Understanding Queer Cinema

Sam Cellini

Understanding Queer Cinema

The portrayal of queerness in film has gone through quite the journey since the birth of cinema in the late 19th century to now. To define queerness itself requires an understanding of how the word ‘queer’ has been contextualised throughout history. Originally used to describe something peculiar or abnormal, the word became a derogatory descriptor for homosexuals in the early 20th century. Following the AIDS epidemic, the word was adopted as a non-pejorative by the LGBT+ community as an act of defiance and a way to instil pride in their identity. Today, the word ‘queer’ is commonly used as an umbrella term to describe anyone who doesn’t identify as heterosexual or cisgender. Queer theory, however, does not just revolve around sexuality but also deconstructing socially established norms and challenging dualistic classifications (e.g., male/female, white/non-white) with a critical lens. It acknowledges Foucault’s postmodernist notion that ideas regarding sexuality, gender and other social aspects are ‘constructed rather than pre-existent.’ He argues that things are not just the way they are but rather ‘made the way they are by social norms and practices, by the institutions and discourses that regulate our behaviour, and by the way we regulate ourselves.’ (Danaher, G, Schirato, T, & Webb, J 2000)

Although the label ‘Queer cinema’ emerged during the 1990s, the genre of queer art had been around for decades before, distinguished by its use of vibrant aesthetics and rejection of heteronormative values. Filmmaking has long been used as a form of rebellion to incite political and social change. The earliest example of a pro-gay film, ‘Different from the Others’ was produced in 1919 by Richard Oswald in a fight to help repeal the laws outlawing homosexual acts in Germany (Brown, S 2016). Early European cinema differed from Hollywood in its approach to queer characterisations. Despite anti-gay legislation at the time, gay characters were at least depicted as well-rounded individuals with real emotions and personalities. This wasn’t the case in classical Hollywood cinema, where the Hays censorship code prevented explicitly depicting queer identities. Instead, queer people were given subordinate status and largely represented through gender-based stereotyping, depicting gay men as flamboyant, effeminate and objects of ridicule.  

At a time of censorship in American cinema, the 1969 film Funeral Parade of Roses was released in Japan, the same year as the Stonewall riots in the United States. The Japanese New Wave film, directed by Toshio Matsumoto, follows the protagonist, Eddie, as she navigates the underground gay culture of 1960s Tokyo. Loosely based on the Greek tragedy Oedipus Rex, the film flips the narrative as the transfeminine character Eddie kills her mother and sleeps with her father before ultimately gauging her own eyes out in horror. It’s important to note that the film does not place itself within the modern discussion of gender identity and sexuality. As the current vocabulary used to differentiate between queer identities did not exist at the time, both the female-presenting and male-presenting characters are collectively known as ‘gay-boys’. It is therefore unclear throughout the film whether the characters percieve themselves as gay men, transgender women, drag queens or transvestites – as the lines distinguishing these identities were much more blurred than they are today. The film calls into question our notions of what gender is and whether the collective ‘gay-boy’ identity is regressive in comparison to our contemporary understanding of gender experience. This stems from the fact that the Japanese terms used to describe homosexuality often conflated same-sex desire with transsexuality, an idea reinforced by Japanese media over the years (Mclelland, M 2000). However, it may also call into question the problematic nature of assuming the centrality of western approaches, particularly western identity politics, since the people featured in this film may fit themselves into the world with a different perspective. This is just one of the ways in which the film challenges heteronormativity – by defying the societal pressure that people must fit themselves into a clearly defined binary.

...