Brisbane’s GOMA is planning a
major season of films by the German wunderkind Rainer Werner Fassbinder. You
can find the details if you click on this link to the two-part
showcase. As a lead-up a couple of pieces have
been posted about the program which you can find if you click on this link Eight Hours Don't Make a Day and a post by Ben Cho here. Ben’s piece prompted an
exchange with long time cinephile David Hare which is reproduced below.
David Hare: Two quick responses to points in
Ben's excellent summation of the RWF season and the writer/director himself. I
refuse to accept the spurious proposition he was bi-sexual (even were one to
subscribe to the notion that we are all bi-sexual in some reductionist Freudian
sense, i.e. existing and identifying on a spectrum.) Fassbinder’s marriage to
Ingrid Caven is also something not specific to implied hetero or bi-sexuality,
and Caven herself acknowledges unambiguously, Rainer was gay. The he's not
queer line is one that is argued completely irresponsibly and absurdly by
Fassbinder’s de facto "curator" and, alas, surviving archivist, the
pig-headed Juliane Lorenz who, for all her good work, cannot get it into her
brain that RWF despite all evidence and recollection of his peers, was quite
simply gay. Not bi, not hetero. Gay.
What he did not want to be
thought of was some kind of precious, sensitive queen, and modern day gender
politics would probably appall him (as they do me) but also send him into
paroxysms of laughter (as they do me). To me and other post-gay queer critics his
Faustrecht der Freiheit/Fox and his Friends is not only one of the
earliest gay movies - gay material, milieu, intention ... but one of the most
powerful critiques of bourgeois gay society in art and one that is decades
ahead of its time. His eyes would be rolling and head spinning at the new world
of the gay middle class with weddings, children, and happy families (as is
mine.) and submersion into bourgeois patriarchal hetero-normativity. Like it or
not both Fox and Querelle in their own extremely subversive way,
are satires and commentaries on gay life and culture, with secondary relevance
to non-gay audiences, and they express nakedly and directly male homosexual
desire and power as seen through the eyes of a vehemently anti-sentimental
artist. Sentimental is something he never ever was. It's the last word to use
in his context.
Ben Cho: David - fair points but let me clear something up. I suspect
he was gay in the sense that he had multiple gay lovers and had intense love affairs
with men. But then I also read some articles about the women he fucked so I
guess I was being charitable in the term "bi"... In regards to the
term "sentimental" this isn't necessarily in the "hallmark"
sense of the word but I stand by that as one of the things I do love about his
work is the ability to one minute evoke extreme tenderness and sadness but then
spike that with a heavy dose of acid.
David Hare: Ben it's a sensitive point with me. Juliane has made something
of a career for 20 years plus now, and a fool of herself, claiming him for the
other team. She is misguided in this because she is promulgating the "He's
really one of us " theme and trying to erase a part of his life that is
fundamental to his whole life's work. His range is incredible I agree. Forgive
me if I sound a bit harsh. (I dont really bite!) But Juliane is one of those
fucking revisionists one has to counter at every step. Many of us have wandered
across the stream from time to time but everyone you can speak to about Rainer
knows him as a gay man. A profoundly complex and wide-ranging one, and not one
the kids today would probably like very much. Kempy and I used to know one of
his late film period producers, Mike McLernon and others here met or knew
members of his ensemble. There is no doubt.
I wish Wildwechsel/Jailbait
(1973) were somehow legally available. But it's still tied up. There are
various sources for it in the usual backchannels. It's a scream. Only funnier
movie is Whity (1971) (in parts) and The Third Generation which I
saw in Paris in 1982. Even having to manage with not frequent
French subtitles, I was in gales of laughter, while the highly
"rad" audience (who all smelt slightly stale) sat there in silence
without a peep. His humor is something that is never far away. Part of his
range.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.