1. NEW QUEER CINEMA: AN INTRODUCTION Michele Aaron ined Wow Quer Cinemas he name sven to «wan f gue lsat Saeunaree Sabo conedaat era hence ii 8 by Rh, Nex Ouse, NOC = rete oat eam eet ose acoso gy aes 1a Snead neo lene tured Oy espn Bing mcdah of rsare ape rt lave ocr of ga eran, ld bes eda ad poplar shan economy i TA wave or maven, ose ofthe arp is of Sundance 1981 and 950 bes urn emi vege 1990, Posen os aye ‘Bony and evon (orm 1992/08 many er Telarc pcly nro Togwes Unter i 990, My Onn Pe dob Gon Van an 1991), Yung Su! Rebels ae fey 190), RSP tlaune tym, 9H Edd (Deccan 191), Rel (Teas furan 191) The Hours and. Tes (Christopher Mane, (Bottana Ti ving End Gres Ara 19) ar wlas work aes La along, Cees Dougherty Sa Fred, fan Greyon and Me ‘Mowe The tsi poured chad ease: rere wraps rem hats ec ohare mas tha She ound Mactan ed ‘omepte’ ce scong to) Haberman pogo seedy ct ined whut Cds the wow oer eos SEERON chess Tir dace carb pe of eating on seal ‘cease nhc eve wo lumina arcs of NO Tse opt heft rl of cepa secs ued y wee oral as tht ge oie the morgaled wo Sng interms of focusing on the lesbian and gay community but on the sub-groups Contained within fe. For example, boc Tongues Untied and Young Sou! Rebels expoce Hack gay male experience (the ltr also offering che rarity of the interracial couple). My Own Private Idaho has male prostitutes for protagonists. The documentary Paris is Burning attends co the gay and transsexual Hispanic and Latino youth of the New York drag ball scene. ‘Second, the Films ae unapologetic about their character aul or, rather, crimes: they eschew poscve imagery. Soom, Poson and The Living End ‘beautify the criminal and (homo}erocicise violence. The gay male couples at fhe cente of Swoon and The Living End revel i thie murderous relation Ships: Kalin’ highly sited cinematography and use of black and white in ‘Swoon tura the film's unacemly events into an exquisite period piece. In 3 central scene, high ange tableau ofthe courtroom i eros-cu with Footage from the original ral upon which che flim s based. As an ‘aliens describes the pais pathology from the stand, a bed upon which they folic, floppy hied and embraced ills the space in front. Arak, on the other hand, poss his main characters a¢ West coast-cool, well groomed despite being on the oad, hot bur preoceupicd. Meanwhile, Hayaes borrows heavily from Jean Genet’ Un Chante’ Amour (1950), especially its aesthetic and erotic charge, in imparting one inmate's sexual obsession for anocherin the dark vaults and lunshaven terrain ofa men's prison. “Third, the fils dely the sanctity of the past, especialy the homophobic past. Edward Ily The Hours and Times and Swoon all revisit historical felationsipe and fmly instat the overlooked homosexual conene, Edward {els of King Edward's homosexual relationship with Gaveston. The Hours and Times develops the erotic dynamic between John Lennon and Brian Epstein, Swoon retells the Leopold and Locb murder case, and, most im portant, Hitchcock's rendison of i in Rope (1948), bur with the homo: esuality of the murderers flly present Fourth the fms frequently defy cinematic convention in terms of form, content and gence, The shorts of Sadie Benning, shot on a Fisher Price Pixel ‘Visio, employ all manner of textual innovation to provide ragged, experi imental but no les confident pices. John Greyson's Zero Patience (1993) oles the unlikely paring of AIDS and the Musical. (A combination which later would find remarkable ieenational success in the Broadway hit Rem.) Indeed, Greyson has been distinguished fr his dislocation of traditional film practic. Julianne Pidduck sees him ae ‘eappropratigg mainstream media" through is use"of split screens and embedded images’ Like other new queer lists he also reappropriates malnsteam gentes and formats (feature length father than just shore), and, utimately,distibutionexhibition channets NQC also incorporates a defiance of the sanctity of mainstem cinema history Just in cate one misses Kalin's swipe at Hitchcock, Swoom restages a scene right out of Rear Window with Jeff and Lisa's romantic dialogue now faking place betwen the male lover. Haynes, in firmly identifying with he ‘outlaw filmmaking of Genet, grounds New Queer Cinema in, well, Old Queer Ginna ~ he uncompromising work of Gent, Fanbndr, Warhol Sales = ther than in he mainstream gangs represeneation, The lak of espace forthe governing des form or contin orcoktec, ded for aliyrood uel hs machin common wih postmodern ct wae tet of posmoderian, as ‘Heme Poo at Rich fa esrb NOC [ithoul there noch oink orem othe ent nd progeson cl qr theory tnd practce, df the aesthsnegen employed by he NGC ime (tf quent appearence tn this book wl ae) fe {lial foundations pomoderiom provider acelran bat often diac ine coment forthe dacson of NQC and at ach il ot be del pon in ‘this Introduction). ° pn Final che ins in anyways defy eth The joyful murderers of Son and The Ling dren sobering fle atch ey way which death ‘th sin se of AIDS Death led ate ictennce pase by the ‘fans the HIV lens of The Ling End insta find the me bom to be “ly erating even died nun Zero Patines the et ici AIDS comes buck ie Tes not sinply hata eno deface characteris hes fi, ba tha i cna theo ore Indeed, ‘qee ands teal nd cll scendancy tte the crcl cont for anderanding te emergence and eration of NQCyand ie oth that ow cm Queeety THERE (Queer, a derogatory term levelled at the non-hetero-seming, was reappro- peated in che late 1980s, early 1990s by its vitims asa defane means of empowermenc echoing black activist’ useof “ager inthe 1960s. Relieving ‘the burden of the titular expansion of LG-B-T> (lesbian, ga, bisexual and transgender), queer's most base function is as an umbrella term or catchall for unig various Forms of nonstraght sexual identity. But it means mach more than this. Queer represents the resiance to, primarily, the normative codes of gender and sexual expression ~ that masculine men sleep with feminine women ~ but slo to the restrictive potential of gay and lesbian sexuality ~ that only men sleep with men, and women sleep wth women. In this way, queer, as aertcl concept, encompasses the non-fixity of gender ‘expression and the non fixity of both seraght and gay sexoality. As Richard Dyer righty reminds us, the contemporary formulation of quer functions in sharp contrast to its pas, ie signifies a fluidity of identity where, historically, «queer represented sn exclusive and fixed sexualy’* To be queer now, them, means 6 he untethered from ‘conveational’ codes of behaviou. At its most ‘expansive and utopian, quer contests (heteo- and homer] normality ‘Asa theoretically lucrative ‘oppositional stance" and the latest walectory of gender theory, quer gained in academic currency throughout the 1990s, ; 5puededoud jenxar #8 Avo ponjen 29 ot oa ns suo 2p Ho yap anss sn 40° pcg Sur ag 0 aes Buguads me pu Hoos uanedde au ayy Vaatog 04:2) 2 HEeA9 25M 240 “POPUL ‘Sr suepeoag vonoss ag. Se uaX2 suOHE essa’) PRUE 7944 EU reg pur [sun09 Jo “aU2u0980 Hoe usa sy oxen ss9anb Jo sH9UNO1284 3 ABH fe 1906 9 2 DE) ue rons, ap 1 ce ang Aiio0soagoydowoy Cieoasurw 48 pooroy st oueyap ssenb wep paraguay 2g sts “dso pos seunut sejadod 0 enu99 mo} 885 aonb 3 ’ [any wewom agent ¥ =s8uBUOP! $50.97 YOREDUINOPY, reddiopaue ae #8 qua dL LV range SAY #88 “dur seP000 {og «uy von yo susd ueonsuteu a] EXUOWY 'O46P] aI WD KHL yepunoy ay oma Jo ans Hoag AP SI ar sug aya “wapid> SCI DON {3H oy peREHTPN pin peno uy ae Se rl duo pu oe ny “sovONRDE LDN HEH ue ape we 90239 5 idan Spano 394 SaTY 49 pUEY qn Seu 303 comb ase SqIY 4 Ssousnopmuon fond o1 Button vomesauod sonpoud snongo ng sad MOU te oy safe por2pvoBsuen s,OUPIeA 223 1 puP vaso IEA 99] ue ere eget ut pan} 4 S}0001N} woHDeY Ke pga 4 Spo 8 pa pH droge em ay Aq PEIN} on wD MNeee [NQCit, of course, contested eatery. It is contested for its exclusivity and fokeniaeincnvey). eis contested for its unwarranted opcimism: in het ding 2 minor revolution when a few flms do aot a movement make; in fromoring queer villainy while homophobic violence rages; and in suggesting queeeendliness of mass culture when che majority of the audience, a5 Hey Benshoff argues inthis book, remain unaltered.” The category is Contested also forthe US-centicity ofits films and theory, Perhaps the most irreparable of charges against NQC is thatthe promise indicated by the fms tf the early 1990s was never fll realised. Despite that inital furore on the Indie sene, andthe dramatic increase inthe production of, and audience for. ‘quer films during the 1980s, a new and enduring secor of popular radical ‘Work failed wo materialise” in many ways this is hardly surprising, for how ‘au marriage between the popular and the radical be sustained when such an ‘Gvocizaon erodes te very meaning of each? By the end ofthe decade, NQC bhadsas Rich argued, journeyed fom ‘radical impulse to niche marke’ with its ‘ange offi innocuous and oken unremarkable films targeting a narrow, father than all-inclusive, new queee audience." These films included Clare of the Moon (Nicole Conn, 1992), Bar Girls (Maria Giovanni, 1994), Jeffrey (Csistopher Ashley, 1995), The Incredibly True Adventure of Two Girls in Love (Maria Maggenti, 1995), Gazon Maudit Josephine Balasko, 1995), ‘Thin Tee Fiona Cunningham Reid, 1995), When Night is Falling (Patric Rosema, 1995), Hollow Reed (Angela Pope, 1997), Losing Chase (Kevin Bacon, 1996), The Watermelon Woman (Cheryl Dune, 1996); Kis Me (Guido (Tony Viale, 1997), Everything Relative (Sharon Pollack, 1997), All ‘Over Me (Alex Sickel, 1997}, High Art (Lisa Cholodenko, 1998), Fucking ~JmalShow Me Love takas Moodysson, 1998) and But I'm a Cheerleader (Jamie Babbit, 2000), Swoon and Poison stand aliost alone in terms of ‘ia attention garnered by the New Queer films. Indeed, its not until Boys ‘Dom Cry thar qucerness could claim such a spotlight again, but for some the ‘Academy's prise, fn the fl itself, eeked of mainstream recuperation. Gynialy put, NQC kickstarted Hollywood's awareness of a queerer aud ‘ence (a combination of the‘pink profi zone andthe general public's current ‘Sdeation) and is appropriation and dilution of queer matters, Albeit ‘gayeploiaton', queer work and quoee themes found financial support, hd th carers of Haynes and Araki were launched.” (These two ey players ‘Gf New Queer cinema are the subjects of Michal DeAngelis’ and Glyn Davis! ‘Sacumons in this book.) Ukimately, however, there was lie more chan superficial change "That aid there is evidence co suggest chat NQC triggered significant cultural and critical (and smalkp politcal gains. rs real impact, and value, ‘Ste not tobe messuted by the quantity or quirkiness of porential members, but bby dhe querer eulrre i ushered in, AS Rich asked of NQC ten years on: "Did it disappear, oii everywhere?” Queerty CuiruRED The pido Hall wood' appropriation ofthe ew gee penal was the srepetly of quer themes amd quer characte in he maiarea tees noe of exibigon and dicbaton, i ot production: (eae abo s period when the poary of he Independen and Holy wc cies was Caving) No longer coighed to the soe role of say “Soho ene mec untimely dent, 1990" Hollywood's homosexcas Me Yeu tn accomplished lven. Not sad young nen be sane sexy sas TORR amply Ber Fins Wedding a and Ont}; ne merely (ey us hot ad fry women fat in for example, Baste Intnet and Mavi Sceypes were evacd eather than teleed. At Good a Gets (emi Brock 397 for example oles ay man ext door, bathe dare taon show to be lar ore sale ttn the ls protagonist ‘Thc Romopbobiaecores one of his and he narrate’ leaning eres. metal in and Out (rank Oz, 1997 the shorthand sigs for male AaeeS aly ave of show tunel and over gestation =e lve ad wae Eein ln’ gay mun but acompied by machovncarae Mage wee Tre Stic), foere were who mh be cal, ue expen fms, hone where characte expore Messy, sth a Chain Ary, ‘Ropers The Oe of My Affection, ad The Neat Best Thing ingen, 2000)--Air oft ue . By chore nd Sanat WOOD) hat we tec “ihe pro‘goiss Sug tence) cere enough in themselves fo ey 2 sh eel reagents = FEES ore cident loin she urge of n0n-Hollywoo fins in 1993 bo bien couples who kil Tsarhouse poupclesr rests Fennec tplton ofthe quer oxy ands explored by Anneke Sali in Chater 6 nth collcson, Fr (Raael Zt, USCanada, 1 Dba Ser my Ser (Nancy Meck, UK, 194), La Cerémom (Claude Cee Ricees 1998) Buty Kis (Michael Winerborom, UK, 1994) Soa Faery Castres Pee Jackson, NZ, 1994) ied the same kinds of Sfeatat at NCQ (pean te ree of postive image) and fered EE Monae bya eae and competing fcorrpe, carats Mica ad lamboseds by quer eet (8 the aoe the ct cnt tat got Hie are notte sole provenance of ue fim rae fad Rept by return, chs upg ati ls are the a aes stag fimmakers Ts coxon ofthe eset of Be eee proces has bon wowed by Rich wh, looking berond the {Theiss nrltre he eumphe of sagt scrors lying gay 0 the "a ‘away success of the New Queer Cinema works’."* Likewise, in Rupert BIELSStac acs, A Tel Hush sod The importance of Bag Erhsty (Give Poker, 1999 and 2002} we find the out, acer, atorcnjoying “straight les (although how straight comedic and Wildean char- Seer can bei questionable to say the leas) “The quserng of contemporary western culture is not about the products slone, but aboot thir theorstion. Dovezaling with the emerpence and fvolution of NQC was the proliferation of queer film theory. Ths can be thought of as operating on three, not unrelated, levels. Fst, 2 the erica ‘exploration of quecr imagery and directors: in other words the wave of films provided a fous for those cinema scholars among the expanding audience Sccond, as a rereading and reclaiming of classical texts a retrospective ‘quecring of film history Third, asa discussion of queer spectatorship: what these quer texts reveal about the specator's experience of cinema ‘Alongside the ever-increasing body of erica work onthe films of NQC and on the queerer mainstream that followed, theorists have pursued the ‘movement's impact upon non-Anglo-American and non-narratveflmmak- ing. Broadening the category and challenging out understanding of NQC, tention has turned ro quer film within, for example, European, anipodean, “Third and experimental context, ax Ros Jennings and Loykie Laminé, Helen Hok-See Leang and Julianne Pidduck exemplify later in this colecon.”” Perhaps the moet noted scholarly contributions exist, noe surprisingly, within the cealm of revising cinema history. For example, Patricia White's (1999) book Uninited and Alexander Dory’s Hlaming Classics in 2000 both queered classical Hollywond, by which T mean they revealed queec themes and characters within a range of convenconal texts. Indebted to lesbian and [ay flm history (of Richard Dyer, Vito Russo, ex) these seudies are, instead, fiveer. While they similarly oncover gay oF lesbian encodings or decodings Uthat i the intervention of the films” creators or audiences}, they question harrative cinema's normative rather than heterosexual economy. Such studies fre, inevitably, about spectatrshipy about how the general spectator 1s “invited to make lesbian inferences, or to adopt ‘reception postions chat can be considered “queer” in some say, regardless of a person's declared sexual and gonder allegiances." Bur this queer spectatorship isnot the sole ‘domain of the classical period or the subtext-rch narrative Founded upon the spectators alignment or identification with or gravia- tion towards a “sharacteror-you', narrative cinema itself depends upon establishing empath, alliances and desire along lines not restricted 10 nor- Imatve patterns of stration. Cinema, a implied above is roored in queet process, Not only hat NQC helped generate ths kind of thinking, it has Encouraged mainsream cole to harness cinema's queer potential. Tis i ‘ot just another way of deserbing Hollywood's Hittin with qucer imagery but, instead, represents sift from the disavowal tothe avowal, the open affzmation, af qucer implications, a wil ilseat ia de final chapter ofthis book, No longer dees popular culeue have t sem to render queer config: trations safe = through for example, himour, homophobia (or oder memes ‘of heterosexuality) and, especially, closure. Inthe remarkably popular Boys Don’t Cry, the queerness of Brandon’s girlfriend (and the spectator by: implication) i indulged eather than represed, as time and time again the narrative constructs her complicity in Brandon's disguise a8 2 man. Popular altace no longer has to disavow queeress, but, ofcourse, stil does for to Keep queerness at bay safely restricted init influence, ensures the impact of its interventions and, more than this, surains the satus quo. And, afer all, ‘sch things undevine mainstream entertainment. What is roca to remember is thar disavowal sa defensive mechanism, quecrness must only appeat to be aueled. This, perhaps, the lesson of NQC: ic must be contested that ican fndue, ie mast remain marginal tha ican lie eecvely with the centre ‘While the films and the directors stopped ‘stealing’ the show at Sundance @ Jong time ago, edgy inspiring, aclaimed bur sll defiant films like By Hook ‘or By Crook (Silas Howard and Harry Dodge, 2001), of LLE. (Michael ‘Cuesta, 2001) ~juse keep on coming. ‘Siding against complete cynicism, New Quser Cinema A Critical Reader does see the categorisation and stady ofthis wave of films 38 productive: as provoking and intervening within important discussions on the evolution of lesbian and gay representation, but also onthe nature of cinema and spectator- ship elt. At the same time, however, ll the chapters collected here ar, with “atying degree of explicines, embroiled in questioning the value thats the esthetic, critical and cultural implications, of NQC: its characterises, its Tocation,itsimpact. Indeed, tt along these lines har the bookhas been divided, with the following sections rerponding ro these thee issues. Pact sets the scene fora study of NQC. My introduction has outlined the various qualities and key issues surrounding the moverent that will be taken Upinthe chapters char follow. B. Ruby Rich's nial arte on NQC, reprinted her, offers the primal scene forthe development ofthe debate and undedies many of the subsequent discussions. Bu itis AIDS that provided the key sie for the development of queer practices and productions. Its impression will shape many of the arguments within this book (by Pudduck, by Contreras) buts in Part 1, Monica Peat! mape the relationship bewween NQC and AIDS. art I explores the characteristics of NQC in terms ofits key filmmakers and its elated filmmaking practices. An air of defiance will continue t0 describe the movement, but eve chapters are about much more than ths, ‘Through a study of Todd Haynes, Michael DeAngelis isolates ateection of the linearity of time as central to the queer projec something chat Pead saw as distinctly AIDS-related, For Glyn Davis eis the prominence of camp, and in particular the ireverence of Gregg Araki's work, that characterises the fms. Anneke Smet confronts the repetition ofthe queer viminal in the at hhouse hts of the mid-1990s, and champions their reecion of posive imagery. Through an investigation of the work of certain avantgarde practitioners, Pidduck considers how such marginal and even anarchic texts Challenge definitions of NQC. As well as isolating the thematic and visual prcoscupations of the movements films and assorted flmmakers, his part 0Moen 39 Susu pur) Og fm ost Au pe Ng wa Seyior pu sSuyeusf soy wourzsou omy dojop SDN 018 (961 sg woo cao pasting i Joy og Pa Soo daa iq suse any uausnou 29 jo oueurtOp aus Buntaos pu pore di009quappns “D4 SPL ods tooq 4p seg JO jourwouayd wy #908 YL rp mou Aq “SOU PHOT ps0 ur any set poganea © 20009 SE Ze ‘mij aned np foo seas wyy 3e sma0 48 BuO] UD SOY wry Aang “a oe a WWANID ¥33N© MAN T eee ets a ne gro ‘i open pe pndags oxen ae a wD