I have a feeling that I’m not going to be drinking the negativity and social observations provided by our textbook, The Celluloid Closet. I can agree with the idea that there could be subtext, but the book tends to take context and throw it into the victimization of an entire group. Movies are not entertainment, characters do not somehow drive plot, and character portrayals are precise examples of the world around us!The idea of homosexuality first appeared on the screen as an unseen danger, a reflection of our fears about the perils of tampering with male and female roles.
—The Celluloid Closet, pg. 6.
The “Sissy” character is supposed to be a sexist character in that a male has taken on female characteristics and is now deemed “less than male.” I’m sure that there are numerous examples to support this but our film, The Kid Brother, does not seem to play out that theme. As the youngest of three boys, the kid brother completes the traditional “female” tasks, since there is no mother figure. However, he does not complete them in the traditional way and applies his brain to create new ways to do dishes and wash and hang laundry. He is proven to be ingenious and is obviously the hero in all of the escapades. Technically, he is supposed to be far younger than the actor portraying him, thus the title “The Kid Brother.” The film plays out like a rite-of-passage film, where the son must prove himself and does so by the end of the film.
In our reading there is a scene where the older brothers believe that there is a woman behind a curtain. The reality is that it is the younger brother. Both older brothers try to woo the lass and when the “truth” is revealed they chase their brother with intent to beat him up. They do not accomplish the task because, once again, the younger brother outsmarts the older two. The Celluloid Closet presents this scene as an example of the two brothers molesting the guest behind the curtain, then when they discover that the person is not a female, they fly into a homophobic rage and must regain their “masculinity” by beating up the brother. I disagree. They were simply duped and upset by the fact. Not being overly intelligent, they reacted in the manner that made sense to them, use brute strength.
One could be “positive” and say that he completed his rite-of-passage using his “natural” skills. He did not have to become a dull, muscle head and in the combat between the villains he was victorious based on his quick thinking not his muscles. Quibble if you must … however, I find it ironic that the example of the negative little sissy was heroic from start to finish. Granted, he beat up the cretin that was harassing him from the start of the film … but even a sissy can get mad and use his manicured fists! Who are we to determine what defines a sissy or not? With a G perspective … Class #2 is over.
The Tranny—I can’t believe she snuck by last week unnoticed and maybe she was not as “fabulous” as she was last night. I must compliment her on the fashionable bob-wig and the smart lavender outfit with matching jewel encrusted nails. Dare I say that she was very demure last night, yes, I will. My only advice would be to make sure the wig covered the “natural” color underneath. Projected Antagonist: Seems at peace with everyone … this may change!
Screened: The Kid Brother
Next Week: Somewhere Over the Rainbow. Screening: The Wizard of Oz (Jack Haley, Jr., 1939) plus clips from films featuring Agnes Moorehead (and others?). Required Reading: Patricia White’s “Supporting Character: The Queer Career of Agnes Moorehead”
