Speak! Women of Color Media Collective

Last year, at AMC a revolution began. It started through heartache, rejection of women of color feminist voices because they were not prepackaged with a stamp of legitimacy from an established white feminist. No such stamp has been required of the multiple book deal white feminist bloggers who publish on the same press and represent a view of feminism that is largely different than that of the radical woc in question. As these amazing feminist women of color banded together under a simple phrase that also begins with “F” meant to empower them, the publisher struck back, publicly, offensively, and without much consequence. The feminist blogosphere lit up with promises very few have yet to keep and with declarations of rejection of feminism as a label and mainstream feminism as a movement from some of our strongest new voices.  Those of us who teach WS pushed back from our computers and shook our heads at how prolonged the control of who gets a room of one’s own and who is expected to clean it has been in this movement we cherish so much.  Some of us raised our voices in solidarity. Some of us wielded the power that we do have to counter that of those who would lock the door on woc voices and still claim feminism as their space against an “unfair siege” by “unrecognizable, angry, conflict inducing, woc.”  When the dust settled, all the players were still there. Those who had fought for woc had all locked their blogs for a period and taken a hiatus, while those who had voiced solidarity but kept up with the status quo or who had shown up in droves at the publisher’s table at WS conferences to reaffirm their white female innocence and the solidarity of mainstream feminism against the radical Others in their midst kept right on blogging without skipping a beat. The publishers posted pictures of themselves eating steak and drinking wine, while some woc blogged about another month of unemployment or whole towns of women workers being locked up for having the wrong ID. Some women reminded how important it was to come out to book launch parties or unapologetically continued to call “feminist press” as the one press that still isn’t, while others wrote about how that pancake recipe isn’t yours. When the dust settled, the power dynamics remained largely unchanged except for the occasional invitation to a woc to be featured, naked and abusable, on someone else’s blog; while the dynamics of who writes shifted slightly, the dynamics of who speaks with legitimacy, the cultural milieu of spaces, and how we speak to & about one another staid largely the same. It was a story so old that the only thing new was the technology itself.

While some women did change, and some showed us what a real apology looks like, it was a story that ultimately appeared to have no winners. Not the women who retained their power at the cost of feeling forever entrenched and worried about the next “flare up.” Nor the women who had lost their faith in solidarity with women across difference for a feminist world. You see someone had to look in the mirror and some lost their faith that a feminist world would be any different than a remodeled master’s house with a mistress at the front of the table and the rest of us, mostly, still on the floor; b/c for some women only means “us” when it is comfortable or when bridging difference is someone else’s responsibility.

group

But what we did not know, was that women who had dared not to be silent, not to be pushed around by people who called them “jealous,” “haters,” and “incomprehensible”  or worse, trashed their reputations, claimed they were a threat to real feminism, misrepresented the facts to make them appear irrational, and even accused them of trans and homophobia under the racist assumption that woc are all straight and more homophobic than mainstream culture, these women were writing back . Following in the footsteps of Barbara Smith and Cherrie Moraga and Norma Alarcon, these women did not simply throw stones at the locked door and then slip away into angry stunted silence while those inside waited them out. No. They started their own publishing effort. They put their words on the CD that the publisher told them was too expensive to make and would never sell inside a book b/c of the additional cost, on to a CD. They got together in the summer and used the heat of the sun and of anger used in the Audre Lorde sense of productivity to create handmade covers for each one.

Ultimately, while the world pontificated about hearing woc “rage” and the celebrating the ongoing interest in connections between racism and feminism like Republicans filibustering in Congress, these radical women of color were The Spook Who Sat by the Door.

cardspeak2

I cannot tell you how proud I am of these women for refusing to be silent. They give me hope for the next generation of feminists and remind me that the struggle those of us who came before them have fought or continue to fight is reaching the next generation. A Feminist world is possible.

There are not enough words to describe how their actions are an example of revolutionary feminism at its most baic and recognizable: women, turned away from the gates of alternative power, refusing to give up, banning together, working collectively, to be heard. Women taking the books out from under glass and spreading the necessary theories for change for ALL women, spreading the voices shut out of mainstream discourse or only sprinkled in like pepper.

Now it is time for us to do our part of the feminist puzzle that helps support the radical paradigm shift we all promised was at the heart of our activism by spreading the word about their efforts and buying their work if we can afford to do so. The CD is only $12 and if you want the e-zine that accompanies it, it is only $17. For those who can, buying an extra copy and donating it to your local women’s center or feminist collective ensures that the like Lauryn Hill, radical woc feminism will continue to flip the script on The Final Hour.  Even if you just take it into to your WS and feminist classes and tell people about it, or pass it around at work, or your dorm, you will be the next step in the revolutionary praxis of actual feminist publishing.

As in the case of many early feminist publishing, the Women of Color Media Collective is donating its proceeds to the continued consciousness raising of marginalized women. All proceeds are going to women who would not otherwise be able to afford AMC. For those who do not know, the Allied Media Conference has become a critical place for young radical feminists to find one another, share and celebrate each others voices, and to share knowledge about digital and alternative media activism. Some of our best and brightest have begun or been strengthened there.

A movement is only as strong as the willingness of the people in it to actually work for a better world. Some people this summer said there is no feminist movement. Others said they only want one if everyone, or mostly everyone, looks like them and thinks like them. I say, there is a real feminist movement and today is the day.

The Women involved in the Collective include, radical bloggers:

These are the voices of the next generation of feminism. They are not alone. For every radical feminist with a blog, there are 100s dreaming of finding a space for their voices that are inspired by these and similar feminist bloggers. For each of these 100s, there are 100,000s more without the means – computer, internet service, reliable electricity or phone lines, free time – doing feminism every day around the globe. Their generation and ours and the ones who have come before and will come after are re/defining feminism despite the closing of institutional and “alternative” institutional doors. We don’t have time to wait for promises never kept, for legitimacy mediated or never given, or for anger to eat us from the inside out. These women, we women, are proving every day that we have the faith in the equality of women that is strong enough to move mountains.

Don’t forget to pick up your copy of this powerful CD and let the ideas within move you to commit or re-commit to the equality of ALL the women in your communities and in our world.

——-

PS. I have purposefully linked to the texts that lead the conversation forward by raising consciousness and avoided the links to the posts written in the midst of the conflict by myself and others so as not to drag us back to things many of us have walked away from as unproductive. I realize I could have further avoided those conflicts by not mentioning them in celebrating the publication of this CD and e-zine, but as a historian I believe we need to look at the history that led to this moment, both to remind and to honor what comes from the ashes. As a feminist, I cannot help but document where we fail and where we succeed in order to keep pushing toward a better feminist future and the lesson of the Women of Color Media Collective is one of a brighter future even in adversity.

Despite all of the pain and conflict, to me telling the whole story (or as whole as one person caught up in it can) is the only way to honor the beautiful project that emerged as a result.

L Word Spin Off ?!?

That’s right boys and girls, no sooner has the series pseudo-ended then there is talk of a new spin-off called The Farm. The 20 minute pitch has already been filmed but has yet to be picked up. From what I’ve read, the series looks to be a take off on the British series Bad Girls which is at times campy, some times introspective, and mostly fluffy but intelligent fun. The Chaiken series will star Alice, who has been framed for Jenny’s murder, as the only confirmed L Word cast member to jump to the spin-off. If the show does well, obviously there is room for Tasha to visit (perhaps playing an already out Helen Stewart to Alice’s Nikki Wade), as well as for other characters to come by during visiting hours.

The L Word has flirted with the prison genre before, sending Bette over the edge with her carpenter lover in Season 1, the ridiculous Helena love affair in Season 5, and didn’t Alice go to jail at some point or did I just decide her stalker behavior in season 2 should have sent her there? These forays have never been as intelligent and introspective, or as delicious, as al_word_prison single episode of Bad Girls. Worse they highlight the racial problems with show in that the prison sequences always have tons of people of color while even the crowd scenes outside of prison on the L Word are often visually homogeneous.

Given the rise in the number of female prisoners in the U.S., the overt criminalization of women of color, poor women, and immigrants of late, and the growing engendered prison-industrial-complex, I’m not sure the L Word, Let’s Go to Prison, lens is the one I want to watch aimed at the issue. Prison certainly isn’t where upper class lipstick lesbians go to get their freak on, even if L Word sequences would have you think otherwise. For a much more realistic and interesting version of lesbians and prison, you can see the movie by another one of our highlighted film directors, Cheryl Dunye, called Stranger Inside. For intelligent, true to life, and yet campy goodness, Bad Girls reigns hands down.

Honestly, I hope they do take a page from Bad Girls if this spin-off gets picked up. Recent interviews with network president Bob Greenblatt seem to imply they might. Well, not that he seems to know what Bad Girls is, instead comparing The Farm to “a less dark version of HBO’s Oz.” (Did I not mention how we lost QueerTime to ShowHBOknockoffTime in a different post?) However, Chaiken is sure to recognize the actual lesbian drama set in prison even if she is going for something brand new.

Perk up Logo. Now is your chance. Release the 5 or 6 seasons of Bad Girls on DVD already and give the current season more prominence on your channel. It won’t make me forgive you for tossing out Noah’s Arc but at least I might write something nice about you all again. (And given that everyone I have ever worked with at Logo has always gone above and beyond with me, I really want to write something nice.)

If we are lucky, both The Farm and Bad Girls will give us something to cheer about. And both will address the important side and the entertaining, snarky, sexually charged, delicious side of prison tv as well.

images

  • Naomi Kettleman/sho.com

Raise Awareness About HIV and AIDs: Rock the Red Pump

National Women and Girls HIV/AIDS Awareness Day is today, Tuesday, March 10th. The epidimic continues to disproportionately impact women and girls around the world and w/in the U.S. is infecting straight black women at the highest rate of any race, gender, or sexual orientation in the nation.

RPPgold

Bloggers Karyn of The Fabulous Giver and Luvvie of Awesomely Luvvie, came up with the Rock the Red Pump campaign to help raise awareness about the spread of HIV and AIDs amongst women. They have asked that bloggers around the world unite in raising awareness today and that people host information sessions, discussions, and awareness campaigns today under the banner of Rock the Red Pump.

Things you can do:

  • educate yourself and others in a non-judging, supportive environment
  • host a discussion in your home or your community
  • make a PSA that raises awareness about the impact of HIV and AIDs on the women in your community – upload to youtube, your blog, and show it at your community center or campus
  • engage women in your community in an awareness campaign
  • wear red shoes (you don’t have to wear a pump if you don’t want to) in solidarity with the effort and tell people why you have them on
  • organize a group of friends to get tested together

In the long term

  • volunteer with an agency that helps spread awareness about HIV and AIDs
  • start a reading group that includes both social science and literary information about HIV and AIDs
  • ask your school or community center, to sponsor a discussion and/or film series about HIV and AIDs
  • if you speak other languages than English, offer to translate existing fliers and brochures, or help re-dub films for your local HIV and AIDs programs
  • encourage your friends to get tested and go with them as a support person, make a date to keep this practice up

This blog has done a lot of posts on HIV and AIDs already over the years with all of the important statistics and numbers. Please use this information and spread it widely. If you want to find a confidential place to get tested in your area or know more about testing start by clicking here. For general information about women and HIV see the link at the top of the post or some of the posts here on this blog (see search engine @ top right hand of blog).

Who Watches? The Watchmen Review (Minor Spoilers)

wbpr-10(watchmancomicmovie.com)

At just under 3 hours the Watchmen movie is a thinking person’s film. Much of the story is taken up introducing the not so pristine characters and their psychological motivations. We learn why most became heroes and why many left the job. We are also asked to think about the world of vigilantism in more complex ways than is offered by people like Captain America or Superman. The heroes of the Watchmen world are rapists, murderers, ambivalent omniscients, drunks, and liars. And when they make decisions to intervene in the lives and affairs of the world, history changes and genocides are excused away. And yet, most of them are deeply committed to saving the world and the people who inhabit it.

Plot

Without giving too much away for those who have not read the graphic novels, the plot is basically that someone in their wnixonranks is killing heroes and bringing the world to the brink of war in the process. In order to figure out who it is, the Watchmen must reunite and care about a world that has seldom cared about them.

The story unfolds in an alternate timeline in which Nixon has successfully changed the constitution and managed to remain the sitting president for 4 terms. The cold war is still raging between Russia and the U.S. and the fear of communism has resulted in a repressed and repressive society riddled with violence. And all of it is to blame on the intervention of Dr. Manhattan in the Vietnam war at Nixon’s request. Dr. Manhattan’s intervention prevented the pendulum swing in the U.S. that led to massive innovation and creativity and the development of a liberal consciousness. And while the movie does not mention this, such a move would also have prevented the militarization and consciousness raising of communities of color that ultimate led to movements like the Panthers, AIM, and the Brown Berets, and that means no second wave feminism and radical woc feminism either. wnewsWithout those movements, or similar pushes for civil rights that appear to be put down by the Watchmen in the name of stability, another act of heroism gone array, there are no major civil rights changes in the U.S. Instead, the world is stuck in a 1950s like shrinking capsule whose release was permanently forestalled by an act of “heroism.”

Given the number of comic books that unfold during wars and posit the heroism of all American superheroes against the regular evils of fascist regimes, the centrality of the destructive nature of Dr. Manhattan’s nationalist intervention into war is a powerful one. And the destructive nature  that comes with acts of superhuman heroism, whether unforeseen or excused away, is at the base of the plot. (It is also one of the critiques I levied at Iron Man‘s irresponsible use of violence against warlords in the villages in an unthinking act of vigilantism that gave no thought to what would happen to the villagers after he flew away. Guess what die hard fans of Iron Man, if I am stupid for questioning what happens when heroes don’t think about the consequences of their actions, then so are the writers of thewhiny Watchmen, one of the most well read graphic novels of its time.)

The moral questions the movie raise are ultimately resolved as unsatisfyingly, as they would be in real life. The one loyal and completely honest hero in the movie is killed because he alone thinks truth and freedom trump a manipulated peace. The wishy-washy “superhero,” who is part of the team because his dad left him money to build their equipment, and who spends most of his time afraid, in denial, or pining after Silk Spectre II, gets the girl; the man she really loves and who loves her leaves the planet in an unspoken punishment for what he has both wittingly and unwittingly done. And the gay window dressing mastermind of the team, Ozymandias, suffers no consequences for the genocides he has engineered to keep the world at peace or for the lives he has taken. Oft-overlooked, Silk Spectre I, is overlooked again when culpability comes down the wire even tho an interview at a bar near the end of the film proves she is pivotal.

Gender and Sexuality

whousewife(For those of you who don’t think gender and sexuality matter, you can skip to the next subheading for a review of the actors stellar performances. But really, you should care.)

As the story unfolds, we are given an insider’s look at what makes each character tick, except for Oz whose interior is left behind to give us a glaring picture of his present. And what is great about Oz’s present is the way it questions the commercialization of heroism and how that skews the perception of vigilante justice all the more.

Silk Spectre II is also less well fleshed out beyond her present relationship drama in which she desperately loves Dr. Manhattan but ultimately ends up in the arms of the imminently less heroic or interesting Night Owl II. It seems her entire moral dilemma and motivation boils down to “mother issues.” I’m not even sure what her particular powers are except to land on her feet when jumping out of an owl shaped plane and kick butt as good as the boys do. And honestly, I am a little sick of sexually exploitative images of women excused away because they can walk freely at night and kick ass without breaking a nail.  I can do that too, but it doesn’t mean I have to do it in a Spandex swimsuit and platform thigh highs w/needlepoint heels; and if you’ve ever actually worn those shoes, you know how impossible that would be AND you recognize the irony in the rape scene in which the jdsilkComedian so skillfully manipulates those heels to try and get his way. (The Watchmen graphic novels clearly have a sense of humor about this that the film does not, since the first book in the series has Silk Spectre II meeting Night Owl II for dinner and immediately taking off her shoes to massage her feet. There is a moment in the movie when the same character laments her latex outfit by saying “I didn’t want to disappoint mom” but let’s be clear, mom isn’t the one dreaming of pinup girls nor changing Silk Spectre II’s drapy yellow dress in the comic book into a Fredrick’s of Hollywood knock off for the film.)

In an ironic turn that speaks to the handling of female characters in this new superhero-cinema world, not only are most of Silk Spectre II’s companions more complex than she is, but Rorschach is among them. His motivation: “mother issues.” Rorschach’s mother issues lead him down a dark road of vengeance on criminals who target women and girls. They have left him with no love for human beings but a profound sense of honesty and moral commitment to freedom. His mix of extreme violence and moral superiority soon spills over to acts of violence against anyone who threatens him regardless of the reason; while he still only beats up on criminals, sparing the doctor who helps incarcerate him for instance, his actions beg the question about why we condone violence against suspected or one time criminals from masked figures when we know our justice system does not always allow for justice.

Violence against women dots the entire film, as it does the comic book. Some of it is necessary in order to establish vietnamesewoman1pivotal plot points, others are gratiuitous. Thus the Comedian shoots a pregnant Vietnamese woman through the belly, killing her and his unborn child, because she dares to hold him accountable. And while some will argue that this scene is to establish how depraved he is, the film includes an attempted rape scene, the shooting of innocent civilians in the back, and the assassination of JFK all by the Comedian’s hand. If that does not establish him as an unhinged megalomaniac in tights, then the fact everyone refers to him as one throughout the film should. There is no need for the violent murder of the pregnant woman; and while the long slow shot of her bleeding out on the floor while Dr. Manhattan contemplates the fragility of life above her, may accurately reflect the graphic novel neither is exempt from racialized misogyny b/c of it. While the attempted rape scene is essential to the plot, it also seems to run long just so the director can highlight another violent, superpower laden, beat down. Silk Spectre I’s complete inability to fight back is ridiculously reminiscent of the longheld belief in the comic world that female superheroes can only hold their own against female villains. If they are Superhuman than shouldn’t they be able to defend against regular humans? And if they have superpowers, shouldn’t they also be able to at least fight back with some success against others with superpowers?  Shouldn’t Silk Spectre I be able to get in more than one good punch? These moments typify the genre more than they reflect a particular guilt of the Watchmen movie; while the director’s decisions are culpable in this film, the issue of misogyny in the genre is a much larger than this film.

A shorter, throw away scene involves dogs chewing on a little girl’s leg bone still socked and attached to little pink shoe and the tossing around of her soiled underpants. The discovery of her underwear in the fireplace and the bloody fat andrapesally meat infused cutting board that is clearly her remains were plenty to establish the depravity of the child abductor, just as the dogs fighting in the yard over a long thin bone was more than enough to tell us what they were eating. While the graphic novel may have illustrated these scenes in a similarly graphic fashion, it seems unnecessary in both film and novel format. The tossing around of her underwear in particular seemed callous and disrespectful.

The film also gets in some unnecessary digs at homosexuality. The theater of mostly men gasped when the opening montage included Silhouette grabbing a jubilant passerby and kissing her. Moments later when Silhouette was filleted on her bed with her lover, the word “whore” dripping down the wall behind them, written in her own blood, no one but me gasped. In a montage of violence against masked heroes by the human population, which highlighted both the violence of the human silhouette_lrace and the uneasy tension between heroes and the population, the voice over blamed Silhouette for her own gay bashing. As the camera lingers over her bloody bed, Rorschach says, it was her own “disturbed lifestyle” that had done her in.

Prefacing The Comedian’s death with this array of misogyny makes it hard to stomach the mournful funeral scenes and the fact that he is the catalyst for the entire plot. At the same time, many of those scenes are necessary for the main tenants of the series to be played out, ie the issue of vigilantism as something that should be questioned even if it is done in an outfit and the toll of heroism on both heroes and the people they “save.” They are also critiqued by the female characters at various points in the film. There is no similar justification for the voice over on Silhouettes death. She could just as easily have been shown with a voice over about how the conservative backlash against heroes extended all the more to people on the margins. Such a statement would have raised the issue of civil rights movements that were stalled or non-existent in the parallel world because of the intervention of superheroes in human affairs. In so doing, it ozymandiaswould have tied her more concretely to the plot at hand.

The graphic novel clearly included a lesbian character as heroic, so why include her in the film just to justify her brutal gay bashing? And no, the total window dressing that is Ozymandias does not make it any better, even if it is the ever lovely Matthew Goode under all that froo-froo. (update: According to someone who read the graphic novel – see the comment section- her lifestyle was not the motivation for her murder so this rings all the more homophobic and unnecessary. end update)

Mainstream movie critics have also noted the director’s ongoing tendency to fail to represent women as fully fledged characters in general in his movies. The evidence is not only in the decisions about how the women are portrayed or how long or how often misogyny is highlighted, but also in the basic marketing of the film. In this case not only do many of the television promos feature long shots of Silk Spectre II’s inner thighs or tight shot of her spandex and thigh highs where you can see the most skin or the accentuate curve of her bottom, but also posters like the one pictured to the left are designed to make her seem vacuous. Rather than being a “stupid girl” when she says this linew_silk in the film, Silk Spectre II is actually agreeing to go out on patrol, a plan she actually suggested; the result, is that she and Night Owl II save an entire apartment complex of children trapped in a burning building. In the poster at the start of this section she is pictured as self-absorbed. Yet, Silk Spectre II is much better off than the advertising for Silk Spectre I, which has Carla Gugino in fishnets holding a prisoner by a belt leash with the caption in an image reminiscent of Abu Ghraib photos except this time the sexualized body is the woman holding the leash. The image is both sexist and racist, and offensive given what we know about how leashes were wielded in the war in Iraq. (Subtle racism also dots this film by the way, including posters that remind us that there is still a famine in Africa and Vietnamese people worship Dr. M as a God – I guess superheroes cannot save backward brown people from their backwardness . . .)

Neither woman’s posters are as a sexist as the Comic-Con poster for Night Owl II. Patrick Wilson stands in full costume in front of the owl ship, adjusting his glove. Above him the caption reads

It’s all crap. Who needs all this hardware to catch hookers and purse snatchers?

The quote is lifted directly from the graphic novel, written in 1986. Thus the misogyny is partially the part of the film and partially embedded into the series itself. And I for one am concerned about the way the genre continues to cultivate a disdain for women amongst pre-teen boys and worse how it teaches them that wabughraibbeing a man means treating women like objects and prizes. Shoot them when they mouth off.

On the brighter side, Silk Spectre II is also the one who says they need to save Rorschach, while his male companions are all willing to leave him in jail to rot or die. Her humanitarian act of loyalty is juxtaposed with a decision by Ozymandias, revealed at the end of the film, in which her decision is ultimately less humane. These two moments and their results once again reveal the complexity of what heroism actually means in the world of the Watchmen. Silk Spectre II’s decision also highlights once again her import to the plot despite the misogyny here.

Honestly, many of these complaints amount to fleeting moments in the film and advertising most consumers will never see. Both Silk Spectres are integral to the plot and Silk Spectre II has more positive screen time than most of the other characters. Despite the fact she and her mother spend time in skimpy outfits, both also spend a considerable amount of time clothed. And both have moments in the film where they express their sexual agency clearly and counter to dominant definition or the desires of the men in their lives. These positive aspects should not be overlooked simply because of both racialized and normative sexism in this film nor do these positives negate the offenses.

I’m sure the die hard fans are going to come a runnin’ with their name calling and their “its true to the graphic novel” comments like always. And like always, I say to you, cinema is a new media with the license to edit or depict material as it sees fit. There are ways to stay true to the basic tenets and plot of the genre without prolonging misogyny or promoting homophobia.

As the caliber of storytelling and cinematography gets better with each passing comic book film, I continue to hold out hope that the isms will slowly fade away. I write these reviews as a fan of the genre who knows where many of these stories come from and as a media professor who also knows how to tell them without bigotry unrelated to the plot. I believe that when pre-teen male comic book readers xmen-goodturned 30 something male comic directors confront their own investment in a certain kind of racialized masculinity this genre will kick on all of its cylinders. It is not a matter of PC politics or ignoring the era in which these heroes were first inked, especially since graphic novels like Wanted, Watchmen, 300, etc. are all contemporary and most of the genres icons, Batman, Superman, Spiderman, are still running in comic or graphic novel form today. Whether the misogyny originates on page or storyboard doesn’t make it any less problematic or necessary to confront and change. Given that the genre targets pree-teen boys, it is also important to their unlearning bigotry. One needs only look at the Bryan Singer X Men films or even Superman Returns to see how easy it is to produce a fan-driven, brilliant, entertaining and true to the original film in this genre that does not demean women, GLBTQ people, or people of color.

Characters and Conclusions

Ultimately, despite a little bit of a drag in the middle, and far too many endings, the film is interesting for both intellectual and special effects viewers. There are plenty of fights and cool costumes and sexual encounters that appeal to both male and female audiences. Most of the special effects are spot on, except I do wish someone would have introduced blowntobitsSnyder to a pair of black Calvin active boxer briefs, which actually do mirror those worn by Dr. Manhattan in the graphic novels, b/c those bikini briefs were only slightly more visually upsetting than when he is hanging free and running down hallways. Nobody needs to see the twig and berries or the black “thong diaper” as we dubbed it.

The characters are all compelling. From the minor to major roles every single actor in this film turns in a stellar performance. Special nods go to Crudup, Goode, and Haley who overcome facial feature skewing makeup and/or morally ambivalent characteristics in order to offer up characters the audience will remain invested in until the last shot. All three captivate on screen, and not just because of special effects. In lesser hands, Rorschach could never be the character who leads us into this world, but Haley infuses him with pathos and passion that cannot be ignored. Goode is hardly recognizable as Ozymandias and his turn in the film, punctuated by the appearance of that odd feline, is utterly unexpected for those who haven’t read it first. Goode is truly underrated as an actor who consistently chooses new characters to play, most of whom require a new body type, hair color,wbpr-28 accent, etc. each time. Carla Gugino turns in one of the most subtle performances of her career; while her Silk Spectre I is still the boozy bombshell that has typified Gugino’s career (that and cops), this performance is just subtle enough that it is wrought with the necessary guilt and anguish to make it come alive. I also give her points for subtlety b/c no one sees her coming in the pivotal role she plays, which is sadly overlooked by the wrap up at the end. Worse, most critics seem to have forgotten her all together in order to focus on what they did not like about Malin Akerman’s performance or the Silk Spectre II character. I liked both, though I do think Silk Spectre II was largely reduced to “love interest.” While the love affair between Silk Spectre II and the Night Owl II is trite, the love affair between her and Dr. Manhattan is interesting. So even though a better director would have given us more well-rounded characters, both women are essential to the plot, and both do a fine job.

The storyline raises compelling questions about humanity, freedom, and heroism that no other rorschachfilm really has yet. It is closer in feel to the latest incarnation of Batman with acting as powerful and introspective as multiple characters in the Dark Night and Norton’s in Incredible Hulk. Yet Watchmen is surprisingly less gritty and more fantastical than both of those films. As someone who prefers the fantastical, this one gave me just the right amount of “comic book” feel.

While some critics have complained that the Director does not have a handle on the story, I tend to think the story was compelling and unfolded mostly at the right pace. If all you want is action, then you will think this movies runs long but in such a complex world, Snyder’s decision to focus on character development and slow reveal draws us into all of the aching souls that populate the Watchmen world. If I had any complaints about the plot/story, it is that we are not given more background on Ozymandias and that the non-stereotypical aspects of the female characters were not more prevalent.

Overall Watchmen signals a critical shift in the comic book/ graphic novel to film genre that can only mean better acting, plots, and yes, special effects.

———

images

  • all images are movie stills from the Watchman film located at the website sited above unless indicated below; all images from that site are co. Warner Brothers Studios
  • “Nixon” Watchmen movie still. Clay Enos/Warner Bros Pictures
  • “The Comedian, Ozymandias, & the newspaper” Watchmen movie still. Clay Enos/Warner Bros Pictures
  • “Night Owl II” Watchmen movie still. Clay Enos/Warner Bros Pictures
  • Silk Spectre II: Comic-Con Poster. Watchmen Movie. Dir Zach Snyder. WB, 2009.
  • Drawing of Silk Spectre I for the Watchmen movie. Artist James Jean. Watchmen Movie. Dir Zach Snyder. WB, 2009
  • Apallonia Vanova as Silhouette. “Art of the Watchmen.” ugocomics.com
  • Silk Spectre II: Watchmen Promotion Poster. Watchmen Movie. Dir Zach Snyder. WB, 2009
  • Silk Spectre I: Comic-Con Poster. Watchmen Movie. Dir Zach Snyder. WB, 2009.
  • X-Men movie still. X-Men Movie. Dir Bryan Singer. 2oth Century Fox, 2000
  • Storyboard for Watchmen Movie. Dir Zach Snyder. WB, 2009

The L Word isn’t Over

update: there’s a spin-off in the works.

update II: Showtime passed on the rights to the spin off show and as of now no one has picked it up. It is unlikely the show will ever air, and that is a good thing according to inside sources.

For those of you who did not get enough of the first “multicultural” series based exclusively on the lives of lesbians, the series is not over. While it will not be playing on Showtime anymore, starting tomorrow, it will be airing short webisodesl-word1 at sho.com  L Word directors like the one featured during Black Herstory Month have been working with this format on their own projects with surprising success and clarity for some time and will no doubt bring that craft to the L word webisodes as well.  You can also watch the tribute videos collected by Jenny which were featured in the final episode but mostly talked over or left in the background.

As for who killed Jenny? I have always maintained the answer is: Jenny. From the first hint of a “murder mystery” to the promos to this last episode, I’ve never believed anyone would be more likely to end Jenny’s life than Jenny herself. She has had many bouts with mental disturbance throughout the show’s run that include lost time, cutting, and dysmorphia. The character was also written in such a way that I could see writers having Jenny intentionally kill herself as a last ditch effort to make everyone realize how important she really was, tho I don’t think that is what happened or that it is an accurate picture of suicidal ideation.  Instead, I think Jenny simply realized they’d had enough of her and her image of herself as somehow innocent crumbled. sojennyshaneln7This last episode seems to concur, even if it does not confirm. Even tho everyone around her is increasingly livid, Jenny is the one who says she knows they do not want her around and that they wish she’d shut up. She is the one who tells Shane if she left her, she’d “kill herself.”  And Jenny also says she doesn’t want to be “this way” anymore, but we all know Jenny has never chosen or been able to be any other way.

The sad thing is, I really don’t care how Jenny died. I disagree with Chaiken that she was “the lens through which we enter this world of LA lesbians.” Bette and Tina were how we entered, and that scene with them and Shane on her am stroll home is how we know who they are. This scene is so significant indana_lara fact, that they recreate it for the last episode.

Thus, I was far more interested in the storylines with Alice, Bette and Tina, and Helena than Jenny. And while I generally am not caught up in Kit’s storylines, except when Kelly Lynch was around, I thought there was interesting ground to cover with her new boyfriend. And as I have said before, I am deeply disappointed in what a warped version of Shane we were given this season and how, in many ways, Moenning seemed to phone it in.

I wonder what would the show have been like if they had not killed Dana and if Lara had at least been allowed to make a goodbye video . . . Dana was far more compelling than many of the ludicrous jennystorylines they offered up in the final days of the show, incuding that whole Dawn Dembo madness.

All of these things mattered to me more than Jenny. I think their own lives also mattered more to the characters in the show as well, despite their decision to forgive her (or perhaps as evidenced by it). Hence why I maintain Jenny killed herself.

There is a lot to say about what this show promised and what it actually delivered. I’m not sure I am going to be the one to weigh in on all of that, but I am sure everyone else will. So for those of you who have already been here searching for my review, I’m sorry. Happy searching elsewhere. 😀

——

all images come from sho.com/LWord

Quickies: the Just When You Thought the World Couldn’t Get Sicker Edition

  • BackType is the new evil
  • why did no one warn me about Bruce laBruce
  • male directors and movies with CSA

BackType – have you heard of this? If not, trust me when I tell you that they have heard of you.  BackType, which the paranoid in me is certain is some offshoot of Google, tracks people’s comments across the internet and archives them by stalkingusername and blog URL. The archive is devoid of context or conversation, instead it is simply a list of your comments in chronological order.  BackType even encourages people to follow your comments daily with the promise of always being in touch. Creepy. Don’t know why it’s creepy?!? One word: cyberstalking.

I have a real life stalker and her episodes are often triggered by establishing a sense of intimacy with me in her head when exposed to information about me whether I am in the immediate vicinity or not. I also have a long history of women’s advocacy work which includes taking women to the police station to file TROs and get stalking orders. In my 3 years on the internet, I have also witnessed or been the target of behavior that in the real world would warrant a stalking order. While most stalkers are content to watch from afar, many are simply gearing up to something dangerous or physically/sexually/emotionally invasive and your best protection against them is a documented paper trail and knowledge of their activities. There is no paper trial with BackType, and much like the internet site that inadvertently hosted the taunting/suicide of an African American youth several months ago, I have no doubt that BackType will refuse to hand over records and potential allow the tamper of evidence to protect themselves. B/c they have the records and you, or your loved ones do not, who would know to even ask them?

If the cyberstalking angle doesn’t frighten you, then imagine one of your trolls subscribing to BackType and literally following you from blog to blog flaming you to their wee hearts content. While this is not dangerous like the examples above it does limit your freedom and can take a toll on your sense of safety and self-expression. A blogger did this to me for 3 weeks recently and I count her as one of the reasons I moved virtual house. I wracked my brain trying to figure out how she was tracking me . . . now I know.

Even if all of this sounds like paranoia to you, ask yourself one question: what is the purpose of archiving your comments all over the internet devoid of context and making them available to anyone who types in your name? Who is served by this?

The Gay Nazi Pornographer – Two of the mainstream video stores in my area have had ceiling to floor displays of  the film Otto: Or Up with Dead People for about a month. The movie is supposed to be one of the first “gay zombie” films that is supposed to take a tongue and cheek look at social conventions and conformity. I love zombies and I love the idea of queer zombies. So I finally fell for it.nsoma

The film is awful. It is disjointed, gory, and contains one of the most ludicrous sex scenes imaginable (involving insertion into a hole eaten into the intestines of another zombie). While I was watching this inane farse unravel, no puns intended, I noticed these posters on the wall behind the zombie’s head, posters for “skin hookups.” The alarm bells were already going off in my head b/c of a certain “nazi aesthetic” in the film, a term coined to describe Leni Riefenstahl cinematic style from Triumph of the Will forward to her post-Nazi regime photos of Africans and even whales.

So I put the movie on pause looked up the director, Bruce LaBruce. Turns out he is famous for making sexually explicit films about Gay Skinheads and Nazis with titles like: Skin Gang, Skin Flick and No Skin Off My Ass.  While LaBruce argues that he is not a racist, he did admit to both socializing with skinheads in the punk scene and being turned on by being beaten up by his racist skinhead ex-boyfriend for making fun of his racism. He also admitted that his entire fetishism of neo-nazi culture comes from that moment in which he was dominated by a racist sflskinhead who he got off on.  Reviews, both pro and con, discuss his films in terms of extreme violence and the mix of violence and sex often in celebration of this nazi aestheticism he finds so darn erotic. At least one of his films includes the violent torture and rape of interracial couples for supposed racial transgression that according to reviewers had people walking out in disgust. Does it matter if the director says he is not a racist if aspects of racist culture turn him on and that is the material he mines for his films?

I really need to know how it is that places like Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, and yes, my local underground queer video store (local as in 5,000 miles away) could stock a “mainstream” film from a Nazi pornographer?!?!!!!!!

While LaBruce seems clear about the reality of racism and neo-nazi homophobia what about his viewers? Have the consumers of this shlock never heard of the history behind the pink triangle? Is their racism so deep that they do not realize how many GLBTQ people were experimented on and/or put to death in Nazi concentration camps? Do they not know how many people have been beaten and/or killed in neo-nazi inspired hate crimes?! One such death happened in California just last year and one of the assailants is still at large.

When I brought the movie back to the store, the manager at least gave me my money back, but how many people go into a mainstream video store see the zombie display, pay their money and then return the film as junk without ever getting to the part with the nazi posters or asking too closely who made this movie? How much money is LaBruce making off of mainstream video stores ignorance? Or worse, is there someone at your video store that knows exactly what his film history is based on?

CSA and Male Directors – lastly in “the world is sick” quickies, I am deeply concerned by the camera angles that male directors are using to film stories about child sexual abuse. I have not seen the Dakota Fanning film that made everyonetowelhead nervous at Sundance, but I have just watched Towelhead (review to follow later). From what I have both seen and heard, both of these films linger a little too long on the assault of under age girls. In both cases, the scenes are far more graphic than they need to be in a world where we all can fill in the blanks all too readily; and, at least in the case of Towelhead, there is dialogue that lets you know the particulars of her initial assault in the film lest there be any confusion. I can’t help but believe this is because straight men are behind the camera.  What does it mean that these controversial films can only get greenlighted with male directors?  I don’t want to be essentialist, but it seems to me that a female gaze would be less concerned about capturing the particulars of sexual assault on screen, or slow glancing preteen bodies in camera shots that mirror a pedophiles’ gaze; they would be more concerned about producing images that reflected an important critique of sexual violence against young girls in our society. Instead of wanting to discuss CSA in a productive way or being fired up to do more advocacy work on the issue after watching this movie, I left Towelhead with this sick feeling about the cinematography in my stomach and wanting to question Hollywood as a vehicle for such stories. I worried about how many people would be buying this film to watch those shots of the main character multiple sexual encounters and fantasies and getting off on not only her abuse but also the ambivalence the film shows it.

All this writing about this stuff is creeping me out. The world is much sicker than I thought it was on Friday . . .

——

Images

  • movie still. P2. Dir. Franck Khalfoun 2007
  • movie still. No Skin off My Ass. Dir. Bruce LaBruce,
  • Movie poster. Skin Flick. Dir Bruce LaBruce.
  • movie still. Towelhead. Dir Alan Ball, 2008

Happy International Women’s Day (and 3rd year blogiversary)

I realized yesterday that I started blogging on International Women’s Day. I checked it against the first dated post on the original site, and it seems my memory is right. For some reason last year, I couldn’t remember when the blog started and thought it would be appropriate to celebrate on April Fool’s Day as the first post that I have left public after shifts in the focus of the blog last year. Anyway, I’m excited to reclaim this day as the real blogiversary b/c it reminds me why I started this blog: to celebrate a feminism that engages women globally, where they are at, what they articulate as their own needs, and meets fellow social justice activists as equals in the struggle for women’s equality. At the time I started to blog, the leadership at my small place in academe was about as far away from that vision as humanely possible and the struggle to decolonize praxis had both me and my partner considering early retirement or a shift in our careers. I wrote to find a global community where the local one I thought was gauranteed seemed lacking. And I wrote to encourage women, undergrad, grad, juniors, to keep struggling to be the kinds of radical globally oriented social justice feminists that they were no matter what; to encourage woc in particular to keep being brave. That first year of the blog was filled with mentorship oriented conversations that I am privileged to have been a part of. The second year was our year of activism in which we impacted discussion of equity and feminism in publishing, the connections between gender issues and economic, environmental, and global racism issues in places like the DRC and the Ivory Coast, and encouraged people to think intersectionally when advocating for GLBTQ rights. I’m not sure what we will accomplish this year, as the blog and its address have morphed again, but I am proud to be starting out a new year on this day in solidarity with all the women around the world. For all its flaws and all its bourgie necessities (access to internet, free time, regular electricity, etc.) blogging is still part of a global media revolution that connects women across personal and politcal war zones and unites us in struggles we might not otherwise know about it.

Happy International Women’s Day my blogging community!  If you have not done it already, let today be that day you commit to being a part of the change the world needs for ALL women, not just the ones who look like/think like/live like you, to be treated equally in this world!

International Women’s Day 2007

International Women’s Day 2008

International Women’s Day 2009

A statement from the March 8 Women’s Organization based in Afhganistan and Iran

Women around the world have articulated their needs every year on this day, and in every passing moment on this planet, with the clarity and understanding of a people who recognize oppression and what needs to change to end it. when we listen to women’s voices, we listen to the sound of revolution.

 

Feminist Spotlight: Vandana Shiva

shiva(image unattributed)

If you don’t know who Vandana Shiva is you should, or more importantly, you should rush to the library or South End Press and pick up some of her books.

Women were, really, in my view, the ones who domesticated plants, created agriculture. And as long as women were controlling agriculture, agriculture produced real food. Agriculture was based on [women’s learned and passed on] knowledge. A Women’s centered agriculture never created scarcity. As long as women controlled the food system you did not have a billion people going without food and you didn’t have 2 billion going obese and w/diabetes. This is the magic of patriarchy having taken over the food system. Earlier, patriarchy left food to women, modern patriarchy wants to control food . . . women’s knowledge has been removed from agriculture . . .we can only have a secure food culture if women come back into agriculture. – Shiva Interview

Shiva works on environmental feminism and social justice. Her’s is a philosophy devoid of the kind of cultural appropriation that often typifies the genre. As part of a new, or newly recognized, cadre of feminist environmentalists that includes Winona LaDuke, Arhundati Roy, and the like, Shiva offers people committed to a decolonized feminist praxis a way of understanding the active part that the environment plays in social justice work.

Her efforts to stop corporations like Mansanto and Coca Cola from destroying seed and water has helped her leed non-violent protests, public intellectual engagement, and the formation of both formal and informal global networks of women and their allies for a sustainable world. Shiva is a founding board member of the International Forum on Globalization and the founder of Navdanya International, a science and policy research center, which includes Diverse Women for Diversity, which seeks to honor all women’s knowledge and center all women’s needs in a sustainable future. She has won several international awards for her work, including from the UN. In 1993, she won the Right Livelihood award, known as the alternative Nobel Peace Prize, “for placing women and ecology at the heart of modern discourse.” (see RLA) She has also sponsored women’s seminars on environmentalism and encouraged what she once referred to as the “grandmother’s college” to encourage younger women to learn the knowledge that older women posess but that has been shoved out or devalued in favor of modern/masculine ways of knowing.

Her books include:

  • Biopiracy – in which she documents the use of patents by the U.S., Canada, Britian, and others to literally claim ownership of indigenous lives and lifestyles as well as ownership of flora and fauna that has grown or been cultivated by “third world” people since before colonialism.
  • Earth Democracy – which outlines the disconnect between a philosophy of “the commons,” or things held in common good, and privatization or global capitalism. She outlines some of the histories of commons based societies, including in the West, and how we can get back to those if we choose people over profit.
  • Stolen Harvest – a well researched and impassioned piece on the impact of genetic engineering and corporate farming on the safety of our food and the livelihood of our farmers.
  • Water Wars – focusing on water this time she unveils the multiple ways in which global capitalism and MNCs are eroding or polluting water resources around the world and the impact that both is having on people, communities, economies, and the world. She indicts several specific and popular companies for stealing water until there is none left and what it means to consume their products.

Her discussion of water in particular, connected the issues of environmentalism to women’s labor, health, and safety from violence. She has been asked to speak on multiple documentaries on the issue because of how salient the issue of women’s rights and environmentalism actually are in a world in which women are the last to eat, the first to be depended on to maintain household needs under stress, and seen as imminently violatable, rapeable, when they are walking for water.

(ADB Water Doc. outlines connections, since Shiva water comments not available on youtube)

I regularly teach both Earth Democracy and Water Wars as well as chapters from Biopiracy. Very few other books on my regular teaching list motivate my students more to ask questions about inequality, economy, and accountability. Even fewer help them to do so while making clear and present links to feminism and women’s rights.

In the segment below Shiva connects “Free” Trade Agreements, The War on Terror, and Environmentalism in ways that show how easy it is to make these connections when you are dealing with a global feminist social justice mindframe:

As much as women as water providers stretch their energies, walk miles . . . there is a limit beyond which one cannot walk – Shiva in One Water Documentary

Her books are short, most under 175 pages, and written with the lay person in mind. Most of my students report reading them in 1-2 days when getting them to read a 10 page article often takes the strength of thousands. In keeping with Southend Press’ feminist commitment to making social justice texts affordable and readily available, Shiva’s books never cost more than $20 and are often between $10-$15 which is great for universities such as mine where the cost of books can mean the difference between taking or not taking a class.

She recently edited a “manual for sustainability” called Manifestos on the Future of Food and Seed as well.

If you are interested in hearing a much longer discussion of her work by Shiva herself, click here. (video is 1 hour 15 min)

If anyone is interested in doing a blog-a-round on any of these texts, or preferrably several of them, please let me know. I think it would be great to have a multi-blog conversation about these texts as a key example of doing feminism from a decolonized, radical, social justice perspective. Rather than continuing to fight over what that means, why don’t we follow in the footsteps of the seed movement, typified by communal meetings and sharing of feminist voices like Shiva’s and LaDuke’s, and actual show each other the work in the hopes of bring each other along?

Even if you don’t want to discuss her work in the public space of blogging, here are a few of her essays on women and ecology to get you started on your own thinking about what she has to say and what it means to feminism this Women’s History Month:

Stop the Madness

The HRC has created an interactive website called “End the Lies” to show all of the misinformation being levied against gay marriage and gay rights in general. As part of their efforts, they are asking everyone to sign a petition voicing their disagreement with the forceable dissolution of existing gay marriages in the State of California. The State Supreme Court is currently hearing evidence on a case to not only continue to deny marriage but also invalidate all same sex marriages in the state. Regular readers know marriage is not at the top of my priority list, however, equality is; this decision will impact GLBTQ equality by not only taking away rights but invalidating the previous exercise thereof. That is not a precedent anyone should want set. You can sign the petition here.

Noah’s Arc Review (Spoilers)

While some of the characters and storylines needed more fleshing out . . . once Noah’s Arc picks up momentum it is absolutely enthralling. – prof Susurro


Not so Flattering Intro

For those unfamiliar with series, Noah’s Arc was a short-lived television show on Logo that recently made the jump to thenoahcast big screen. The series was based on 7 minute shorts that featured all of the main cast and a message about safe sex. The television show smoothed out some of the edges and shifted the characters slightly. It was groundbreaking in that it centered the lives of 4 out African American gay men and their partners/love lives. In so doing, it opened the door for both black communities and mainstream queer communities to see the basic humanity and diversity of black gay men.

Noah’s Arc was also significant for its behind the scenes employment of African Americans as well. The writer and Director of the show, many of the people who worked on wardrobe, photography, etc. were all African American and some of them were also out gay men. Thus Noah’s Arc became a central place for the black gay community in Hollywood to work as well as to represent. In many ways this convergence of storyline, viewer, and labor excused some of the less polished aspects of the show.

Noah’s Arc also represented Logo’s attempt to capitalize on the huge vacuum left behind by the exit of Queer as Folk from Showtime. Like the L Word promos, the promos for Noah’s Arc promised viewers the one thing QAF did not: racial diversity in its core cast. The L Word gave us problematic multiculturalism and Noah’s Arc gave us an intense focus on black, including Afro-Latino, gay men. Similarly to QAF however, it offered cursory reference to lesbians and none to bisexuals, and all though it featured a transgendered character throughout the series, zhe was relegated to the background not actually part of the core cast. However, the fact zhe was there at all was another step forward.

Out of both anger at Logo for marketing this show like “black barbie” as if I could not recognize the mold and annoyed by not only the dissolution of QAF, including the core friendship between Michael and Brian, but also what I had lovingly referred to as QueerTime, the once gay abundant programming stripped down to ShowHBOknockoffTime, I refused to dragwatch Noah and his darn Arc.  Besides, I had never in my life heard a black person ask “what’s the de-ga-ga.” And like all Viacom channels, the commercials for the show were on a continuous loop featuring this inane phrase that made me desperate enough to want slit both my wrists with a rusty lid just to escape it.  The only other time I’ve been that annoyed with supposed queer ebonics was when I was reading Abigail Padgett’s The Last Blue Plate Special. I’m telling you, Logo’s marketing strategy nearly killed this show for me.

But like The Last Blue Plate Special, I have to say “de-ga-gas” aside, Noah’s Arc turned out to be a surprisingly entertaining series that had so much more life left to live than Logo allowed. And I am grateful to the movie for resurrecting the discussion of Noah’s Arc’s place in queer media so that I would finally sit down and watch the entire series. While it is an uneven effort, it represented both a critical intervention into the prevailing definition of queer on television and a thoughtful look at the varied black gay community.

Season One introduced us to the titular character and his three friends: Alex, Ricky, and Chance. In the first two episodes they come across as histrionic and way too high maintenance. But by episode three, they have established a necessary groove that moves the characters beyond stereotype and into the realm of the believable. While some of the characters and storylines needed more fleshing out, & some scenes were clearly overworked, once Noah’s Arc picks up momentum it is absolutely enthralling.

Noah and His Lovers

darrylAt the center of the story is Noah, the doe-eyed ingenue, who is looking for true love up the “straight boy” tree. By season’s end he has coaxed his love interest, Wade, out of the closet, befriended Wade’s “straight” colleagues, and cheated on him in a moment of stifled self-absorption mixed with fear. Darryl Stephens plays the character with just the right mix of naivete, kindness, and self-absorption that allows the character to grow in unexpected directions by the end of Season Two. During the first season, Noah is trying to establish a realistic relationship and build his screenwriting career while cherishing his small group of loyal friends. While his is the idealist of the group he is just as flawed as anyone else and that makes him compelling even at his most selfish.

Noah’s second season relationship woes also provide the show with a wider range of characters to deal with. Thus he goes from dating Wade, a newly out man trying to negotiate both dominant definitions of masculinity and his own desires, to several much more established gay men. At the beginning of the season, he is dating Malik, the man he cheated on Wade with when Wade sent their relationship into hyper drive without warning. Unlike Wade’s constant need for reassurance through dominance, Malik is secure in both his masculinity and his queerness. His response to Noah’s unexpected move into his home, reflects this security in a way that comments on the immaturity of both Noah and Wade. In so doing, it highlightsmalik one of the things that Noah’s Arc does best: it offers a more complex or nuanced critique of many of its characters and situations than previous queer series have allowed.

From there, Noah moves on to Quincy, played by the imminently watchable Keith Hamilton Cobb. Cobb puts just enough compassion into Quincy’s character as a self-righteous idealog that you believe, he believes, he loves Noah. For me, Quincy was one of the most compelling members of the supporting cast because of the way Cobb shines a light on a certain kind of black male performative public intellectualism that should be recognizable to most viewers. His narcissism is like the back side of the Wade coin or even Chance, who is the academic of the group. When Noah is gay bashed, Quincy is the primary foil from which the story bounces off. Unlike the long suffering of Brian in QAF, who takes unrealistic responsibility for what happens to Justin, it never even occurs to Quincy that his need for the public spotlight and callous dragging of Noah into it, might have been the catalyst for the homophobic encounter to turn physically violent. (I want to stress the word “might” here b/c obviously gay bashing is an act of violence perpetrated by those who fear or hate, or both, a specific group of people regardless of their behavior. It is not something that is brought on by the actions of any queer individuals. Rather than cobbvictim-blaming, the parallel I am trying to draw here is one in which Brian is able to be self-reflexive about his own well-fought sense of safety as a 30 year old out, white, gay man vis-a-vis the ever shaky ground of his high school student partner at the prom, while Quincy never stops to think about how his age, 30-35 years old, intellectual standing, public intellectual status, and hypermasculine physical presence gave him a sense of safety that was unrealistic for his effeminate 20 something year old boyfriend who was out within the realm of an extremely supportive queer community and area of town. In both cases, these disconnects, raise important questions about what is written on the body and how the body may or may not be priviledged in the policing of heteromasculinity in similar ways to the policing of heterofemininity.) Noah’s self-preservation is imminently recognizable and also provides an alternative read to gay bashing that reminds us that not everyone is strong enough to face up to abuse predicated on state sanctioned maginalization. In fact, the majority of people never report their abuse. Sadly, many people with minor physical injuries or ongoing emotionally abusive encounters, simply endure b/c ultimately their abusers are backed by a system of homophobic oppression. While I tend to fall on the side of Justin, who ultimately did become a poster boy for anti-homophobia campaigns and also had that poorly executed foray into radical activism, Noah’s character is no less salient.

For Cobb fans, Noah’s Arc also resurrects the outfit from the Andromeda minus bone blades for a runway fashion show. Stephens steals the show in his long wig and feather-lashed eye but Cobb’s mesh top and leather pants cannot be mistaken. The nod to SF fans is incredibly cute and does not distract b/c it takes place during their rather painful breakupjason_steed1 scene. Pay close attention to the MC’s voice over in the background of this scene b/c it offers up an astute critique of “cute people” that will show up again in the film. (I took this critique to heart b/c if I was to say I was like any of these characters it would have to be Noah, minus the cheating, and I don’t think there is enough critique of the impact of “innocence” and “cuteness” or the particular ways that they can be used by the person being described. It took a similar critique to the one Cobb levels at Noah in this scene for me to really think about that in my own life. I think its ripe for theorizing, especially from a media theory standpoint in which the example of “innocence” as multiple things is abundant.)

Jensen Atwood does some of his best acting of the show during these episodes as well. He turns in a solid performance as the concerned and caring ex-boyfriend who puts Noah first. He also transitions to anger much more smoothly and therefore realistically than either he or Stephens manage at any other time in the show. Unfortunately, his anger plays out in a scene ripped from a Veronica Mars episode in which, angered by someone abusing his ex, Wade goes on a rampage in front of the police station and beats up Noah’s assailants. It was cute when Logan did it b/c he was in high school. (He also had economic, race, and heterosexual privilege going for him, Wade has none of these and still manages to make it home for dinner.)

Finally, Noah has a “comedic” encounter with a British Hip Hop artist turned movie star named Baby Gat. I’m not quite sure what Baby Gat brings to the table except British ebonics and bling. And yet, Baby Gat is included in the movie when stronger characters like Junito, addressed below, are not. His particular kind of accepted closeted queerness, in which his public persona is overtly hetero and slightly misogynist, is obviously the stuff of DL fortunes.

I think he is there to remind us that even the most materialistic tendencies within “cute queers” are not an invitation to be bought. When Baby Gat showers Noah with expensive gifts, which continues in the movie, Noah’s rejection seems oddly out of step with his character, who in one of the first scenes of the first season laments Ricky’s failure to give him free clothes and takes a one of a kind designer sweater from the designer without question of cost or reciprocity. While he questions Wade’s spending habits, he clearly envies his economic success at certain points innoahs_arc the first season as well. Noah’s childish policing of his things when Wade moves in and his frequent wardrobe changes speak to a materialism that should have been attracted in some ways to what Baby Gat had to offer. Noah’s rejection of Baby then is supposed to highlight his own growing maturity, but honestly rings hollow in the series. By the time the movie starts however, Noah has established himself economically and emotionally and his assertion of independence with Baby Gat are much more satisfying.

For the series, the scenes in which Noah almost loses his apartment are much more convincing. When Wade writes him a check for thousands of dollars to cover his back rent, he is initially giddy and ready to accept in the same way he did the sweater from the designer and the painting from Baby Gat. But, upon reflection, he decides to stand on his own two feet. Even as he makes important sacrifices that represent a turning point in the way Noah handles his finances and his career in the show, he also maintains his underlining characteristics by readily accepting Wade’s studio hook up and his rebuying of Noah’s car.

Ultimately, all of these relationships are just opportunities to highlight the diversity of the black gay community while maturing Noah’s character. He is never far from being in love with Wade at any point in the series, and as implied by the cover of the Noah’s Arc movie, Jumping the Broom, Wade and Noah ultimately reunite. It is unfortunate that the series was not given more time to flesh out Wade and the relationship between Wade and Noah. Even though the movie starts 3 years later, Wade is no more secure with himself and his place in the world than he was on the very first day they hooked up. While I bristled at Wade’s abrasive and controlling behavior in the series, his behavior had to be filtered through the lens of transition from straight to gay and the particular racialization of masculinity at the heart of black men’s gender performance. There is no excuse, however, for his continued diffuse anger and sense of alienation and inauthenticity 5 years later. His lack of growth undergirds his ongoing conflicts with Noah which culminates in a scene that is more My So Called Life than feature film. And while I have a bias toward Ricky, no pun intended but still true in both cases, it seems terribly sad that the character once described as the “last romantic” settles for a relationship that seems so unsatisfying at every turn. The good news is that both Stephens and Atwood are much better actors by the time we pick these characters up in the film.

Ricky

christian_vincent12Ricky, Noah’s bestfriend, does Brian better than Gale Harold ever did, and Gale Harold is my personal g-d. Ricky’s life is an endless parade of beautiful men unmarred by nary a twinge of conscience. And yet, like Brian, he manages not to be shallow because of his loyalty to his friends and his occasional willingness to be self-reflexive. When he is shot down by one of his cute employees in favor of a transgendered clothing designer, his own incredulity opens the storyline for addressing gender differences within the black gay male community. And even as these moments raise issues of performance, identity, and desire, Ricky’s behavior also remains true to the character by always placing the question of his own “shallowness” at the center rather than making him a vehicle for a political point.

By mid-season an accusation of shallowness provides the openness Ricky needs to find love. This is one of the really solid transitions in the series. Ricky gets called out and in an equally shallow response, gloms on to the first man he hooks up wilsoncorywith after the accusation. Despite an amusing attempt at a date, Ricky does not end up with this person. Nor does his openness lead him to an instant love affair somewhere else. Instead, he begins to build a relationship slowly and with the kind of trepidation that is befitting a player discovering real love.

His relationship with Junito, played by Wilson Cruz, expands the storyline once again to include HIV and AIDs from an African American perspective. As Noah’s Arc tells us, 46% of black gay men are positive (this number is based on the 2005 CDC study b/c of reporting and testing issues surrounding HIV, the number may be higher). Under these circumstances, Ricky is less afraid of being positive than he is of losing his positive boyfriend to the disease. Like so many in AIDs’ ravaged communities, and in the U.S. the black and Latin@ communities are being infected and dying an alarming rate for a western country, Ricky assumed he would be positive sooner or later. His friends are less concerned with the exposure that Junito may represent b/c they all yumm41realize that in a world of hookups between men of color where 1 in 2 men is infected, they have all likely already been exposed. This understanding of the place of AIDs in the black community does not belie responsibility it simply shifts the discussion from the privileged belief that you can insulate yourself and the types of reactions that come from that place of privilege. A subtle comment from Junito, in which he says that as long as you live in the West HIV is a manageable disease, also reminds us how globalization of racism from within big pharma has helped to create a diasporic pandemic that is largely outside the “healthy face” of misguided, bourgeois pos parties and ad campaigns.

The way that Ricky and Junito negotiate their relationship is one of the highlights of the first season. If I could, I would watch these moments in a continuous loop. They are that good.

One of the best things about the way their story unfolds is how it realistically mirrors relationships as ongoing negotiation. There isn’t just a single moment of fear and then acceptance, there are yummcontinuous questions, concerns, and the working out of desire between them that elevate the series in the simple light of normalcy. The queer media prof in me is already thinking about juxtaposing certain scenes with other depictions of HIV and AIDs to ask students to think about diversity, love, compassion, fear, agency, and desire.

Wilson Cruz and Christian Vincent shine in these roles and in these moments. Both of them offer up nuanced performances that not only elevate the potentially heavy handed issue of the AIDs pandemic but also show us what this show could become had it been given enough time. Vincent deftly moves between being the relationship novice to the “golden [sex] g-d” that makes both aspects of his character all the more endearing and helps establish Junito as an equal partner in their relationship. Cruz, the veteran of the cast, also infuses Junito with just the right mix of kindness and clarity that keeps him from being a push over.

The short shrift given the dissolution of their relationship in Season Two is ultimately jarring precisely because of howyumm21 well it is written and acted. Not only do they deal with HIV but they also navigate different definitions of commitment in which Junito is monogamous but supportive of Ricky’s “need” for continual conquest and outside desire. And until Ricky’s friends interfere, the two are extremely adult about the disconnect, entering into the relationship with their eyes open and their cards on the table. This helps them avoid the manipulative mechanations of less honest relationships and establish an equilibrium where each seems satisfied.

One can only hope that the writers had imagined Noah’s Arc continuing past its second season so that the moment when Ricky declares his love for Noah and Noah hugs him and sends him “back to [his] boyfriend who is missing [him]” would have built into a larger story arc from which Junito’s exit would make more sense. Given the rapport established between these characters, this plot twist, is the only explanation for why Junito would accept Ricky’s petty, and obviously hurt, response rickynoahto his declaration that they needed to recommit or end it. Junito seems quite clear about Ricky’s fears and how to navigate them.

Also, had this storyline been allowed to develop, it might have reflected back on to Noah who essentially set the dissolution of Ricky and Junito’s relationship in motion by questioning Junito’s celibacy. And it is Noah, that Junito goes to when he sees the writing on the wall, but Noah does not recipricate with one of the infamous emergency phone call sessions from the bathroom that is central to all of the rescues these 4 pull off for one another throughout the series. If they’d been given more time, how would these moments have been woven back into the future plot to flesh out both characters? Maybe, like Noah and Wade, Junito and Ricky would have ended up together or maybe we would have been given much more insight into the core friendship between Noah and Ricky. Either way it would have enhanced the series and the enjoyment of it by viewers. Given that Stephens and Vincent were originally cast to play each other’s parts, no one could have given us a better deconstruction than the two of them, since they have been inside both characters’ heads.

Since Logo canceled its self-proclaimed “most watched show,” after just two short seasons, there is no storylinericky2 development that moves us through Ricky’s growing understanding of his desire for Noah or whether or not Noah recognizes it. Instead, the issue is dealt with rather quickly in the film, and in such a way that it reduces Ricky to the same kind of simpering we’ve seen from Shane this season of the L Word. A travesty for both characters. And I find myself wondering why it is that writers of queer television give us such strong sexual beings only to reduce them to bad and shaming hook ups by the end of their prospective series’ runs. My gf says, that narcissism should never be rewarded and that hypersexual characters are the most narcissistic of all. Perhaps my own desires are showing, or my memory of who she used to be, but I think it is an awfully retrogressive message to say that those among us who harness and embody sex should ultimately end up alone and/or broken unless they are willing to get on the monogamy bus with the rest of us. As someone who has been happily monogamous for 20+ years, I don’t think we have the right to judge the non-abusive desires of others and I think there is something especially wrong about those judgments coming from within the queer community.

The Drama Queen

For me, the other two characters’ storylines are far less compelling. Alex is the desperately annoying queen with his porno star look-a-like boyfriend Trey, who spends most of the series squawking orders at someone and demanding that the rodneyworld revolve around his ever increasing whirlwind. He never shows the compassion and dedication that would be necessary to run a free HIV clinic. The fact that Ricky has to have a HIV crisis in order for us to really delve into HIV and AIDs as a storyline speaks volumes about how ineffective Alex’s character really is as anything other than pseudo-comedic, histrionic queendom.

A scene between him and a co-worker about funding in the Bush era is utterly fruitless in Rodney Chester’s hands, who chooses to play the scene with a high strung “b-tch don’t make me slap you” attitude that cuts off any real discussion of the policing the Bush administration accomplished under the guise of abstinence-only curriculum. This is unfortunate not only b/c of the obvious but because Chester proves himself to be a solid actor in many of the non-drama related scenes of the show.  The transition to running his own clinic as a result of this fight, is equally jarring but represents the failure of the writers not Chester. They provide no real insight to the conflict or interest in the shift to a new clinic, instead making the whole thing look like a vehicle to showcase Alex’s perpetual neediness-meets-demanding persona. If you watch the series closely, you see he is more than his latest drama moment, so when he is reduced to histrionics it is disappointing both from a storyline and viewer’s point of view.

Given how the character is written, it is no wonder he wrecks one of his bestfriend’s weddings to position himself as the center of attention. As Ricky points out, his boyfriend would rather go to Africa then deal with him and even though his boyfriend is going to help fightrodney2 the pandemic, Alex only cares about what it means for him.

His entire first season storyline revolves around the sexual disconnect between him and his partner that is ultimately about his self-absorption and endless creation of drama. The opportunity to discuss the role of fantasy and experimentation in long term relationships, the growing import of internet hookups in the gay male community, and the negotiation of vanilla and kink are all lost here despite the writers laying down the necessary foundation. I cannot help but wonder where the failure lies here, since the outtakes of some of Alex’s scenes show Chester to be much more capable in this roles than the scenes that actually aired. In the outtakes Chester plays Alex more toned down so that he is still true to his drama queen nature without becoming painfully annoying. Had he been allowed to play him this way on screen, I think the issues embedded in his storyline would have been better explored without compromising actual comedy. The evidence is in episodes like  the one where Alex explores his femininity through drag. His fear that he is “not man enough” for Trey offers another important insight to the insecurities involved in transgressing gender even within the gay community. (While I did find his drag a little frightening, I loved seeing chesterphoneVincent dance and the bouffant on Stephens more than made up for his unexpected membership in the rythmless nation with yours truly.) This episodes, and scenes between Alex and Trey like the one in the grocery store on their aniversary, highlight the potential in the character and the skill of the actor. It is really a shame that we were not given more of this and less of the drama.

By season two, Alex has gotten slightly older but no better. When he is actually watching his relationship and his life being threatened, his closest friends do not believe him. Even after Noah finds a fake suicide letter that threatens Alex’s life, none of his friends actually see past the perpetual drama to come to his aid. It takes Ricky being threatened by the same man for the group to rally. Even then, his boyfriend of 7 years does not believe him b/c of his behavior. The resolution of this “whacky” triangle never results in self-reflection, behavior modificiation, or even the promise of change. Within moments of the exorcism of the boyfriend stealer in their midst, Alex is back to his drama.

The movie does little to flesh out Alex’s character. Instead, his role seems like a bad after school special starring Elizabethkeith_gregory2_jpg Berkley. Like an actual episode of Saved by the Bell, Alex is popping pills that make him even more manic than usual. Despite being asked about them by several of the characters, he continues to pop them claiming he has too much on his plate (all of which he has put there himself) until he passes out in the woods. And just like Berkley’s character Jessie in that episode of Saved by the Bell, we discover that what he is taking is caffeine pills. Oh please. At least if he was on meth it would ring true, explain his behavior, and give us a chance for Alex’s character to finally become something other than not-so-comedic-relief. Meth would also link us back to the cybersex of the first season and make both Trey and Alex more complex characters as we unraveled how their competing desires led to this addiction. Instead, like Jessie we are expected to move on quickly b/c caffeine pills are not the danger in our midst. Is Logo owned by Disney? (Sorry.)

Alex does have one introspective moment in the movie when he admits that he is too domineering in his relationship and that he is worried that after 10 years something is going to give. The series ends with Alex and Trey,  recommitted to one another and ready to adopt a child. The movie begins three years later with child in tow. I had expected to see a more well-rounded Alex who had either mellowed or channeled his energy into parenting, ie mellowed b/c of channeling or was hyper-parenting, neither of which happens. I also assumed that after the multiple ordeals Trey and Alex had endured that boiled down to Alex constantly ordering Trey around and acting desperate, jealous, and whiny, that they would have worked out many of their issues or split up in the three years we did not see them. Instead, Alex remains static and Trey is virtually eliminated from the film. The fact he calls their baby OJ is a whole other level of nothing I can talk about.

The Stifled Professor

Round out the cast, is uptight Professor Chance whose longing for bourgeois respectability and intellectual stimulation dougspearmanleads to all kinds of recognizable silliness. What I really like about the character Chance is how well he reflects a certain segment of actual academe. From his over-intellectualizing of “thug life,” which is really about analyzing his relationship, to his bored condescension toward non-academics in his midst, to his ego-driven predatory turn in the movie, he is a mirror whose reflection has many recognizable names. I also like that his character provides both leadership and drama to the foursome without becoming the excuse for other characters around him to give up their eccentricities and sell out to the picket fence. Finally, Chance and Alex characters also give the show an opportunity to discuss the role of the church and faith in the black community, unlike the villain the church often plays in mainstream discourse, Noah’s Arc reminds us that church is often a central part of black culture and that black intellectuals, queers of color (particularly gay men), and the like are always troubling the boundaries of religion vs. faith.

At the same time, there are moments with the Chance character that I can’t put my finger on but definitely don’t work as well as other characters in the show. Looking at some of the outtakes, I wonder if he had been allowed to camp out a little more, would the moments in which he did this on the series make more sense? There is also the issue of the do-rag he dons on his date with T Money, and the name T Money, which I am putting on the list of things I am not talking about. However, the writers did do a good job of ensuring T Money rose above stereotype as well and that was much more than I can say for some of the people making their careers off of writing about “thug life.” Lastly, I was disgusted that they changed Kenya from a black child to a light-skinned, blondish haired bi-racial child in typical Hollywood lightening tactics that I wish at least one black show would stand up against. (And I levy this critique as a biracial girl myself.)

At the heart of Chance’s story, is his uneasy relationship with his partner Eddie, an equally uptight, bourgeois, man. Their relationship provides a solidly acted and written opportunity to explore what we give up to become part of a family. jjChance’s own desires for independence and space act out a much more mature version of Noah’s own meltdown in the same season. His ultimate decision to commit also seems to reflect a more developed sense of the trajectory of his life.

Chance also shows the most growth in the series. He moves from reluctant family man, to hurt/spurned lover trying to reclaim a mythic masculinity, to committed dad and partner. With each shift, Douglas Spearmen turns in a subtle and believable performance. It is that performance that elevates the character from stereotype.

In the second season, Chance also helps to closeted lesbians finally come out and commit to one another. The handling of their struggle is at once universal and specific to a certain segment of the black middle class. While Noah’s Arc fails to represent lesbians on a regular basis, the show makes this relationship the center of attention until its resolution, giving them far more prominence than other shows have done in multiple seasons.  Again, I wish that Noah’s Arc had been given more time on tv so that we might have seen these characters recur and grow.

Despite their stifled, suburban, existence, Chance and Eddie are predictably coming undone by the time we rejoin them in the film. While Chance’s need to be desired and even worshiped by a student is sadly not uncommon, I was disappointed to see him hookup with his attractive, barely 20, former student just one floor below where Eddie slept. While Chance glgjpgtook responsibility for his actions with Eddie, he showed no accountability for his actions with the student. I realize that academic policy says that you can do whatever you want with adult students after the semester is over, but I do not think relationships based on the unequal position of tenured/TT professors and the young students who idolize them ever escape the dynamics of power represented in the classroom. The end of a term does not change the ability to change a student’s grade, impact the trajectory of their career through recommendations or lack thereof, their ability or success in graduate school, or  the way certain colleagues view their success. This is a real detrement to the potential intellectual contribution of young scholars, particularly in the queer community, whose own brilliance may be forever overshadowed by whom they slept with “to get the job.” The reality of their own agency and desires has not changed perception and in some cases it has warped young scholars own sense of themselves. Given how many junior scholars I have seen derailed or tainted by these dynamics, I am deeply saddened by the way Jumping the Broom perpetuates the myth of mentorship. Yet I cannot fault the film for depicting reality. Chance’s midlife crisis, his commitment to being a desired intellectual, and his need to be wanted outside of the bourgeois trap he has built around himself are all undone in the eyes of his twenty year old hero worshiping student and Chance takes that moment of freedom in order to parlay it into the life change he would otherwise be unwilling to accomplish.

Conclusions

Ultimately, I am grateful to have finally seen Noah’s Arc, both the series and the film. While the film was a disappointing hodge podge of critical storylines that would have all made great films on their own, not to mention an underlining pessimism about long term relationships, the series was an optimistic, entertaining, look at black gay male life that was imminently enjoyable.

noahmovie

If the series had been allowed to continue, I can only imagine how much more fulfilling each of these characters and how complex the performances the actors gave us would have been. I like to believe that even Alex would have turned into a watchable and interesting character given the right amount of time and nuanced writing, and I have no doubt that Ricky and Noah would have given us endless thought provoking and sexy entertainment. I’d also like to believe that Wade’s journey would have led us somewhere much deeper. In just two short seasons the caliber of writing and acting did nothing but improve, in 5 or 6 it could have been the show that sparked diversity throughout small screen representations of the gay community and inspired the same rush to fill the void as its predecessor.

I’m told that the series was canceled because the actors dared to ask for money equivalent to other groundbreaking shows in the genre. If this is true, Logo’s greed not only cost us on the small screen, but ultimately on the big one where they failed to develop the characters and the plot to the level demanded by cinema. Worse it has robbed the black community jensen-atwood-11of a show that made all of us, straight or gay, recognize the diversity surrounding us. The show provided an opportunity for black people to discuss homosexuality openly and honestly and to see black gay men depicted in all their wonderful, beautiful, human glory every week. It also opened the door for television executives and queer media producers to recognize that queers of color are just as legitimate and worthy of representation as the upper class white gay people that populate most of their greenlighted programs and films. Noah’s Arc could have been revolutionary if Logo had given it a chance.

Others have benefited from their short sightedness. Here network cast Jensen Atwood as a bisexual warlock in their campy Dante’s Cove. His acting has done nothing but improve and the character he plays has much more room to grow, if Dante’s Cove makes it back for another season. Darryl Stephens went on to star in Boy Culture and Another Gay Movie, films featured at the Here network. He too has evolved in to a solid actor and continues to be a compelling onscreen presence. Christian Vincent and Douglas Spearman have not been so lucky, which is a shame. Both of them showed a hidden range of acting talent in the series and both of them tackled more complexity with greater success during the series run. However, Vincent has a thriving dance career that includes stints with Madonna, Prince, Shakira, etc. and an ongoing commitment to mentoring up and coming dancers in LA. In fairness, I should note that myBOY CULTURE POSTER.indd little sister was among those dancers for a short time. He is also an accomplished painter. You can see his work here.

For viewers hoping to see more than over the top black drag queens and Latino twinkie bestfriends or future Broadway stars, the loss of Noah’s Arc on the small screen is really inexcusable. While the Here Network did offer up the series DL  Chronicles for one season last year, there has been no long term resurrection of a television show exclusively about queers of color. The DL Chronicles was a thoughtful dramatic series but it replicated the very emphasis that Chance rallies against in Noah’s Arc, that of the closeted gay black man. While he is a reality, I also think the media frenzy around the DL serves dominant desires to see the black community as more homophobic than mainstream society, even though there are closeted, married, white gay men all over this nation. And even tho the L Word does boast a multicultural cast of lesbians, its emphasis on lipstick whiteness has often failed to adequately represent lesbians of color, with the exception of Tasha. Thus we are left with singing pre-adolescents on Ugly Betty or American Idol or finger snapping black youth as back up to Heather Graham or Jennifer Love Hewitt (oh wait, that was Joey from Blossom . . .). The more I think about it, the more I think we need to challenge queer networks and the networks offering queer programming to do better. When this season of the L Word wraps on Sunday night, there will be no regular GLBTQ live action multi-cultural dramedy left on air in the states. Instead, we are left with reality tv, fantasy soaps, and British imports that are not even available to online subscribers. Do vincentbetter.

The series has also come under attack because of the potential closeting of the actors. Only Wilson Cruz and Douglas Spearman have come out to audiences. Others, like Chester have actively denied any homosexuality claiming “mystery” is important. These controversies are no different than the actors and actresses on other mainstream queer television, with the Fab 5 and cast members of Project Runway being the most honest precisely because careers in fashion are less stigmatized. While I would love to see gay Hollywood take the keys to the kingdom, one needs only look at the yearly Oscar snubs or the butching up of obviously gay young actors on TV to know why they do what they do. More importantly, knowing their sexuality does not change the import of any of the shows they are on. While having out black gay men to look up to on television could make a world of difference, having out black gay characters on tv already has and we have Noah’s Arc to thank for that. Can you believe it took until 2005 for a show about them to air on national television in the US?

If you have not seen Noah’s Arc, you can watch the entire series on Netflix or buy it for a reasonable price at most online stores, including Logo. You can also rent the feature length film Jumping the Broom, at your local video store. I strongly recommend you watch the series first.

—–

images

  • all images come from Logo except those listed
  • Jason Steed. contactmusic.com
  • Christian Vincent. caravan photography
  • Wilson Cruz. Cory SF
  • Rodney Chester and Gregory Keith. Screenrush.uk
  • Jensen Atwood. Men of Eros Magazine. 2009.
  • Boy Culture movie poster
  • Christian Vincent. unattributed