The Hollywood melodrama
reached its zenith in the 1950s: the same decade that enshrined the
20th century bourgeois values that continue to haunt us –
upward mobility, materialism, repression, conformism, the nuclear
family – also produced movies deeply critical of those values from
auteurs like Nicholas Ray, Douglas Sirk, and Vincente Minnelli. After
over a decade of blockbusters catering to fantasy fans it's safe to
say that fantasy is no longer an underdog genre, and it should
therefore cause no butthurt if I remark that it might be interesting
for a movie to take a long hard look at contemporary life and values
now and then. At least Hunger Games had the virtue of
allegorically reflecting something about Occupy-era boomer-Millennial
relations.
Any movie that's not a comedy is a melodrama in the broad sense, but there's also the
melodrama, a genre characterized by over-the-top acting, lurid subjects, and a focus on family and/or marital relationships. The
melodrama is usually associated with women because of that
relationships-focus and all of the emotion and stuff, and until
recently I thought that melodramas with male protagonists were
largely covered by film noir (usually centred on a sexually and
existentially anxious doomed protagonist) and movies about
dangerously angry and alienated men (starting in the 50s with
Nicholas Ray and continuing in very different ways in the films of
Cassavetes, Scorsese, Coppola, and Anderson). Sometimes there was
overlap between the types, as in Ray's In a Lonely Place or
(arguably) Taxi Driver. Sometimes a melodrama that still fits
comfortably within the realm of the “woman's picture” (focus on a
single romantic plot) might have a male protagonist, like Sirk's
There's Always Tomorrow or Dieterle's Love Letters. The
woman's picture/noir hybrid, meanwhile, produced movies that
anticipated 1950s melodrama in their critique of American bourgeois
values and the nuclear family, like Michael Curtiz's Mildred
Pierce (1945) and Max Ophuls's The Reckless Moment (1949).
But there was a time
when bestselling novels written by men, featuring male protagonists,
attempted to deal with problems of class and sex in American society.
(Not only men, and not only male protagonists, but that's what I'm
talking about here.) For better or worse, this kind of novel was
shrugged aside by academics because it didn't fit with the
narrative whereby the serious novel can never recover from Modernism:
The Recognitions is an acceptable sprawling novel of American
life, Peyton Place is not. I wrote about a movie based on one
such bestseller, Kings Row (1942), in my last post, and now
I've seen another, Vincente Minnelli's Some Came Running
(1958). It seems like a novelty today to see a film that is neither a romance aimed at a female audience nor a romantic comedy, in which
the whole concern of the male protagonist is to be loved by a woman
rather than to bond with or prove himself among other men, and
in which this is not an indication that the man is a stalker.
Thanks to feminism we
have a heightened awareness of the cultural tropes that demonize
female sexuality, and from Shakespeare to Thomas Hardy to Preston
Sturges there have always been male authors interested in protesting
against the sexual double standard. Some Came Running,
however, shows how similar tropes can be used to demonize male
sexuality. Frank Sinatra's Dave Hirsh, an Army veteran and
unsuccessful novelist, returns to his hometown, where he meets Gwen,
a creative writing and literary criticism teacher who's a fan of his
work, through his semi-estranged older brother, who became a
successful businessman through his wife's wealth. Dave falls in love with
Gwen, who's conflicted about her feelings for him. Dave's a drinker
and a gambler who sometimes takes up with “tramps,” and as such
the educated, upper-middle-class Gwen feels that he's not good enough
for her. More particularly, she's concerned that because he's been
with “whores,” his desire for her means that he thinks she's a
“whore” – and any desire she shows for him would confirm it.
She rejects him out of affronted pride and jealousy, in the same way
that, Freud speculated, “Dora” neurotically rejected her
employer's advances even though she had feelings for him because she
learned that he'd made the same advances to a lower-status woman a
few days earlier. For the movies, this is pretty advanced sexual
psychology, even if a female viewer may feel that there's a simpler explanation when a woman acts like Gwen, and it's called "she's just not that into you."
In any case, Gwen's
cuturally-conditioned conflict isn't presented especially
sympathetically, and she would come across even more as a typical 50s
movie melodrama portrait of a “frigid” woman (see also the
“nymphomaniac,” as in Sirk's Written on the Wind) and
neurotic female intellectual/career woman if it weren't that Hirsh
jerks around and leads on Shirley MacLaine's Ginnie in much the same
way. He can't love Ginnie, who loves him with even less pride than he
loves Gwen, because she's a tramp and because she lacks education:
Gwen can't understand his sexual life and Ginnie can't understand his
intellectual life. In other words, Hirsh is as divided, conflicted,
and neurotic as Gwen, a point driven home when we glimpse Gwen
discussing the phenomenon of great male writers' debauched sex lives
with her class. The movie is troubled by Hirsh's
unconventional sex life – as pathologized as the sexuality of the
“frigid” woman or “nymphomaniac” – and asks for
understanding of it.
A couple of
interrelated subplots flesh out this portrait of middlebrow American
sexual hypocrisy. Dave's unhappily married brother seeks consolation
in the arms of his much younger secretary; when his daughter
discovers this she goes wild and takes off to a nearby big city with
a man who's picked her up, where she runs into her uncle, who makes
him scram and puts her on a bus back home with admonitions about not
turning into a “tramp.” Later we learn that she's decided to
break way from home in a healthier way, by getting a job with a
publisher in New York. When we first met her she told her uncle that
she admired the male freedom that allowed him to see all different
sides of life, but if her desire to emulate Dave and its
proto-feminist implications are explored in the novel, they're not in
the movie. We only know that a middle-class young woman can't emulate
male freedom without becoming categorized as a “tramp” –
although we also know that Dave, to a lesser extent, is also
considered damaged goods, although being the victim of such attitudes
doesn't make him any less disposed to exhibit them towards women.
The movie cuts the
Gordian knot of sexual hypocrisy using the melodrama trope of the
good-hearted whore and her refreshing honesty. Throughout the 60s
MacLaine just kept playing sexually aberrant women. What was it about
the fey, offbeat personality and the androgynous haircut that
screamed “prostitute” and “fallen woman”? It all started
here, anyway, with her grating/endearing, abject and masochistic
performance as Ginnie, which won her an Oscar. Having a gamine
actress play a virgin/whore character is a familiar European gambit
(see Bresson's Ladies of the Bois de Bologne and Fellini's
Nights of Cabiria);
the actress's ethereal
quality makes the virgin archetype stand out in relief against the
soiled and vulgar reality. Two years later MacLaine would play a
similar role (for which she got an Oscar nomination) in Wilder's The
Apartment, in which Jack Lemmon's junior businessman must face up
to the fact that as a 99%er, he's a prostitute in relation to the big
boys just as much as MacLaine's suicidal abandoned mistress is, and
must choose between joining their ranks by exploiting women or
choosing “feminine” values by rejecting power. Which come to
think of it is also the theme of Some Like It Hot, in which
Lemmon more literally embodied the feminine.
No comments:
Post a Comment