On the Universality of "Brokeback Mountain"

Author(s): D. A. Miller
Source: Film Quarterly, Vol. 60, No. 3 (Spring, 2007), pp. 50-60
Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4486677 .
Accessed: 28/02/2011 22:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Film
Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org
 * D.A.MILLER
ofBrokebacA
On theUniversality
I there,expectedharanguesfromtheWoman on theneg-
NON VOGLIOPIU SERVIR.Today's cultureproduct lected wives, from the Gay Man on still-persisting
comes to marketshrink-wrappedin controversy.To
arms,citizens!A culturewar is being fought!And si-
multaneously,a commediadell'arteis beingperformed,
withthe Liberal,the Christian,the Feminist,theMedia
Critic,all steppingonto the stage of public opinion in
masksas familiarly definedas those of Pulchinelloand
Pantalone. In "The Battle of BrokebackMountain,"
some of us have been asked to performwearing the
mask of the Gay Man, whose role in this comedy,of
course,is as thoroughlyprescriptedas the others.He is
to be the film'snaturalpartisan,so innatelyidentified
withit thathe mustweep and cryhomophobia when it
doesn'twin an Oscar.He is to believethebad faithof its
boosters,who pretendthe filmis "for"him,when it is
merely"about" him and has been made entirelywith-
out his kind.He is to be all gratitudeat seeingexposed,
in 2005, the damage done by the Closet and-in the
midst of a struggleto refusethe fatalityof his condi-
tion-feel nothingbut admirationfor a nostalgically
tragicview of it.And finally,as if so much servilityto
the mastercultureweren'tenough, he is to forfeithis
reputationfor taste and mistakea middling piece of
Hollywood productfora major workof art.
It is thereforeworth insistingat the outset that,
contraryto the playbill,we weren't bornto play this
part.In thisphonywar of ideas,queer intellectualsneed
to develop formsof what,in otherwars,is called con-
scientiousobjection.There is somethingto learn from
the morons who, when polled fortheiropinion on a
universallyburningissue, answer"none"; or fromthe
philistineswho, by way of ending the discussion of a
universally admiredfilm,pronounceit"boring."In fact,
erotic disappointmentmay well be the only genuine
homosexual response to BrokebackMountain-and
hence the only genuinebasis fora political critiqueof
the film.For in the spate of opinions thatthe filmhas
been painstakinglydesigned to let loose, one attitude
remains unsolicited and unprofessed:that of Desire.
Here, right on cue, comes the Christian to thunder
againstsin and the Liberalto warble of love. And, over
Vol.60,Number3,pps 50-60.ISSN0015-1386,electronicISSN 1533-8630.? 2007 bythe Regentsofthe University
FilmQuarterly,
50 to photocopyor reproducearticlecontentthroughthe University ofCalifornia
homophobia, fromthe Film Critic on the Westernor
Ang Lee as auteur. But, notwithstandingthe scene of
two men fucking,no one has steppedforwardto attest
any sexual excitementin the film,whetheraround the
film'sactors,theirbodies, or whattheseare represented
as doing withone another.It is the idea of homosexu-
ality that is hot in BrokebackMountain, not the sex,
which has been skillfullydepicted, down to Heath
Ledger's unforgivablyharped-upon resemblance to
GeorgeBush,so thatno one could possiblygetoffon it.
What we are asked to "accept" about the Homosexual
is not his sexuality,but his agonized attemptsto fight
it-touching proof of a certaindevotionto normality
afterall.
The de-eroticizationstemsfromthesame principle
of mainstreamrepresentationthat,operatingless sub-
tly,eventuallyproduces forour edification,along with
other carrion, a couple of gay corpses. For even the
Closet needs the stimulusof spectacle,be it only the
spectacleof itsown enforcement. In enlightenedHolly-
wood, the decorums of thisspectacleremainthe same
as in darkestWyoming:homosexual desireis shown to
best advantage in the condition of having passed on.
Small wonder the filmis "haunting."What thwarted
love and gay-bashingspell out throughplot, nostalgia
and melancholy insinuate in the basso continuo of
overalltone.As stagedin the story,of course,the spec-
tacle of the Closet is meant to stir its yuppie demo-
graphic to indignation:why can't these countrygays
have Sex in the City,too? But as staged in the story-
telling,it is meant simplyto be invisible.
II
TRIMLITTLE, In its makingand
PRIMLITTLECRAFT.
marketingalike, BrokebackMountain invitesthe glib
controversy thata homosexual themestillreliablygen-
eratesin Americanculture.Far frombringingits pub-
lic togetherin compassion or tolerance,as some have
suggested,the filmdiligentlysolicits,in all theirfrac-
tiousness,the main divisionsof Americanopinion on
Allrightsreserved.Please directall requestsforpermission
ofCalifornia.
Press'sRightsand Permissions
website,http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp.

Mountain
this"hot-button"issue. So cannilyrotatedis thehomo-
sexual theme that, under one aspect or another,
itlendssupportto virtuallyall theconflicting positions,
attitudes,and judgments that make it so thrillingly
-and bankably-contentious. Accordingly,male ho-
mosexualityin BrokebackMountain is massivelycon-
tradictory:it is by turns,dependingon which opinion
is up for flattery,irresponsibleand committed,casual
and deeplyfelt,shockingand perfectly natural.In one
scene, the Homosexual appears as the declared enemy
of the family;but in another,he rises nobly to its de-
fense;he hates women, of course-at least when he is
not shown lovingand caringforthem;and thoughthe
filmimplicitlyaffirmshis rightto social recognition,it
also dooms him,inexorably,to suffermore than social
death. The programofferssomethingforeveryoneto
mouthoffabout.
In all the blah-blah,however,thereis widespread
accord on one point: thismovie of cowboysin love is
well made. Christianity Todayis nearlyblown away; it
overrides its predictable reservationson the subject
matterto award the filma generousthreestarsfor"the
qualityof the filming,the acting,the cinematography,
etc."'The New YorkReviewofBooks,witha warmerwel-
come forthis subject matter,nonethelessconcurs:the
film'sachievementconsistsin thatits"distinctively gay
story... happens to be so welltold thatanyfeelingper-
son can be moved by it."2And fromvirtuallyevery-
wherein betweenon the spectrumof opinion (which
in thissense is not all thatbroad) we hear of the film's
extraordinary "beauty"its strongsense of "craft."As if
by magic (or the operationof theunconscious),theart
of BrokebackMountainhas turnedeverymedia appa-
ratchik,usuallybusy summarizingplots and assessing
star turns,into a Jamesianaestheteagog at the sub-
tletiesof artisticshaping. Even brutal sodomy only
whets everybody'sappreciation of the narrativeand
pictorial"mastery"with which this "raw" subject has
been "exquisitely"composed.
It has not been, then,around an always-debatable
homosexualitythat the film(despite the good inten-
tions professedon its behalf) builds a consensus,but
Todesignate
theHomosexual
here
isatoncetobegin
elaborating
fantasies
ofhisbeing
"agayisbeing
harmed:
beaten."
around its own conspicuous craft.This craftis the real
universalforwhich the filmasks and is receivinggen-
eral recognition.(The ironyof theAcademyAwardsis
thatthe film,afterall, did get the prize it triedhardest
to deserve:Best Direction.) In the criticalreception,as
in the filmitself,the topic of homosexualityand the
practice of craftwork antithetically:the former,by its
violent divisiveness,breaks up the social body as ef-
fectivelyas a centrifuge;whereas the latterunifiesall
that it touches-and everyonewhom it touches-in
the spectacle of fineworkmanship.But theyare com-
plementaryprinciples,too, since, especiallynow that
the ideologization of culturehas become total,respect
for good formremains the best formof all. Such re-
spect is not just an act of graciousness shown to our
defeated adversary,like those statues of ancient roy-
alty posed grandly in frontof federal buildings in
Hawaii. It is also an act of generosityto ourselves,as,
by means of thisgesture,we all get to look a littleless
tendentious:the Christianless rabid,the New Yorkin-
tellectual less shrill, the film itself less messagy. In
"The Battle of BrokebackMountain," craft is our
Switzerland.In acknowledgingthe neutralityof this
country,at once political sanctuaryand psychicsana-
torium,we lay claim to our whole,healed humanity-
to the universalityof "any feeling person"-which
even in wartime is thus affirmedto have never de-
serted us. We are more, and better,than our often
nastypositions in combat.
But what, exactly,does crafthere consist in? Or
rather,of all thatit maybe thoughtto consistin,under
what particularaspect has it won such extraordinary
homage?The answeris farfrombeing immediatelyap-
parent,sincewhatusuallyfollowsthestiffsaluteto craft
is only a vague wave toward "the filming,the cine-
matography,the acting,etc." (To elaborate the quality
of RodrigoPrieto'scinematography, forinstance,onlya
single predicate is ever offered: "beautiful.") But this
reticenceconveysitsown message,one fullyconsonant
with the intentionsand practicesof craftitselfas an
artisticideology.For the exerciseof craftrequiresnot
only a high degree of technicalcompetence;it further
51
 demands thatthe performanceof such competencebe
accompanied-as by a coefficientthat multiplies its
value-by a rhetoricof discretion.Craft'sgolden rule:
to keep quiet about itself-or as quiet,at any rate,as is
compatiblewithitsrecognitionas quiet.Accordingly, it
offersa spectacle of the All-but-Invisible:the author
seems virtuallyto have disappeared froma world that
seems all the more solidlyreal forhis absence; and his
techniques,likehis meanings,are barelydetectable.(In
this,craftis opposed to style,which,ostentatiousand
obtrusive,alwaysseems to point,in the one direction,
to a narcissisticallyindulgedselfand, in the other,to a
factitious,unbelievableworld.)
It is thisrhetoricof discretion,ratherthananyspe-
cifictechnicalachievement,thatis celebratedin Broke-
back Mountain. Lee is praised for "renouncingovert
politics,"formakinghispoints"quietly," with"subtlety"
"delicacy, nuance, taste," and even "heroicrestraint."
He is admirably"removedin his direction"and atten-
tiveto "thethoughtand emotionsbeingarticulatedbe-
tween the words and in the pauses." The point of this
litany becomes plain when there is thrown into its
midst, as part of the same approbation,the frequent
observationthat"thereisn'tmuch sex in the film."Not
unlike that earlyenthusiastof Gide's The Immoralist
who said, "If Michel freedhimself,he would cease to
interestme,"criticsessentiallypraise Lee forthe prim
repressivenesswith which he handles the homosexual
theme.' Crafthas become a covertfigureforthe Closet
itself:thatwell-madepiece of cabinetrywherehomo-
sexual desire,farfromgeneratingan overtpolitics,lives
quietly with heroic restraint;and where nothing is
more commonplace than words and feelingsbetween
thelines,unlessitbe thevirtues-ever propitiousto the
artisticsense-of delicacy,taste, and nuance. Craft's
discreetrelationto meaningis hereused to sublimate-
conceal and idealize-the Closet's discreetrelationto
one meaning,thatmeaning,in particular.In a word,the
craftof BrokebackMountainis the Closet of the Closet.
III
LITTLEDOES HE KNOW.It is not, of course,the homo-
sexual desireof Ennis del Mar thatis put in thiscloset.
No, his desireis (withincraft'stactfullimits)displayed
forall to see. Indeed, we see it farbetter-and rather
sooner-than Ennis himself,without the ignorance,
confusion,and disavowalthatdistorthis consciousness
of it."Theybelievedthemselvesinvisible," AnnieProulx
writesof hergaycowboysin thewell-madefilm'seven-
better-madesourcestory, "notknowingJoeAguirrehad
watched them throughhis 10x42 binoculars for ten
minutes"4-and not knowing,either,thatthey'rebeing
52
scrutinizedfarmorethoroughlybyProulxherself,from
underthe narration'scloak of invisibility.
As a matterof
fact, this cognitiveedge over the Homosexual seems to
lie at the veryheart of her inspiration.Here is her ac-
count of how "Brokeback Mountain" began to take
shape:
One nightin a bar upstate I had noticed an
older ranch hand, maybe in his late sixties,obvi-
ouslyshorton theworld'sluxurygoods. Although
spruced up forFridaynight,his clotheswere a lit-
tleragged,boots stainedand worn.I had seen him
around,workingcows,helpingwithsheep,taking
orders froma ranch manager.He was thin and
lean, muscularin a stringykind of way.He leaned
against the back wall and his eyes were fastened
not on the dozens of handsome and flashing
women in the room but on the young cowboys
playingpool. Maybe he was followingthe game,
maybehe knewtheplayers,maybeone was his son
or nephew,but therewas somethingin his expres-
sion, a kind of bitterlonging,thatmade me won-
derifhe was countrygay.Then I began to consider
whatit mighthavebeen likeforhim-not the real
person againstthe wall,but forany ill-informed,
confused,not-sure-of-what-he-was-feeling youth
growingup in homophobicruralWyoming.A few
weekslaterI listenedto thevicious rantof an eld-
erlybar-caf6owner who was incensed that two
"homos" had come in the nightbeforeand or-
dereddinner.She said thatifherbar regularshad
been there(it was dartstournamentnight)things
would have gone badlyforthem."Brokeback"was
constructedon thesmallbut tightidea of a couple
of home-growncountrykids,opinions and self-
knowledge shaped by the world around them,
findingthemselvesin emotionalwatersof increas-
ingdepth.I wantedto develop thestorythrougha
kind of literarysostenente.5
Werewe to come upon thispassage in a novel,as partof
a fictionalfirst-personnarration,we would immedi-
atelyunderstandthatthereare not one, but two char-
actersin the bar scene. One character,of course, is the
designatedone. This is the ranchhand who commands
our attention as it is deftlyled in stages from his
shabby-genteelclothes,to his lean, muscular body,to
his eyes fastenedon the pool players,and finally-the
eurekaof character-formation-tothat"somethingin
his expression,a kindofbitterlonging"thatdefinitively
suggestshe is "countrygay."The othercharacteris the
one we see designatinghim thus. This is the woman
who, by way of noticingthatthe man isn't looking at
women, has placed him under such close watch.If she
seemsa freerspiritthanhe,thatis because she has been
spared the immobilizingtechniquesof her own obser-
vation. He is the character,she "merely"the narrator.
The same processthatrevealshisbody,age,work,social
status,and desire denies equivalent knowledgeabout
her,including,most relevantly, the motiveforher sud-
den-and massive-psychic investmentin him.
But in a novel,we would nonethelesswonder:what
has brought the woman to this bar full of flashing
women and desirableyoungmen? How is she occupy-
ingitsmilieu?Afterall,she does not seem to be playing
the social games of the place any more than the ranch
hand.And whydoes she fixon him so intently? He has
certainly not noticed her.What is she doing,what is she
getting, in her observation of him-an observation that
she wants nothingmore thanto prolong,as by a piano
pedal,in a literary "sostenente"?Not all thatobscurely,it
is a complex of desirethatstructuresherinterest,desire
not for"the real personagainstthewall"-from whom
itwillquicklydetachitselfforfresher meat-but forthe
super-excitingpossibility of male homosexualitythat,
on theexiguous basis of "somethingin his expression,"'
she eagerly,forciblymakeshim personify. The knowing
qualityof herdetection,likeitsunsurprisingdiscovery,
suggeststhatshe has foundonlywhat she was seeking.
"I had noticed": thisepistemologistof the closetseems
to havebeen on thecruisefora Homosexual wellbefore
she found one ("againstthewall" indeed).
Whateverthe passage makes us wonder about its
narrator-withoutthe restof our novel,we can't with
certaintysay-its psychicmix of aggression,paranoia,
and identification can hardlybe reducedto an innocent
reflexof liberalgood will.That,though,is preciselythe
aim ofthe artistic"idea" as thepassageeventuallyworks
it through:to replace the woman's complex desiring
relationto male homosexualitywiththe free-standing
figureof the Homosexual. This figurecan thenbecome
thesole object of our interest,which,thusdisinterested,
can in turnbear a simpler,noblername: sympathy.
He will need it. For to designatethe Homosexual
here is at once to begin elaboratingfantasiesof his
beingharmed:"a gayis beingbeaten."First,thewoman
envisionsthe damage thatmay have been inflictedon
him in childhood,then,by way of someone else's "vi-
cious rant,"she foreseesthe danger he runs in adult-
hood when what is, in effect,herknowledgefallsinto
thewronghands (the caf&-owner's or her friends').But
this fantasy,of course, places her in an implicit
dilemma: she must not tellwhat she knows,can never
getherknowledge(or herselfas itskeeper) recognized.
This is thedilemmathatwillbe resolvedin theethically
dignifiedformof a story.The couple originallyformed
bythewoman and thecountrygaywill morphinto two
countrygayswho love each other,hurteach other,are
harmed by others.In the gays'now entirely"othered"
drama,thewoman will entirelydisappear,and her im-
plication in dreamingit will have dropped out of the
picture-or better,will remainonlyas partof the enig-
maticfascinationof theirpicture.In thissame memoir,
ProulxnotesthatJackand Ennis did somethingthat,as
a writer,she had neverbeforeexperienced:"theybegan
to get verydamn real."And in the process the author
can damn well forgetshe made themup.
In the finishedstory,the memoir'snarratorial"I"
has been replacedbythe same anonymous,impersonal
narration, with all its objectifying,"realistic" tech-
niques,thatProulx'snaturalistpredecessors,absentgay
cowboys, reserved for peasants, workers,and petty
clerks.It has been replaced,in a word,with Literature
-a Literatureto which,barelyable to read or write,
Wyomingcowboys (like Maupassant's Norman peas-
ants beforethem) have even less access than to self-
consciousness.Harbored in thisnarration,armed with
its devices,Proulx can say of the Homosexual as often
as she pleases: "littledid he know."And, objectifiedas
her character,he is less than everin a position to chal-
lenge her:"What the fuckare you lookingat?"
IV
MOUNTING.
HORSEBACK Proulx'sself-disengagement
models the protocol of liberal sympathythat is fol-
lowed,withvaryingspecifications,by all the men and
women connectedwith the filmadaptation.This pro-
tocol requires,first, thattheyestablishthe Homosexual
in all his obvious libidinaldifference;and thenthatthey
seek, somewhere outside that difference,a basis for
"relating"to him understandingly.Having made the
Homosexual a Martian, they may then congratulate
themselvesfor findingin him their fellow man-or
ratherfortryingto,as the effortmust neverbe entirely
persuasive.Heath Ledger,interviewedon his approach
to therole of Ennis,affordsan excellentexample:"First
of all, I had to go in and discoverwhatwas causing this
inabilityto expressand to love.What was the culpritin
that?I figuredthatit was some sortof a battle,and the
conclusion I came to was that he was battlinghimself
and battlinghis geneticstructure."6Ennis is a mystery;
he requires nothing short of an expedition, as into
unexploredparts,to "go in and discover"the obscure
cause ofwhichhe is theeffect. This cause,quasi-logically
"figured"to a "conclusion,"is his "geneticstructure," a
strategicsynonym for homosexuality that surrounds
53
 even the heartof darknesswitha cordon sanitaire.It is
now more unthinkablethan ever that Ledger might
have attemptedto "go in and discover" his own re-
pressedhomosexualdesireforhelp in playingthepart.
Yet once the assumption of his externalrelation to
Ennis is in place,therecommencesthemost extraordi-
naryfantasyof thebond betweenthem:
The easiestthingI found [in playingthepart]
was being a ranch-hand,being a horse backup. I
can ride backwardsifI had to. I'm verycomfort-
able with horses.I love horses and I have grown
up around farm-handsand even if I was born in
Perth,WesternAustralia,there'ssomethingvery
universalabout anyonewho's on horsebacknight
and day.There'sa universaltrait.Even physically,
when you are on horsebacknightand day,when
you get offthathorse,you are stillwalkingas if
there'sstilla horsebetweenyourlegs.
It maywell be doubtedthattheuniversaltraitof Broke-
backMountainis horsebackmounting;it is more likely
to be the hilaritycaused bythisclaim to thateffect.But
Ledgerhas a point,albeitan unconsciousone. No West-
ernhas everfeaturedso manyhorses'asses as Brokeback
Mountain,or so much male behaviorthatbeggedto be
called horseplay.How long,Jackasks Ennis on a fishing
trip,must theykeep meetinglike this?"Long as we can
rideit" is the reply.Could thebit bear anymore strain?
If the critics'craftwas code forthe Closet, the actor's
universalhorsebackmountingis an unwittinglylewd
metaphorforthedesireinside it.
Ledger's naivetyabout this desire ("Though I am
not like Ennis in his 'geneticstructure,'I am like him
when I ride backwardsor walk with a horse between
my legs") may explain the curious abstractnessof his
performance.He has been praised, of course,forjust
theopposite,forconcretizingEnnis'srepresseduncon-
scious in a veritablecornucopiaof psychosomatisms.If
we don't read repressionin theactor'spursedlips,then
we read it in his evasive eyes; and should we miss it
there,his rounded postureor his mumbled diction is
ready to expound. Overloaded with signage,though,
thisrepressiongrowsgeneric;it loses the specificity of
an unconscious wish,of thatunconscious wish. In the
hecticcompetitionof symptoms,no singleone can se-
riouslyinviteour imaginationto drop below thewaist.
Any G-rated trauma mighthave done to account for
therepressionof thisEnnis,who is merelysuperlatively
uptight.(Here the performancechimes perfectly with
Lee's auteurism,whichprojectsa similarlybroad-spec-
trumrepressiononto JaneAustenheroines,comic book
54
heroes, Taiwanese families,Connecticut WASPS, and
gay cowboysalike.)
While it is, of course, a classic mechanism of
homosexual repressionto displace and generalizeitself
in just such a way-think how manyclosetcases come
off as asexual-Ledger's performanceis governed by
this mechanism,whose logic it obeys ratherthan lays
bare. The overproducedsigns of "the clenched" point
us moreto theactor'sremarkablecraftthanto the char-
acter's restiveass. In admiring this craft,we reinforce
Ledger'sdistancefromEnnis, who has no more acting
abilitythan,in a formerlife,he had Proulx'sfluencyin
styleindirectlibre.The performanceof repressioncon-
tinues repression'swork. Justhow thoroughlyLedger
threwhimselfinto this repressionis suggested in the
factthat,on thesame setwherehe was playingat falling
in love with JakeGyllenhaal,he reallydid fall in love
with Michelle Williams,reversingEnnis's swing from
Alma to Jackwithfastidiousprecision.
V
CRASH.Let me be clearas to what is bogus in the liberal
attemptto "relate"to the Homosexual: it denies a rela-
tion to him thatalreadyexists.This is the libidinal,the
fantasmaticrelationto homosexual desirethat no one
in Westernculturecan escape in eithernarrowlypsy-
chic or broadlyculturalforms.That is why,in the eyes
of its homosexual objects,liberal sympathywill always
fallshort:forittakescare neverto be so progressivethat
it goes back to theprimarypsychicrelationitwishes to
have severed.Ledger'sremarksabout theuniversalityof
horsebackmountingare a particularlyabsurd case in
point,but itoughtto be no less preposterousto suggest,
with certainassociates of the production,that it was
only by reachingdeep into his Confucian upbringing,
or in drawingheavilyon his still-unfinished mourning
forhis late father,
thatAng Lee managed to understand
what his repressedgayloversweregoingthrough.
It can neverbe anythingbut falseto regardhomo-
sexual desire as the characteristic,the problem, the
tragedyof someoneelse. It can neverbe anythingbut
falseevenwhen it manifestlyis this.That is because it is
neveronlythis.In everyindividualand in everycollec-
tive,homosexual desire is a palpably internal affair;
even throughits institutionalizedrepression,it slips
more oftenthan thereare fratinitiations.'Moreover,
what the Homosexual representsas homosexualityin-
cludes somethingbesideshomosexuality.If the Homo-
sexual figuressexualityin its most excitingform (who
does not recognizewhatGuy Hocquenghem called "the
spontaneoussexualizationof all relationswitha homo-
sexual"?), he also figuresit, not unconnectedly,in its
 mostfutile.Whetherwe have in mind an otherwiseeli- and "relationship"
gible bachelor or the repellentanus of his desire,the
Homosexual is not onlyhimselfa greatwastebut also
thatalone can give Ofcourse,like
good
gay sex meaning.
the agentof a stillgreaterwasting.And what he, so to Prieto's beautiful naturalist
protagonists,
speak,laysto wasteis nothinglessthansexuality'ssocial landscapes do thehorny cowboysdon't
seethis
use value: itsdependablyproductivesubmissionto the double duty:their
yokeof conjugalityand to theburdenoftheChild.That ready-to-wearin-
even moon,
is whyhe is so terrifically excitingand whyhis repre- effabilityat once letaloneunderstand
sented fateis so regularlyto die forus. Justas, in an
automotiveculture,the spectacleof cars being demol-
suspends the plot
and naturalizes
what itmeansor
ishedgeneratesequal partselationand alarm,so, under its obvious func- appreciatetheanti-
the imperiumof the Couple and the Child, the spec-
tacleof an irresponsible jouissance-of sex desocialized
tions. No sooner
does Ennis join
narrative ofits
artistry
-is as thrillingas it is threatening. What is consumed Jack in the tent, appearance; wedo.
only
and condemned in this spectacle is not just a seduc- forinstance,than
tivelyhomosexualdesire,but also theseductively deso- the momentumof theireroticadventureis brokenby
cializing insistence of the sexual drive whatever
itself, an enormous full moon happening-to-be-gliding
particularembodimentsit mayassume." across a cloudyhorizon.And by the operationof that
Here is the contradictionunder which Brokeback economywhichis one of thegreatwondersof craft,the
Mountain "happens to be" well crafted.On the one same Moonstruckmoon thatholds up the action also
hand,homosexualityis onlyinteresting (marketable)if puts a classicsignifierof romancein frontof it.
it is theoccasion forrehearsinga fantasyof theHomo- Of course, like good naturalistprotagonists,the
sexual as thrillingly,pointlesslyantisocial,a betenoire hornycowboysdon't even see thismoon, let alone un-
who mustdie. On theotherhand,thisfantasyis neither derstandwhatitmeansor appreciatetheanti-narrative
compatiblewith,nor even tolerableto,theliberalpoli- artistryof its appearance;onlywe do, fromour obses-
tics of homosexualityas we know themand as Broke- sivelyindicated positionof seeingmore thanthey.I've
back Mountain would espouse them. Thus the film already remarkedhow the naturalisttechniques of
must give us, along with this fantasy,a "progressive" Proulx'sstoryextendheroriginatingpresumptionthat
alibi forindulgingit;evenwhiletradingon thefantasy, the Homosexual doesn'tsee--doesn't see himselfand
it must tame it into appearing to authorize the for- doesn'tsee us watchinghim.If,as Proulxherselfallows,
mationof gaymarriedswithchildren.The domestica- the filmadaptation turnsout to be "more powerful"
tion followstwo strategies.The firstaims at reducing thanherstory,thisis because cinema-with itsbuilt-in
the sexual excitement, while the second deals withre- voyeuristic splitbetweenspectatorsand spectacle-can
cyclingthe sexual waste. In keepingwith the former, makethispresumptionintovirtualreality.
the filmcultivatesa quasi-clinical anhedonia around
the male physiqueand dragsouts whatwe must pun- VI
ninglycall the actionas distractingly as possible.Com- "WHATTHE FUCK AREYOU LOOKINGAT?"These are
pliant with thelatter,it takes care to ensure thatthegay Ennis's words in the film;theyare said to a man who
sex, even from itscasual beginning,signifies-thatis to happens to pass thealleywhereEnnis,havingjust sep-
say,signifies the socially redemptivevalues of "love" arated fromJack,is violentlythrowingup. His ques-
tion is effectual,shooing the man on despite his
curiosityor concern.Why shouldn'tit be? Ennis has
resortedto a venerablecatchwordof gay-baiting,on
hearingwhich everyman knows enough to take his
eyeselsewhere.Yetthisefficacy evidentlyhas itslimits;
ourview of Ennis-who, rebus-like,is "spillingout his
guts"to us-continues unaffectedby anythingexcept
m our now heightenedappreciationof spectatorialpriv-
Y
v
o
ilege:to see withoutbeing seen.And theepisode spells
L,
v,
o
o
out forus what,in thisfilm,thatprivilegespecifically
N
o entails:namely,thateven as othersare debarredfrom
Moonstruck
moon inspectingthe gaypenetralium,we get to keeplooking.

55
 That there is no
Medusawassupposed "sex" in this
toturn
whoeverlooked episode merely
permits us to
ather the
tostone; sentimentalizein
isfelt
Homosexual to good conscience
thesadismof our
hisbeholders
petrify prurience.Ennis
butnoless.
differently, mayhave topped
Jack in the pup
tent; but here,
alone with us, it is he, crouched and grunting,who
seems to be fucked royally:back-broken under the
burden of his own homosexualityand penetratedun-
gentlybythesuperpowerwe enjoywhilewatchinghim
squirm. We are, to modify Ennis's locution only
slightly,fucking-looking at him; and better still, we
neverhave to hear ourselvesaddressedbyhis question.
Like the Homosexual of classic psychoanalysis,
Ennis is paranoid: "You ever get the feelin'-I don't
know,when you'rein town,and someone looks at you,
suspicious,likehe knows.Then you go out on thepave-
ment and everyone'slookin' at you like theyall know
too." This paranoia has alreadyproduced itssymptom
in the scene where, deep in conversationwith Jack,
Ennis suddenly looks off into the horizon, sensing
something;Jackinstinctively followshis anxious eyes,
as does the camera. But all we see is a passing pickup
truckand a hawk casually flyingabove it; the driver
looks straightat the road, and the hawk is a piece of
local color,not an envoyfromThe Birds.All we see, in
otherwords,is theemptystructureof Ennis'sparanoid
seeing. Yet with only the slightestdetachmentfrom
Hollywood's"cinemaof comfort," we mightalso recog-
nize here the pressureof our own seeing. Ennis is al-
waysbeing watchedlike a hawk-if not by Jack,or Joe
Aguirre,or Alma, then,in a farmore continuous sur-
veillance than theirs combined, by us spectators.
Though BrokebackMountaindoes not otherwiseseem
to aspire to the cinematicavant-garde,thereis some-
thing about Ledger's ever-"on"performancethat al-
most suggests one of those postmodern shifts of
narrativelevel in which a characterbehaves as though
he knowshe is in themoviewe are watching. Onlythefic-
tivesurveillanceintrinsicto our spectatorialposition,
afterall, allows us to diagnose the"paranoia"of Ennis's
belief in the fictivesurveillancethat he imagines to
know all about him. Weare his paranoia; our verygaze
holds-even as itholds back fromhim-the proofthat
he is what he can neverbe sure of being: in his right
mind.
56
Yet spectatorialprivilegedoes not in itselfsecure
that distance which everyone is so eager to claim in
watchingthe Homosexual. Where the Homosexual is
concerned,it is preciselyat thevisual levelthatthisdis-
tance is oftenfeltto be mostunsustainable.Medusa was
supposed to turnwhoeverlooked at her to stone; the
Homosexual is feltto petrifyhis beholdersdifferently,
but no less. The verysightof him threatensto make
men hard with his own kind of desireand to glaciate
thewomen withthe frigidity of his own indifferenceto
if
them.And even the men thus aroused become furi-
ous or the women thus scorned compulsively"warm"
towardhim,theseare not dispassionatestatesof mind.
It is as ifeyecontactabsorbsfromhim thesexual equiv-
alentof second-handsmoke,whichcauses even the ab-
stinentto reekand sicken,to tingleand turnon, all at
once. But BrokebackMountain has no choice in the
matter(to use that hoary trope of pornography):the
storyinvolvesus in theperilouslyenjoyableoccupation
of queer-watchingby necessity. How does the filmin-
terestus in this story,and make us lose interest,to-
gether?What,in otherwords,is theexactbusiness of its
celebratedcraft?
I offerthreelinkedshotsas keyto whatthefilmhas
to tell us in this regard.The firstshot shows Ennis as
seen by Jackin the outside rear-viewmirror of his
truck;it concludes the ocular ballet of approach and
avoidance,lookingand looking away,thatthetwo men
performwhile waitingoutside Aguirre'straileroffice.
The second shot showsJoeAguirreholdingbinoculars;
he has been spyingon what we have just observedour-
selveswithless trouble:a scene of Jackand Ennis,half-
naked,horsingaround the campsite.And thethirdshot
shows Alma looking throughthe window of a screen
door and seeing a vehement kiss between Jack and
Ennis thatis continuedover fromthe shot beforeit. In
all threeshots,the Homosexual-unambiguously "as
such"-is shown being seen by another character
throughglass.The vitrificationat once singles out the
shotsand joins themto one anotherin a series.'
Technicallyspeaking,thesethreevitrified images all
do thesame thing:theyrendertheprecedingshot or se-
quence, given to us "objectively,"into a "subjective"
point of view.And (nothingquiet about thecrafthere)
theydo thiswithunapologeticvirtuosity. To speak less
technically, we also note that the omniscientnarration
alwayshas the same content:a spectacleof erotic play
betweenJackand Ennis. The subjectiveshotsinterpose
themselvesin frontof thisspectacleliketitlesin a silent
movie.Not onlydo theybringdown the curtainon the
spectacle,but theyalso give it a meaning that is, as it
 THE HOMOSEXUAL OBSERVED: EROTIC PLAY UNDER GLASS

~"lrr

?:i$rzi~~

L
I
ar
s,::
1
: t
~I r
d? r

i
?~i- P F

~i~z5lii
r
e~~
?-- I~ 1
?,T

4A6
t?
~1~ g:

"i
?: ::
i
-~s~L ~YxZ~
a/ I-I ~1~?~ '"

(Ir
-AmmiWMINW
ow

~?-?--
- Aloo ?:

i I: I?i IIt
i ? ::

Jackiswatching iswatching
Aguirre

ro
LL-
i .~f*ZillllB Ik:I
LL
C
Ln d
C)".~9
Almaiswatching

57
 happens,no smallpartofthecensorship."'Movingfrom
objectiveto subjectiveseeing,we move froma homo-
eroticspectacleto a "view"or"take"on it,a strong,emo-
tionallybiased positionthat effectively replaces visual
homoeroticismwithnarrativecaptioning.The firstshot
plainlybears the title"Jackis Amorous" and launches
the gay love plot. No less legibly,the second shot-
"Aguirreis Wrathful"-kicksoffthehomophobiccoun-
terplot.And withthe thirdshot,almost screamingthe
message"Almais Crushed,"thereis born themasterplot
of the Family'sdestructionand ultimatereconstitution.
In this series of views,the filmcauses to precipi-
tate,as out of a solution,not so much threecharacters,
as threefigures,threeessences,which the drama will,
like a good soap opera, set againstone anotherin nu-
merous permutations.First,the Homosexual (Jack,
Ennis, Earl and Rich, the Mexican hustlers,Randall)
who acknowledgesthatthehomoeroticspectacleturns
him on; then,the Homophobe (Aguirre,the Clown,
Earl'skillers,Lureen'sfather, Jack'skillers,Jack'sfather),
whose desireforthisspectacletakesthe formof a fury
to annihilateit; and finally,theWoman (Alma, Lureen,
Cassie, Jenand Alma Jr,Jack'smother) who reps the
"familyvalues"thatthespectaclewould exclude,unless
-great liberal"hope"-there were founda way to do-
mesticateit. X loves the thingthroughhis narcissistic
mirror;Y hatesthething,whichhis binocularsmean to
keep at a distance; and Z, across the cruel,look-but-
don't-touch transparencyof the window pane, feels
shutout by the thing.So the film'striangulardramatic
structurealreadyanticipates,even courts,what I have
called the commediadell'arteof its reception.
But, more important,theseshots also workto put
the spectatorat a removefromthe verytrianglethat
theyconstruct-to installus, at keymomentsof narra-
tiveexpectancy,in a comfortzone outsidethenarrative.
For to be told withso much"theater"thata shot repre-
sentsan individualcharacter'sperspectiveis also to be
toldin thesame emphasisthatit does notrepresentour
own. By paraded antithesis,these shots reaffirmour
prioralignmentwiththe perspectivally unowned om-
niscience.Because the viewpointsare man-
characters'
ifestlypartial,limitedto particularsocial, psychic,or
narrativecoordinates,our own seeing gets definedin
the contrastas "universal."The watchersin theseshots
know more thanthose theywatch,but the spectatorof
theseshotsknowsmore thanthewatchers;and no one
is,or can everbe, watchingus. Preciselyinsofaras their
one-sidedviews(in thebestHegelian fashion)combine
to generatethetragedy, theyare preventedfromwholly
understandingit. By contrast,the objectivenarration
withwhichwe are thuspointedlyidentifiedneversub-
58
mitsto theparticularity of Jack'shunger,Aguirre'shate,
Alma'shurt,or anyequivalentdeformationofitself.If it
brieflycitesthesecharacters'perspectives,it is to negate
them fromits own always recoverable(because never
actuallysurrendered)position above the fray.
Withthisconsequence: that,wheneverthe Homo-
sexual is seen as such,itis notwe whoare seeinghim.Or
to put it differently,we're not seeing him that way-
withthe cruisingglance of the Homosexual, the mur-
derous gaze of the Homophobe, the wounded look
of the Woman. On the contrary,the filmimplicitly
invitesus to contradicteach of these views thus: "but
it doesn't quite mean what the character watching
thinks!"Ennis doesn't mean his stance to be sexually
provocative;and he and Jackdon't mean to be fucking
around the camp any more than they mean for their
kiss to hurtAlma and the kids; in a word, theydon't
mean tobe homosexual.The men are detachedfromthe
particularmeaningthat"perspective"imposes on them
by the feltpartialityof thatsame perspective.
Yet the dialectic of these shots does not move us
beyond perspectiveso much as back to wherewe were
before it, articulatingin miniature the film's overall
structureof nostalgia. At one end of each shot is a
homosexual who doesn't mean to be homosexual, at
the otherend, matchingand mirroringhim, is a film
spectatorwho doesn't mean forhim to be either.Both
parties are disallowed self-consciousness,the homo-
sexual unable to attainit,the spectatorfreedfromit by
having its burden shiftedto the dramatis personae.
Accordingly,what is preserved in these shots is that
vague homoeroticism, innocent and ineffable, that
Jack and Ennis shared with us and the scenery on
BrokebackMountain. Even as the storylineis busy de-
stroyingtheHomosexual, thevisualsworkto safeguard
thishomoeroticism,which,on conditionthatit remain
unowned, unnamed and unmeaning,need answer to
nobody.
Thus thefilmremainsquite faithful to itsgenre,the
Western,wherethispsychicpreserveis more common
than an Indian reservation,of which it occasionally
takestheform.Finally,however,the ethosof Brokeback
Mountain remindedme less of The Searchers(echoed
forcinephilesin thelast shot) than of Bear Pond, Bruce
Weber's1990 collectionof male nudes."Bear Pond" is a
mythicsummerplace where unaffectedly naked men,
alone or in twosomes,engage in outdoor activities as
bucolic as itsname. Here thehomoerotic,though every-
wherediffused, is nevercondensedintotheHomosexual
or theGay;in theprevailinginnocenceof theplace, lust
or loathingwould be as out of place as a woman. The
worldof"Bear Pond" has been beautifully, simply,given
 lit
BruceWeber, Jasonand
Christian
ontheisland
at BearPond,inBear
Pond(1990).
? BruceWeber

A k

Iti

to us,thewaya mountainlandscapeis givento sight,or NOTES

the mountainair to respiration.The emergenceof de- Thisessaycameout of conversations aboutthefilmwithRobert
sirewould be fatalto thisfairyland,would driveit as far Beck,Matt Bell,NaifeiDing,Lee Edelman,RichardHutson,Chris
Jensen,DavidKurnick, JosephLitvak,RichardPefa,KentPuckett,
offas that El Dorado vainlysought by the cowboys,
EnricoVettore,J.Weiner,and RobWhite.
leathermen,and otherassortedfauxmachos livingin 1. Editor'snoteto reviewbyLisaAnnCockrel,www.christiani-
Chelsea or the Castro. Some of us used to thinkthat tytoday.com,16December2005.
Bear Pond was a regressivedaydreampeculiar to gay 2. Daniel Mendelson,"AnAffair to Remember," New YorkRe-
men:an Edenicfantasyof ourselvesbeforethefall-the viewofBooks,23 February 2006.
3. CitedinMichaelLucey,NeverSayI (Durham,NC: DukeUni-
fall,I mean,notintoforbiddensexualpractices,but into
Press,2006),84.
versity
the stateof gaydesireitself.Littledid we know: in the 4. AnnieProulx,"BrokebackMountain,"in Proulx,LarryMc-
worldthatproducesand proscribeshim,thewishto re- Murtry,and Diana Ossana, Brokeback Mountain:Storyto
turntheHomosexualto latencyis universal. Screenplay(NewYork:Scribner, 2006),7.

59
 5. Proulx,"Getting Movied,"ibid.,129-30. "aversiontherapy,'framingitshomoerotic scenes,on one side
6. "Interview: HeathLedgeron'Brokeback Mountain,"' conducted or another,withimagesthatthrowa chillon them.The most
by EthanAmes,CinemaConfidential, www.cinecon.com, 29 gruesomeinstancecomeswhenEnnis,rejoining theherdafter
December2005.The laterquotationfromLedgeris also from hisfirstnightwithJack, findsa sheep'sguttedcarcass.A first
thisinterview. shotgivesus Ennisand thedeadsheeptogether. A secondshot
7. Copycatcrime?At theUniversity ofVermont,Phi Gamma showsus a close-upofEnnislookingand a thirdthesheep's
Deltarecently "madeitspledgeswearcowboyoutfits and en- mutilated carcass.A fourthshotmakesas ifto replicate this
durea rainofantigay insultsbasedon therecentmovieBroke- shot/countershot elaboration.
We see Ennislook away,look
backMountain"(ChronicleofHigherEducation, NewsBlog, back,but then-wherethe reverseshot of the dead sheep
10 May2006). oughttobe-we geta shot,inno waycontinuous withEnnis's
Another,moreseriouscrimeworthyof note hereis the sightline,of Jacknaked,washingclothesbythestream.His
recentdeathoftwomenin Columbus,Ohio. I quotethebe- freshnudityhasalreadybeen"spoiled," assimilatedto thecar-
ginningand end of thenewsreportbyTheodoreDeckerin rionitwillbecome.
theColumbus Dispatch,12 January 2006:
Murder-Suicide of ChildhoodFriendsBaffles Relatives D.A.MILLER
isJohnF.Hotchkis
Professor
ofEnglish
attheUniversity
TheywerechildhoodfriendsfromUtah,ridingin ofCalifornia, andauthorofJaneAusten,
Berkeley orTheSecret
ofStyle
rodeosas teensand stayingin touchas adults.Now, (Princeton Press,
University 2003).
Columbuspolice and relativesare tryingto sortout
how sucha closerelationship couldend in a murder- ABSTRACT ofAngLee'sgay-themed
Critics Westernmayormaynot
suicide... condonehomosexuality, buttheyagreeon one point:thismovieof
"I know that those two men were best friends," cowboysinloveis wellmade.Theessayunpackswhatthispercep-
Michael Stone said. "Theywerefriendsall through tionimpliesaboutLee'scraft, anda politics
as an artofreticence of
highschool.Theyrodeoedtogether. neutrality.
"Thereis absolutely nothingI knowofeitherofthese
that
gentlemen they would escalateintoan argument
AngLee,Brokeback
KEYWORDS Mountain,
Western,
homosexuality,
or one ofthemshootingtheother... craft
"It'sjust so shockingthatit is almostindescribable
becausethosetwoweresuchgood friends ...
"Hopefully, somedaywe'll be able to knowexactly
whathappened."
The articlemayor maynotbe alludingto Brokeback Moun-
tain;and the puzzlementthatit compulsively underscores
maybe disingenuousor merelyunimaginative. We mayno
more resolvethese ambiguities, which are typicalof the
Closet,thanwe can denythem.
8. To comprehend thisspectacleand notjust homophobically
consumeit,one mightconsulteitherof twosources.One is
thegreatpsychoanalytically mindedtradition ofqueertheory Action Speaks Louder
runningfromGuyHocquenghem(HomosexualDesire,1972)
throughLeo Bersani(Homos,1995) to Lee Edelman(No Fu-
Violence,Spectacle,
ture,2004). The otheris thatfilmtraditionone mightcall
andtheAmerican
"homocinema," a samplingofwhosemajorworkswouldin- ActionMovie ERIC
UCH
cludeGenet'sChantd'Amour, Fellini'sLa dolcevita,Pasolini's EricLichtenfeld action
Teoremaand Salo, Fassbinder'sQuerelle,Oshima'sGohatto, coherent,
"[A]nintelligent, and
and mostrecently Almod6var'sLa mala educaci6n.Holly- frequently studyof
illuminating
wood cinemaknowsonlytwooptions:to makehomosexual a genrethathasbecomefirmly
desireinvisible,in a closetintendedforgeneraluse, or to entrenched inpop culture...
maketheHomosexualsuper-visible, as a minoritized The bookencourages theidea
"prob- that,although someactionfilms *
lem."In homocinema, whatis unclosetedis not theHomo-
maybe 'mindless,'ourreaction
sexual,but the nexus of desire,pleasure,and fantasythat to themdoesn'thaveto be."
normalculturedevelopsaroundhim.In theopencirculation -Variety
of theseelements-intheiremigration fromthepersonand "EricLichtenfeldaccomplishes
categoryof the Homosexual-homocinemafindsa radical the impossible,puttingaction Revised and expanded edition
potentialfordisrupting socialand symbolicorder. filmsunderthemicroscope
9. To underscore theseries'coherence, eachshotin itis givenan withoutrobbing to startleandamuseus.
themoftheirability
echo:Jack, Aguirre,Alma,all resorttothemirror, thebinocu- Hismarriage ofpopcornandtheprovocative produceswhat
canonlybe calleda roller-coaster
read."
lars,theglasspane a secondtime. -Steven E.de Souza,screenwriter,
Die Hard
10. ThoughAlma'sobservation does notliterally end Ennisand
Jack'skiss,itthoroughly drainstheerosfromitscontinuation.
Wemayno longerenjoythekiss,mustentertain feelingsquite
contraryto pleasure.The filmconsistently practicesthis

60