culturally significant, especially due to the fact that rom-coms are a highly popular genre, appealing to a wide variety of audiences - something that this essay will go into more detail on. The films But I’m a Cheerleader, released in 1999 and Imagine Me and You, released in 2005, will be used as examples of ‘woman meets women’ instead of the traditional ‘boy meets girl’, and as comparisons of how the two time periods approached the idea of presenting an on-screen, explicit homosexual relationship, rather than a subtly implied affair. Other films will also be touched upon briefly throughout this essay.

Romantic comedy films have a long history in which they have evolved and generated several sub-genres within itself.They have been referred to as the cornerstone of Hollywood entertainment (Grindon, 2011). The genre comes with a lot of rite of passage tropes that need to feature within the film, otherwise its status as a romantic comedy is debatable. These tropes include cliches such as the rules of romance, a meet cute/or initial dislike for each other, a misunderstanding, characters with the wrong partners, a make-over or disguise etc. The history of romantic comedies have produced a traceable timeline of romantic comedy cycles, which follows as such - in the 1930’s and the 40’s the “Screwball” romantic comedy; the 50’s had “Sex Comedies”; the 70’s introduced the “Radical Rom-Com”; 80’s and 90’s offered what is called the “Ephronesque turn” into the mainstream consciousness. What Ephronesque refers to is a writer and director of the 80’s and 90’s, Nora Ephron - she reverted women back to characters that had to be pursued and ultimately charmed by the male figures in the film. These films also tended to either bypass sex or at least tried to soften the subject. In the present day, the Ephronesque style rom-com is in competition with rom-coms that try and appeal to the male and teenage target audiences with whom downplaying sex would not succeed. Although the romantic comedy traditionally aligns itself with the female audience members (McDonald, 2013), there has been an increase of male oriented romantic comedies, often referred to as “Homme-Coms”, which replace the female central lead with a male perspective. This has lead to the increase of “gross out” comedies from the late 70’s onwards. These films also produced their own tropes that got recycled within this sub-genre such as gross bodily events like urination, excrement, vomit and ejaculation. Abbott and Jermyn (2011, p. 150) argue that “sex is currently frequently portrayed in rom-coms as an immature pasttime, a phase one goes through which explains its greater prevalence in comedies aimed at teenage markets.” This backs up the idea that sex is more visible in teen targeted rom-coms as the gross out humour is usually derived from sex in some form - whether it is during intercourse or just before the characters engage in sexual activities. It also explains why characters in adult based romantic comedies are rarely seen having sex, as it is holds adolescent connotations - although this stigma is slowly being overcome in the more modern romantic comedies being released e.g Friends With Benefits (2011), Crazy Stupid Love (2011), Love & Other Drugs (2010). Although the sexual acts shown in these films are seen as possibly light hearted and still somewhat childish perception of sex, they are still romantic comedies portraying its characters having sex, despite the fact that they aren’t specifically aimed at teenagers.

Whilst this timeline of heterosexual romantic comedy sub-genres was growing and evolving, another strand of rom-com was emerging parallel to the previously discussed cycles. Although homosexuality has featured in cinema since films were born, it was almost never explicit. Given the time these films were being produced, homosexuality was one of three things - something for audiences to poke fun at, for audiences have feelings of benevolence of, or something for audiences to be scared of. Gay male characters have appeared in films in the 30’s and 40’s as the feminine sidekicks to the leading character but this quickly evolved into portraying these types of characters as unstable, emotional wrecks and were often suicidal from the 50’s through to the 70’s (Davies 2010). Culturally, this kind of representation of homosexuality left a lasting impression on the public - it showed heterosexual, and homosexual people, how to feel about homosexuality as it portrayed these incredibly tortured characters struggling to accept themselves.This kind of negative perception of homosexuality within the film industry has meant that attempts to put these kind of relationships on screen have produced varying outcomes. Films have tried to place these relationships within the romantic comedy genre, but given the negative associations that LGBT themes have carried in films, it has meant that the outcomes have often been detrimental to the Gay Rights Movement. For example, in Kissing Jessica Stein (2001) and The Kids Are All Right (2010), both films are are shown to have lesbian leading characters. In Kissing Jessica Stein, the main character is exploring her sexuality with another woman while in The Kids Are All Right, the two women are married and have a family together. So whilst one film depicts a woman taking control of her sexual agency and the other a committed lesbian relationship, at the end of both films the female protagonist ends up with a man. This ending, although disappointing in Kissing Jessica Stein, is somewhat damaging in The Kids Are All Right, as it suggests that a man was able to turn a woman back to heterosexuality through sexual satisfaction. Although not within the rom-com bracket, the bleak ending of Ang Lee’s 2005 film Brokeback Mountain, with the death of one of the main characters (implied to have been beaten to death due to his sexuality), certainly struck a chord in the queer community, as it seems like these films are suggesting that homosexual relationships are destined to fail (McDonald, 2013) or to end in tragedy. This kind of treatment of characters within the LGBT community has also been demonstrated within television series as well, with many lesbian characters ending up with a male character, dying, or becoming pregnant. This has been slowly rectified in recent years though, with a record high of 4.4% (GLAAD 2013) of series regular characters on television being within the LGBT community.

However, this essay now intends to explore two films released during different time periods which successfully attempted to follow the formula dictated for a romantic comedy with a homosexual romance. But I’m a Cheerleader, directed by Jamie Babbit and released in 1999 is a satirical romantic comedy. It is the lesbian equivalent of a teen rom-com and uses gender signifiers (blue for boys, pink for girls; trousers for boys, dresses for girls; sports for boys, housework for girls etc), that we as an audience have already been taught by society, and uses them in such a hyperbolic way that it becomes humourous. The film demonstrates that standard gender roles are something that people are taught (Motschenbacher 2010) - throughout the film, the audience follows Megan (portrayed by Natasha Lyonne) as she is conditioned to conform to the heteronormative standards of society and to categorise (Driver 2007) her sexuality and identify what caused it, rather than accepting that that was how she was born, as well as following her as she is taught how to fulfil the stereotypical roles of a woman - how to care for children and do housework. The colours in the film are also highly saturated in order to communicate to the audience that this is an exaggerated environment that these events are taking place within.  The film treats homosexuality as a perversion so aggressively that the audience is forced to align themselves with the film's main character, Megan (portrayed by Natasha Lyonne) because, generally, the audience is able to recognise that homosexuality is not the disgusting result of a sexual deviant. The film uses the uses the audience's intelligence as the audience, again generally speaking, knows that homosexuality is not something that can be fixed through therapy (an aim that the film's main antagonist, Mary Brown, is trying to perpetuate) and so is able to allow the audience to find humour in the absurd actions of the characters that create obstacles for Megan to overcome. The obvious fake-ness of the film adds to the ludacris theme of righting homosexuality - even the flowers that Mary Brown is gardening are shown to be fake when she pulls one out the ground. The film follows the previously discussed format of teen rom-com, in the sense that the way sexual activities are treated are quite immature. For example when Graham (the Megans eventual lesbian love interest) is introduced, she explains that no inappropriate behaviour means “no fucking”. It is the first instance of swearing in the film and it is very abrupt - it is also very immature way to describe no sexual intercourse. Masturbation is also frequently brought up in the film when a girl is shown to be pleasuring herself with an electric shocker. Megan then also participates in this practise. But I’m a Cheerleader also uses the frequently seen tropes found in rom-coms; the two love interests initially dislike each other/a misunderstanding/Megan displays an embarrassing public gesture to win over Graham at the end of the film etc. Following romantic comedy norm, the two characters end up together against the odds and have a happy ending.

Where But I’m a Cheerleader catered to a younger generation of teens, Imagine Me and You, written and directed by Ol Parker and released in 2005, follows the pattern of romantic comedies aimed at adults. The sex is treated fairly mildly - the most physically close the characters get is kissing, although there is some crude language surrounding the subject, but it is structured in such a way that it is an adults humour rather than that of a teenager. Imagine Me and You is probably the most readily available mainstream romantic comedy featuring a queer love story as the central focus. Part of this may be due to the films cast - the actors appearing in this film are recognised as more household names, such as Piper Perabo, Lena Headey, Matthew Goode and especially Anthony Stewart Head. These easily distinguishable faces in the film were able to reach a wider audience, such as those outwith the LGBT community and didn’t have quite the same knowledge or investment in queer cinema. The 2005 film also follows a recognisable romantic comedy pattern, such as the main character being with the wrong person. But instead of wrong person, in this situation the main character is with the wrong gender as Rachel (Piper Perabo) discovers when she falls in love with the florist at her wedding, Luce (Lena Headey), which also happens to be the characters’ ‘meet cute’, another requirement for rom-coms. In a Q and A with popular queer website AfterEllen, Parker disclosed that he had originally intended to write a heterosexual love story, but after realising that people found that the way the story developed very predictable and changing it thusly, he discovered he was actually writing a lesbian rom-com (AfterEllen 2005). What Imagine Me and You handles well is the fact that none of the characters are demonised for their actions - Heck (Matthew Goode) is still a sympathetic character without the audience rooting for the straight romance to win out in the end. The audience want things between Rachel and Luce to work out whilst simultaneously wanting Heck to have a happy ending - which he does. All the characters receive a happy ending, as is the staple of rom-coms.

In conclusion, given the treatment that LGBT characters have received within the film industry, attempts to portray these types of relationships on screen has varied. Due to the negative connotations of homosexuality early on in film history, this had bled through into filmmakers endeavours to display these relationships in a light-hearted way, often opting for conservative endings. However there are examples of successful romantic comedies featuring a homosexual relationship, as this essay has discussed. But I’m A Cheerleader and Imagine Me and You are examples of romantic comedies aimed at teenagers and at adult audiences, with the differentiating element that these films happen to focus on a homosexual love story.

References

Abbot, S and Jermyn, D., eds. 2008. Falling in Love Again: Romantic Comedy in Contemporary Cinema. London: I.B Tauris.

Davies, S., 2010. Out at the Movies: A History of Gay Cinema. Harpenden: Kamera Books.

Driver, S., 2007. Queer Girls and Popular Culture: Reading, Resisting and Creating Media. New York: Peter Lang.

Dyer, R., 1990. Now You See It: Studies on Lesbian and Gay Film. London: Routledge.  

GLAAD., 2013. Where We Are On T.V. [online]. Page 3., [Viewed 3 April 2014]. Available from: http://www.glaad.org/files/2013WWATV.pdf

Griffiths, R., ed. 2008. Queer Cinema in Europe. UK: Intellect Books.

Grindon, L., 2011. The Hollywood Romantic Comedy: Conventions, History and Controversies. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.

Kitchell, B., 2005. Review of “Imagine Me and You”. [online]. [Viewed 5 April 2014]. Available from: http://www.afterellen.com/review-of-imagine-me-and-you/09/2005/

Maddison, S., 2000. Fags, Hags and Queer Sisters: Gender Dissent and Heterosocial Bonds in Gay Culture. London: MacMillan Press LTD

McDonald, T. J., 2013. Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre. London: Columbia University Press.

Motschenbacher, H., 2010. Language, Gender and Sexual Identity: Poststructuralist Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Needham, G., 2010. Brokeback Mountain. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd

Stuart, J., 2008. Performing Queer Female Identity on Screen: A Critical Analysis of Five Recent Films. USA: McFarland and Co.

Wallace, L., 2009. Lesbianism, Cinema, Space: The Sexual Life of Apartments. UK: Routledge  

Buffy and Gender

From the 1990’s and onwards, the way that we see gender roles on television being portrayed had began to evolve, Gauntlett (2008) explains that this evolution has seen these roles as becoming more and more equal, and gradually losing the stereotypical mould that would typically surround these portrayals of gender. In more recent years, films, television series, music videos and other forms of media has occasionally been praised for challenging the status quo in reference to the depiction of gender roles and for constructing innovative concepts of femininity and masculinity (Gymnich et al. 2010). However Carroll (2015) rebuts this argument by pointing out that gender roles and stereotypes are still reinforced in American Reality television in shows such as The Bachelor, The Millionaire Matchmaker and Keeping Up With the Kardashians, which paint women as brainless, backstabbing and bitchy. Carroll (2015) does go on to say, however, that gender stereotypes are changing in fictional television shows; men are being shown as stay at home dads, single fathers and even poke fun at the old fashioned “macho-man” stereotype. This essay will look specifically at the television series Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1997-2003) and analyse the way in which it deals with gender roles and gender representation.

Building on the previously mentioned progress in representation in the 1990’s, O’Brien (2008) states that by the 1980’s and 90’s, women’s sexualities were being shown as more prominent and independent and no longer dependent on a man’s approval. O’Brien (2008, p. 376) says, “Gone were the pearls and knee length skirts of the 1950’s and 60’s: in came stiletto heels, miniskirts and belly-button baring t-shirts in popular television series such as [...] Buffy the Vampire Slayer.” The whole point of casting Sarah Michelle Gellar as Buffy is because of the way she looks - she is small, slim, blonde and, at a glance, is typically everything a “badass heroine” is not. Something that the show acknowledges and uses as a source of comedy.            

Buffy the Vampire Slayer is no stranger to the practise of poking fun at gender roles, often parodying these ideas (Wilcox and Lavery 2002). Xander Harris is Buffy’s long time admirer turned sidekick, and is the show’s resident camp comedy provider. He struggles intensely with the macho stereotypes placed on men, as he is an archetype of the new 1990’s masculinity. Wilcox and Lavery (2002) go on to explain that Xander navigates his role as Buffy’s resident handmaiden to her vampire slayer. This gender reversal is shown frequently throughout Buffy’s run, and not just in Xander. In Angel, he takes on the two roles most commonly associated with women: the spectacularized, eroticised body and the traumatized body (Levine and Parks 2007). Of all the bodies in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, it is Angel’s body which is the most displayed and eroticised, reversing the norm of the male gaze on female bodies in media. Angel’s body is fetishized by the camera in a way that Buffy’s (and the other female characters on the show) is not (Levine and Parks 2007).

Overall, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, is a show which embodies and embraces the change in gender roles from the 1990’s onwards. From the strength of Buffy, to the campness of Xander and the fetishization of Angel, Buffy the Vampire Slayer turns the concept of gender roles and representation on its head.

References

GAUNTLETT, D., 2008. Media, Gender and Identity: An Introduction. New York: Routledge.

GYMNICH, M., RUHL, K., SCHEUNEMANN, K., 2010. Gendered (re)visions: Constructions of Gender in Audiovisual Media. Germany: Bonn University Press.

CARROLL, J., 2015. Sexuality Now: Embracing Diversity. Canada: Cengage Learning.

O’BRIEN, J., 2008. Encyclopedia of Gender and Society. California: Sage Publications.

WILCOX, R., LAVERY, D., 2002. Fighting the Forces: What’s at Stake in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

LEVINE, E., PARKS, L., 2007. Undead TV: Essays on Buffy the Vampire Slayer. USA: Duke University Press.

A Close Reading of Cloud Nine

Cloud Nine is a 1979 play by Caryl Churchill which explores the parallel between colonial and sexual oppression. She does this by purposefully taking gender and racial stereotypes and overturning them, using cross-gender and even cross-racial casting (Seal 2012). At the time, two large movements in Britain were gaining momentum; the gay rights movement and the feminist movement, both of which would have impacted Churchill’s writing. Churchill has been praised for Cloud Nine and her ability to capture the attitudes of the time, using these social movements as well as the confusion of a fast changing society (Ashton and Diamond 2009). Through a close reading of most of the characters, this essay aims to show the effects of the various forms of oppression they endure.

Clive is the resident patriarch, stating in his opening lines, “I am father to the natives here, and father to my family so dear.” (p. 1) and is the middle man between the parallel of colonial and sexual oppression. He begins at the top of the racial and family hierarchy, but throughout act one, his status begins to diminish. He does not seem to recognise his own hypocrisy; he asks his wife to be faithful to him and yet he himself aggressively makes sexual advances after another woman.  Clive is constantly instructing the other characters throughout act one to either enter or exit, forcing the other characters to be in a continual state of adapting to new circumstances. His unwavering belief in these patriarchal structures means that these beliefs are forced upon the women and children in his home. Churchill includes notes on how to cast specific characters in the copies of Cloud Nine, which reflects heavily on the themes she is trying to portray. The idea of a quest for an identity is brought up when taken into account the gender-bending cross-casting of some of the characters (Stanton and Banham 1996). Betty, Clives wife, is cast as a man, and in her introduction to the audience says, “I am a man’s creation you see, What men want, I want to be.” (p. 1) enforcing the idea that femininity is a male creation. Diamond (2003, p. 87)  argues, “Betty, the male centered, male subservient angel of the house, is literally man made.” Clives daughter, Victoria, isn’t even cast as a person in act one and is instead substituted by a doll, adhering to the classic Victorian patriarchal beliefs of young children, especially girls, to be seen and not heard. This is taken to the absolute extreme by casting her as an inanimate object. Clives son, Edward, is cast as a woman, highlighting Clives futile attempts to impose traditional masculinity upon his son, who is shown to have a penchant for playing with his sisters dolls and his inability to throw straight.   

The sexuality of individuals, like the bisexual Harry Bagley and the lesbian Ellen, are denied and disputed throughout act one. Characters establish themselves in relation to Clive. Harry hides his homosexuality from him out of fear, as does Edward and Betty tries to resist her feelings for Harry out of loyalty. Ellen tries to clearly state her feelings, much to Betty’s obliviousness (p. 27):

Ellen         I don’t hate you Betty, I love you.

Betty        Harry says we shouldn’t go away. But he says he worships me.

Ellen         I worship you Betty.

Betty        Oh Ellen, you are my only friend.

This is one of the only instances in act one where homosexuality is actively seen on stage. The other relationships are obscured by the casting choices: Harry and Edward’s relationship is changed because Edward is played by a woman, so is visually a heterosexual relationship; Harry and Betty’s relationship, despite Betty being played by a man, is typically heteronormative since Betty is meant to be a woman; this use of cross-gender casting thereby embodying homoerotic desires as conventional heterosexual relationships (Harding 1998). The other display of homosexuality is between Harry and Clive, when Harry makes a pass at him having misunderstood the situation. Having been outed, act one ends with two of the more openly homosexual characters being married together, at the hand of Clive, who strives to maintain the crumbling world he wishes to see by oppressing everything that falls outwith the norm. Marriage is usually used within dramatic comedies to mark the restoration of traditional family values (Ashton in Kohlke and Gutleben 2011), something which Clive would have believed in deeply. Churchill uses the notion of cross-dressing to express the idea of disguise within the characters as a way of life (McIntyre and Buchbinder 1987).

Much like the gender and sexual identity being dictated and oppressed, so is the racial identity of the African characters (McCullough 1996). Joshua is a black servant and yet the actor who is cast to play him must be white, according to Churchills specific casting notes for the play. In his introduction, Joshua says, “My skin is black but oh my soul is white. I hate my tribe. My master is my light. I only live for him As you can see, What white men want is what I want to be.” (p. 2), sharing a similarity for Betty being cast as a man, Joshua is cast as a white actor because that is what Clive wants him to be. His need to separate himself is also heavily reinforced in a later exchange between Joshua and Mrs Saunders, following the flogging of people from a nearby tribe (p. 32):

Mrs Saunders     You don’t mind beating your own people?

Joshua                Not my people, madam.

Mrs Saunders     A different tribe?

Joshua                Bad people.

This kind of determined attitude to remain separate from his roots shows how his identity has been shaped by internalising Clives racism and how he has been oppressed (Kritzer 1991); much like Harry and Ellen’s sexualities, who both express a hatred for their desires in act one. However, Joshua’s attitude begins to change after the revelation that his parents have been killed by British soldiers. Joshua attempts to remain distanced from the incident, refusing to take the day off or to even attend his parents funeral, act one ends with him aiming a gun at Clive; an event that Edward does not try and prevent, despite having seen Joshua in plenty of time to warn his father. This act of betrayal highlights the resentment Edward harbours for his father.

Act two is set technically hundreds of years later, however the characters themselves have only aged by twenty-five years. By doing this, Churchill introduces the idea that the past and present will always be linked (Jenkyns 2006). In act two, colonisation aspect has moved from the British occupation of Africa to the post-colonial presence in Northern Ireland (Patterson 2007). As it is post-colonial, the characters exist in a post-Clive environment; now free from the patriarchal structures imposed upon them, the genders of the actors cast for the characters change, highlighting this freedom and its effects. Both Edward and Betty are performed by their correct respective genders as they both begin to grow into their real selves and discover their sexualities (Patterson 2003), showing a greater sexual freedom.  The only example of a character being cross-gender cast is a little girl called Cathy, Lin’s daughter, who is played by a man. This is used in response to Edwards upbringing. Instead of having traditional values imposed on her, Lin encourages Cathy to play with guns and other “masculine” toys, and doesn’t try to dress her in “feminine” clothing. However, Cathy rebels against this liberated upbringing, insisting that her mother buy her dresses for school. This clearly depicts the issues that arise when thinking about what can be considered as correct behaviour for a girl - or, as in act one, the correct behaviours for a boy.

As the second act is set within “present day” London in the 1970’s, this coincides with the movement of second wave feminism, as well as the gay rights movement. Churchill writes in an introduction to Cloud Nine that more energy in the act stems from the women and homosexuals. She also mentions that the male characters find it difficult to relinquish control - this is personified by Victoria’s husband, Martin. Martin is painted as someone who wants to catch up with the change that is happening around him and is failing to do so. He is confused as he doesn’t know how to deal with his previous need to dominate, as that is something he cannot do any more as the roles of women were rapidly changing (Jenkyns 2006) and the sexual politics were evolving. This is highlighted when, after participating in an orgy with Victoria, Lin and Edward, Martin says, “I was all for the sixties when liberation just meant fucking.” (p. 75). The play ends with a liberated modern time Betty faces her oppressed Victorian self after being scolded by a disappointed Clive who haunts her, where the two embrace as present day Betty comes to terms with herself (Mihaylova 2008).

Churchill used cross-gender and cross-racial casting to explore the similarities between colonial and sexual oppression. She subverted the stereotypes surrounding women, homosexuality and race, which was viewed as controversial, however, this was common for feminist theatre at the time (Coyle et al. 2002). Churchill expresses the ways in which imposing certain ideals on children can be harmful, shown through Edward and Cathy, and subsequently how the notion of embracing gender and sexuality are crushed by the patriarchy.

References

ASHTON, E., DIAMOND, E., 2009. The Cambridge Companion to Caryl Churchill. New York: Cambridge University Press.

COYLE, M., GARSIDE, P., KELSALL, M., PECK, J., 2002. Encyclopaedia of Literature and Criticism. London: Routledge

CHURCHILL, C., 1978. Cloud Nine. London: Pluto Press Ltd. and Joint Stock Theatre Group

DIAMOND, E., 2003. Unmaking Mimesis: Essays on Feminism and Theatre. London: Routledge.

HARDING, J., 1998. Cloud Cover: (Re) Dressing Desire and Comfortable Subversions in Caryl Churchill's Cloud Nine. PMLA. Vol. 133, no. 2. pp. 15

JENKYNS, M., 2006. The Play’s the Thing: Exploring Text in Drama and Therapy. London: Routledge

KOLKE M., GUTLEBEN, C., 2011. Neo-Victorian Families: Gender, Sexual and Cultural Politics. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

KRITZER, A., 1991. The Plays of Caryl Churchill. London: The MacMillan Press

MACINTYRE, M. and BUCHBINDER, D. 1987. Having It Both Ways: Cross-Dressing in Orton's What the Butler Saw and Churchill's Cloud Nine. Journal of Dramatic Theory and Criticism, Vol.2 (no.1), pp. 34.

MCCULLOUGH, C., 1996. Theatre and Europe, 1957-95. Exeter: Intellect Books

MIHAYLOVA, S., 2008. From Gestus to the Abject: Feminist Strategies in Contemporary British and American Radical Theatre. Doctor of Philosophy. Northwestern University.

PATTERSON, M., 2003. Strategies of Political Theatre: Post-War British Playwrights. New York: Cambridge University Press

PATTERSON, M., 2007. The Oxford Guide to Plays. New York: Oxford University Press

SEAL, K., 2012. Gender Politics in Caryl Churchill’s Cloud Nine. [online] India. pp. 203 [viewed 29 November 2014]. Available from: https://www.thecho.in/files/Gender-Politics-In-Caryl-Churchil-s-Cloud-Nine.pdf

STANTON, S., BANHAM, M., 1996. The Cambridge Paperback Guide to Theatre. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Fight Club and Masculinity

Contemporary screen media has seen a significant change in the way that it displays masculinity, which in the past hundred years or so has been seen as being in a recurring state of crisis (Baker 2008). The way that this crisis of masculinity within Hollywood has manifested itself, and the way it is explored, has ranged from a visceral male anger, as seen in films such as Fight Club (1999) and American Psycho (2000) which portray a violent response to the way society expects men to express their masculinity, to movies such as American Beauty (1999), which depicts a more subdued response in its criticism of the feminised, white collar ‘New Man’ (Deakin 2012). Focusing specifically on Fight Club, a film which is centred around a young, white man working in a job he hates, this essay will analyse the way in which it comments on the idea of masculinity in crisis.

The depiction of white, heterosexual men struggling with the perceived threat to conventional masculinity has become more prolific within the arts and popular culture (Gymnich et al. 2010). Gates (2012) explains that the starting point of masculinity descending into crisis can be traced to the rise of second-wave feminism, which began in the 1960s, and the consequent social change spurred on by the empowerment of women. With an increasing number of women leaving the home and entering the workplace - a space which had previously been dominated by men - male dominance was faced with a major challenge. By the 1980s, more and more women were managing to secure high-paying professional and corporate jobs. This apparent rise in the importance of women’s roles resulted in a perceived feeling that the masculine role was becoming more diminished. Observers often associate these masculine anxieties with war; in reference to British masculinity, this crisis goes in hand with the end of the Second World War, when thousands of men returned to a country whose domestic landscape had been changed by the need to operate without them. The traditional spheres of gender, which depict women in the home and men in the workplace, were redefined as women entered the factories in support of the war effort (Genz and Brabon 2009) and it was discovered that women could do the same jobs, and to the same standard of quality, as their male counterparts. McInnes (cited in Gates 2012) points out that attributes which were once celebrated as masculine features, such as strength, rationality and backbone, had now evolved into male downfalls, such as aggression, coldness and an inability to communicate. According to studies which took place during the late 1980s and into the 1990s, the ‘average’ male had come to feel alienated and uneasy within this changed environment, as those masculine qualities that would once have been of benefit to him were now perceived to be outdated and disadvantageous (Slack 2008).

The ‘New Man’ refers to the way in which early 1990s cinema depicted white heterosexual men, who were often displayed on screen as domesticated, feminised and/or paternal figures (Nelmes 2003). The creation of the ‘New Man’ has a direct correlation to the masculine crisis because, in many ways, it is itself the product of this masculine anxiety. The ‘New Man’ was born out of the perception of a change within men’s attitudes to issues such as gender equality, and the way men’s roles in the home were changing, specifically in relation to parenting and the shared responsibility of housekeeping (Slack 2008). The ‘New Man’ stereotype also refers to an increased willingness among men to connect with what were previously perceived to be more typically feminised aspects of the self, such as being in touch with and expressing their emotions. Beyon (cited in Baker 2008, p. 67) attributes the redefinition of masculinity to “changes in employment patterns, loss of the ‘breadwinner’ hegemony and the high profile of feminised ‘New Man’ models, and particularly the loss of masculine ‘rights’.” Ging (2012) further associates the label ‘New Man’ with terms such as ‘gay’ and ‘metrosexual’, which again emphasises the way that the ‘New Man’ has been feminised. The description is now being lumped together with the kind of terminology used to describe homosexual men who have been strongly feminised by society and the media (Cook 2014), and to refer to men who take particular effort in their grooming and physical appearance, both of which are typically seen as feminine qualities.

Fight Club, directed by David Fincher and released in 1999, is a film about masculinity in crisis; it centres around the young, white, American male and the way in which he has become alienated, feminised and frustrated with capitalism and the life he is forced to lead in the late twentieth century (Nelmes 2003). The key theme at the heart of the film focuses on the way that men’s role in society has changed, and how there appears to be a lack of meaning in their lives. This motif is addressed several times throughout the movie, in speeches almost always delivered by the infamous Tyler Durden. In one of his opening speeches to the men of fight club, he states: “We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war... Our Great Depression is our lives.” For these men, fight club is supposed to give its members a task, some purpose and a place in history - to be remembered and thus to have led a meaningful life (Gymnich et al. 2010). The Narrator and the members of the exclusively male fight club, an underground bare knuckle boxing society, are trying to reclaim their lost sense of masculinity through taking part in a brutal display violence and male bonding, as in their day-to-day lives they feel powerless (Kimmel and Aronson 2003). For some critics, the violence in Fight Club serves as a metaphor to represent the inner struggle of men who wish to destroy the new form of masculinity they have come to know before it has a chance to destroy them (Lee cited in Shary 2012).

Eventually the fight club group splinters into a sister organisation, ‘Project Mayhem’, a faction obsessed with anti-capitalism. However, in order to join ‘Project Mayhem’, members of the fight club must endure a series of harsh tests in order to be considered masculine enough to be accepted (Nelmes 2003). The members of ‘Project Mayhem’ attribute much of their loss of masculinity to consumerism and therefore focus their attacks on symbols of corporate culture, such as coffee shop chains. This eventually develops into targeting the buildings of major credit card companies, with the end goal being to erase all debt (Kimmel and Aronson 2003). Fight Club criticises consumerism, depicting it as an ideological entity which is breaking men down, weakening them and domesticating them (Lewis 2002). The Narrator addresses this when he and Tyler are on a bus and he points at a Gucci underwear advertisement showcasing the torso of a muscular looking man wearing a pair of boxer shorts, and asks: “Is that what a man looks like?”. Just before posing this question, The Narrator expresses his pity for men who force themselves to go to the gym every day in order to achieve a specific type of body because that is what Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger decree they should look like.

The Narrator versus Tyler Durden dynamic explores the ‘New Man’ versus anxious male who wants to reclaim his masculinity. The Narrator embodies the domesticated man: he is passive, alienated and without ambition. Tyler, on the other hand, exemplifies the sort of masculinity that rejects the allure of consumerism (Giroux 2003). The Narrator’s crisis of identity is shown in a literal sense throughout the film. At first he adopts various names when attending group therapy sessions for different diseases, and then later on in the film it is revealed that Tyler is his alter ego. This identity crisis is further emphasised when it is pointed out that The Narrator does not even have a name; he is never addressed by a specific title and is even credited as ‘Narrator’ at the end of the film (Ruddell 2014). By contrast, The Narrator’s alter ego has a first and last name, Tyler Durden, which is repeated constantly throughout the film. The Narrator is dissatisfied with his life, he represents the Everyman (Giroux 2003) with his fear of a loss of masculinity. The Narrator has been constructed to be relatable to men, a character who is dissatisfied with his personal and professional life, whose only respite from this unhappy monotony is through his desire to complete the perfect ‘IKEA home’. The Narrator even tries to find a sense of identity through this aim, asking questions such as: “What kind of dining set defines me as a person?”. Essentially, The Narrator's identity is that of a consumer, and that is all (Shary 2012).

For Tyler Durden this dissatisfaction and unhappiness is not applicable, as he was created out of a response to a perceived loss of masculinity and identity. Instead, Tyler is regarded as the ideal in masculine perfection. The Narrator created Tyler to be everything he himself is not, and as a result of this, Tyler’s characteristics are deeply rooted in the traditional perception of macho masculinity (Ruddell 2014). This is highlighted when,  after the reveal that Tyler is a creation of The Narrator, Tyler explains: “All the ways you wish you could be, that’s me. I look like you wanna look, I fuck like you wanna fuck, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways you are not.” Tyler takes steps to help The Narrator reclaim his masculinity, and the beginning of this journey can be pinpointed to when Tyler blows up The Narrator's apartment. The IKEA set that The Narrator had become so obsessed with is destroyed, forcing him to abandon his consumerist lifestyle in search of a more meaningful one, and thus marking the beginning of his quest for an identity (Klemens 2007).

Fight Club also exhibits its fear of a loss of masculinity through its relationship with its female characters, as well as in the representation of the male body throughout the film. The singular female character in the film, Marla Singer, is, in The Narrator's eyes, the source of all his problems. She ruins the group therapy sessions he attends at the beginning of the film for him, and she drives a wedge between The Narrator and Tyler when she strikes up a sexual relationship with Tyler. As the The Narrator explains: “She ruined everything.” The narrative deliberately makes Marla - and the sexual threat that she represents - key to the masculine identity crisis (Wager 2009). This highlights the threat women appear to pose to men, in the sense that they are making men replaceable: entering the workplace, earning the breadwinner title etc. In fact, Marla represents the male fear of castration, a theme which runs throughout Fight Club (Nelmes 2003). It is a literal response to the fear of a loss of masculinity: the fear of losing the penis. Castration is presented as the ultimate act in the removal of the masculine identity, and Fight Club takes steps to combat this, through the animalistic aggression of the fight scenes (Packer 2002).   

In a bar, Tyler tells The Narrator that his situation (his destroyed apartment) could be worse: instead, a woman could cut off his penis and throw it out the window - here, Marla is implied to be the woman to whom he refers as the audience does not know any other female characters in the film. In Tyler and Marla’s first meeting in Marla’s apartment, Tyler notices a large dildo on her bedroom drawer. She quickly assures him, although mockingly, that it does not pose a threat to him (Kuhn and Rubin 2009). It does, however, because it shows that men could be perceived as replaceable, not only by women in the workplace but by dildoes in the bedroom. The film draws upon these phallic images in order to suggest the notion of masculine vulnerability, and Tyler’s response to this is to reclaim his manhood through various acts of rebellion, such as inserting images of penises into family films at the cinema; urinating into the soup of rich customers at a restaurant; and threatening the chief of police at the head of the ‘Project Mayhem’ investigation by targeting the chief’s testicles (Gymnich et al. 2010). Castration is a fate that almost befalls The Narrator, which would be fitting as he represents the feminised ‘New Man’. Tyler describes his generation as men who have lost their masculinities, and attributes this to the women in their lives and the absent father figures: “We are a generation of men raised by women.” He blames women for the feminisation of the men of his generation and, by extension, for the loss of their masculine identity (Rehling 2010).    

The men in Fight Club seek to reclaim their bodies and their masculinities from the threat of castration (figuratively and literally) from women, and to free themselves from the consumerist culture that has surrounded them. They do this through fighting with each other, inflicting their bodies with cuts, bruises and broken bones which have historically been perceived as badge of manliness (Armstrong 2014). “The wounded male body is stylised as an icon of the crisis of masculinity and creates a bond between the members.” (Gymnich et al. 2010, p. 51). By marking their bodies with scars and imperfections, the men strive to reject the ideal of the perfect body which has been imposed upon them, such as the unscarred, flawless and faceless male model of the Gucci underwear bus advertisement that The Narrator and Tyler mock. The implication is that such self-inflicted pain offers the men a way to re-establish their autonomy over their bodies and “break out of the chains of a commodity culture that has reduced masculinity to an image that can be bought or sold.” (Rehling 2010, p. 85). Tyler embodies this idea; he is consistently shown as bloodied, beaten, greasy, dirty etc., but also within a powerful context: the camera often points up towards him, which puts him in a position of power. At one point, the film draws a contrast between the idealised masculine body (Tyler) and the flawless, consumer culture-driven ‘New Man’ Gucci model seen from the bus. Tyler is framed in the exact same pose as the model in the advertisement, although with Tyler in the bruised aftermath of a fight he has just won (Baker 2008).

In conclusion, Fight Club, in common with many films released during the same period and even today, showcases a specific response to the way that masculinity and male identity has been challenged. This crisis of masculinity is shown as a real anxiety within Fight Club, and is depicted through themes such as loss of purpose, the impact of consumer culture, what it means to be a man and the threat posed by women to the male identity. This is explored through the relationship between ‘The Narrator’ and his alter-ego Tyler Durden, which, when analysed, represents the ‘New Man’ and his quest for a masculine identity.  

References

ARMSTRONG, J., 2014. Experimental Fiction: An Introduction for Readers and Writers. London: Bloomsbury.

BAKER, B., 2008. Masculinity in Fiction and Film: Representing Men in Popular Genres, 1945-2000. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.

COOK, M., 2014. Queer Domesticities: Homosexuality and Home Life in Twentieth-Century London. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

DEAKIN, P., 2012. Masculine Identity Crisis in Hollywood’s Fin De Millennium Cinema. Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities thesis ed. University of Manchester.

GATES, P., 2012. Detecting Men: Masculinity and the Hollywood Detective Film. Albany: State University of New York Press.

GENZ, S., BRABON, B., 2009. Postfeminism: Cultural Texts and Theories. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

GING, D., 2012. Men and Masculinities in Irish Cinema. Ireland: Palgrave Macmillan.

GIROUX, H., 2003. Public Spaces, Private Lives: Democracy Beyond 9/11. USA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

GYMNICH, M., RUHL, K., SCHEUNEMANN, K., 2010. Gendered (re)visions: Constructions of Gender in Audiovisual Media. Germany: V&R Unipress.

KIMMEL , M., ARONSON, A., 2003. Men and Masculinities: A Social, Cultural, and Historical Encyclopedia. California: ABC-CLIO, Inc.

KLEMENS, N., 2007. IKEA Boys and Terrorists: Fight Club in the Light of 9/11. Germany: GRIN Verlag.

KUHN, C., RUBIN, L., 2009. Reading Chuck Palahniuk: American Monsters and Literary Mayhem. New York: Routledge.

LEWIS, J., 2002. The End of Cinema as We Know It: American Film in the Nineties. London: Pluto Press.

NELMS, J., 2003. An Introduction to Film Studies. New York: Routledge.

PACKER, S., 2002. Dreams in Myth, Medicine and Movies. USA: Praeger Publishers.

REHLING, N., 2010. Extra-Ordinary Men: White Heterosexual Masculinity and Contemporary Popular Cinema. UK: Lexington Books.

RUDDELL, C., 2014. The Besieged Ego: Doppelgangers and Split Identity on Screen. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

SHARY, T., 2012. Millennial Masculinity: Men in Contemporary American Cinema. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

SLACK, N., 2008. A Cinema of White Masculine Crisis: Race and Gender in Contemporary British Film. Doctor of Philosophy thesis ed. University of Sussex.

WAGER, J., 2009. Dames in the Driver’s Seat: Rereading Film Noir. Austin: University of Texas Press.