Author: corneliastreet

One of my favorite queer movies of all time is The Birdcage (1996), starring Robin Williams and Nathan Lane as a gay couple who pretend to be a traditional, straight family in order to help their son get married to the daughter of a Republican senator. When I was a kid, The Birdcage was the first film centered around a queer couple presented as positive queer representation. While the movie always stood out to me for its humor (which I admit I did not fully understand until I got older), complex but lovable characters, and challenging of stereotypes, I remember most how normal their relationship and their queerness felt to me. I remember how much I loved their relationship and their individual characters, as well as how many times I yelled at the tv when I was frustrated with their son, the senator, and even Robin Williams’ character at times. I chose this movie as my cultural artifact because it highlights the unique struggles for acceptance faced by the LGBTQ community and celebrates various queer identities, something that is especially important during an era that positive queer representations of relationships and family dynamics were not really talked about. 

In our class, an important theme we have discussed is acceptance: in a society that prioritizes patriarchy, ableism, and heteronormativity, we have to learn to accept ourselves and love every aspect of our identities. We have also explored a variety of identities and how the intersections of social identities affect the writers and characters that we have read. For example, Prior in Angels in America is a queer man and former drag queen diagnosed with AIDs and author Eli Claire is a transgender man with cerebral palsy. In The Birdcage, the film explores many intersections of identity and their unique experiences, both positive and negative, such as a drag queen, queer male stepparent and Jewish queer male who have to perform the roles of a traditional family with “Christian and American family values” in order to make their child happy at the cost of masking who they really are. However, the movie ends with the son choosing the love for his parents by fully accepting his parents without hiding and stating that his stepfather is his real mom or real parent, ultimately leading to the families accepting each other. The movie reminds us the importance of us having acceptance and understanding for ourselves, our loved ones, and really just everyone we meet. 

One important theme presented in Angels in America is the significance of human connection, specifically the interconnection of the “outsiders” or identities who were excluded and repressed during the Reagan era. One claim I make in regard to this theme is that the human connection between the “outsiders” Prior and Harper emphasizes how the necessity for human empathy during tragedy transcends a society that tries to divide and repress them. 

During their mutual dream scene in act one scene seven, it is emphasized that Prior and Harper are outsiders of their respective identities because they don’t fit into these specific molds. As a gay man with AIDS, Prior is alienated from both society and his relationship with his partner Louis due to the stigma of AIDS. Harper is alienated from her religion as she does not fit into the traditional expectations or gender roles due to her failing marriage with Joe and her addiction to Valium. Prior and Harper are able to connect by sharing their unique life experiences with each other in this private, shared space. For example, the two are able to joke with one another when Prior tells Harper his church does not believe in Mormons (Kusher, 32). While homosexuality is not typically accepted by the Mormon religion, Harper does not react negatively to Prior’s identity but instead seems curious and wants to learn, especially in regard to Joe and his sexuality. Similarly, Prior does not judge Harper for her addiction but instead tries to understand her and sympathizes with her when revealing her husband’s sexuality to her. 

In act three scene three, Prior and Harper meet in the Mormon Visitors Center’s Diorama Room, connecting through the “threshold of revelation” or the state of mind that reveals one’s deepest and most painful truths. While it is terrifying to confront one’s deepest fears, Prior and Harper have created a space that allows them to both confront their individual struggles and fears while recognizing their shared experiences and suffering, even if they have not had the same life experiences or beliefs. As “outsiders” in both society and their marginalized identities, Prior and Harper meet in unideal circumstances that creates a unique human connection that transcends the tragedy and society turmoil of the time period, allowing them to confront their individual struggles through their shared revelations, shared suffering, and human compassion.

Eli Clare uses a metaphorical mountain as a representation of the goals and obstacles one meets throughout their life, finding their ultimate success at the top of this mountain. This mountain, however, is made up of what is deemed true “success” or “wealth” by a capitalist, patriarchal, hereronormative, ableist society. In this section, Clare writes “Our wheelchairs get stuck. We speak the wrong languages with the wrong accents, wear the wrong clothes, carry our bodies the wrong ways, ask the wrong questions, love the wrong people” (Clare, 1). These different aspects of identity affect how far we can move up the mountain because it depends on what is considered “desirable” by this society. 

I also imagine or interpret this metaphor as a balance scale, similar to the “Sex Hierarchy” or “Charmed Circle” models that demonstrates how society categorizes or ranks sexual behaviors. I imagine this scale with one side holding the “mountain” and the other side with a person. It begins with both sides being balanced, until slowly aspects of our identity with different weights applied to each based on how “good” they are are added on. It is difficult to move up the mountain or maintain balance on the scale because these aspects of our identities that “bring us down” don’t fit into a society that values capitalism, patriarchy, heteronormativity, and ableism. Thus, the gap is widened between who or what is deemed “normal” and the “other” or “exiled”.

The metaphor of the mountain connects to the theme of class because aspects of our identities and how they intersect with each other impact our place on the mountain. My interpretation of the mountain as a scale further emphasizes the identities society perceives as desirable and the ones that are disregarded. However, my interpretation of the mountain as a scale also tells us that maybe we don’t need or even want to be on this mountain or balance this scale. Maybe we learn that we can each create our own mountain or scale that is made up of all these aspects of our identities that make up our personal obstacles, goals, and dreams. And at the top of the mountain, or the perfect balance of this scale, is us accepting and loving ourselves for who we really are. 

For my first blog post, I focused on the poem titled “Boy in a Whalebone corset.” The poem details a scene in which the boy’s father is burning the boy’s “feminine” belongings as the boy watches from the window, recovering from the physically and mentally violent attack. One aspect of the poem that especially stood out to me was the repetition of the phrase “Corset still on” (12). Despite the devasting and frankly disturbing scene that is being described, I try to find a more hopeful meaning within this line. I interpret this line as even in the aftermath of this horrific and traumatic event in the name of “Old Testament God” (12) as said by Jones, the corset remains on as a symbol representing the boy’s unchanged feelings and truth. The father’s actions have not made the boy “less queer” or “less feminine”, as the boy’s queerness and sense of identity remains.

I think of the poem as a memory or reflection of the boy’s past trauma of this event that took place at the hands of his own father and in the name of religion. He is reflecting on this event in order to accept who he is. By using insults likely said by his father such as “w****” and using descriptive words for the “sissy clothes” (“Something pink in his fist, negligee, lace, fishnet, w****”), and of course the phrase “corset still on”, the boy is reclaiming his power of words and actions used to demean him and accepting himself as who he is. This is why I like to think of the line “corset still on” and the poem overall as hopeful, as it means that the boy is reflecting on this event because he has survived. His queerness, or in this case his corset, remains on.