Why do homosexual writers get right to the essence of relationships?

terrancerattigan-001It hadn’t occurred to me before (I don’t know why) how good homosexual writers are with relationships. I recently watched the film version of The Deep Blue Sea, a recent version of Terrance Rattigan’s play. I was very impressed with it and decided to watch something I’d recorded in 2011, an hour long documentary on Rattigan by Benedict Cumberbatch. It was in that interesting documentary that it was stated that Rattigan’s female characters, including, Hester Collier, played by Rachel Weisz in the film, were actually based on men, that at the time the plays were written the characters had to be changed because homosexuality was against the law.

I first came across a Rattigan play in the 1990s. I didn’t know or didn’t register who the play was written by. The play was Separate Tables, including Julie Christie and Alan Bates. The play was very moving. I remember my wife of the time saying ‘You could feel that’, and she was right – you could feel it. I recently watched the play again, but it is of course dated. With the best of intentions you can’t help noticing the hairstyles, the static camera – it’s still a great play but the shine is taken off it. The Deep Blue Sea was my first experience of Rattigan modernised – still set in 50s but with modern techniques. I felt it again. It is a very touching drama in which not much appears to happen.

This reminded me of The Browning Version, another moving Rattigan play. I suddenly realised that Rattigan gets right to the heart of the matter without making very much happen. I had watched an earlier version of The Deep Blue Sea. It was from 1994, televised as a play, but seemed even older. While the performances were good from the actors, including a young Colin Firth, it somehow remained quite static. Of course it was a play, not a film, but keeping the action in one dingy room somehow lessened its emotional impact, which was there waiting to be brought out. The main character, Hester, was also older, or looked it, which also (for me) reduced its effect. Subtle differences were introduced into the 2011 film: The action moved to a pub a couple of times; a musical scene in the pub showed the bond between Hester and Freddie Page (Tom Hiddlestone); Hester’s husband, Sir William Collier (Simon Russell Beale), was shown at dinner with his mother and provided more of a clue to the tension between husband and wife. The changes made for the film, just switching occasionally to the street, a pub, a telephone box, made the action more understandable and believable. The action in both was set in the 50s but the film had somehow made the action seem contemporary. It was very cleverly and sensitively done; I highly recommend the film to anyone who is interested. I have Rattigan’s plays and films in a BBC collection. Through no fault of their own they are dated, losing much of their impact.

hesterandfreddiepage-001The main thing I learned from the plays is that they are very emotional. Separate Tables moved me in 1983 and The Deep Blue Sea was incredibly poignant today; it left a lump in my throat, sent shivers down my spine and, believe me, it takes a lot to do that; I am a cynical person who dislikes ninety per cent of what I see, the pathetic excuses for drama we are now presented with. It takes a lot to affect me. The fact that Rattigan’s original intention in most of his plays was to have a man as the love interest rather than a woman does not lessen their impact, if anything it increases it.

Why do homosexual writers get right to the essence of relationships? Men are obsessed with sex and very few can write honestly about women. Women have other priorities, but again it is their own path they are interested in – there is a constant and never ending battle, rarely acknowledged. Homosexual men in general remain apart from the mating game. Whatever their heart desires, parenthood (until recently) was not a priority for gay writers. Although it is complicated, one could say that they are neutral, above the fray, and therefore write honestly. Cyril Connelly once said that:

‘The pram in the hallway is the enemy of art’

despite the valiant efforts of both men and women, this remains true. Men, no matter what they say, are only interested in sex. Women are interested in rather more. Homosexual men, freed from the battle of the sexes, are free to observe women as neutrals.

Tennessee Williams based his fragile women characters on men. Blanche, in A Streetcar Named Desire is based on a man. She is wise but broken by a cruel world; she is a mixture of toughness and vulnerability. A Streetcar Named Desire is another play that I find very emotive; I can watch it perhaps once a year, although, as usual, I prefer the film version. For me the tragedy of the play was the relationship between Blanche and Mitch; they were perfect for each other: Blanche’s wisdom would have smoothed Mitch’s rough edges, massaged his ego and Mitch would have provided much needed, last resort protection for Blanche. But Mitch’s ego, his twisted idea of morality led him to reject her and watch, albeit guiltily, as Blanche was taken away to the asylum. Real, heart rending tragedy. Williams once said that he just wished people would stop ‘being so beastly to each other’, which does rather seem to be a more typical female wish.

twilliams-001EM Forster’s Howards End is one of my favourite books. The main female characters appear full of reason and wisdom, while the men are merely insensitive, competitive and not very bright, apart from the tragic Leonard Bast. Forster did not make all his female characters wise, but his main protagonists were. Not openly gay, like Williams and Rattigan, Forster nevertheless wrote in a similar way: above the fray. Henry James, if we believe his many biographers, was celibate. Celibate or not, he was probably homosexual and wrote of women, incredibly long-windedly, but honestly. The film Wings Of The Dove demonstrates, briefly, his talent.

Of course, sensitive direction is essential and Terence Davies (The Deep Blue Sea), Elia Kazan (A Streetcar Named Desire), James Ivory (Howards End) and Iain Softley (Wings Of The Dove) all spotted the potential of the material and synthesised it wonderfully.

Lastly, in this necessarily brief reflection, comes Shakespeare. He was almost certainly bi-sexual. Of his 154 sonnets, 127 were written in praise or lust for an anonymous beautiful boy, only 25 to a mysterious dark haired woman. Shakespeare, many years before anybody else, wrote wonderful parts for women.

He was aware both of their qualities and faults and wrote about both. Generally though, I think he admired women over men. Anyway, I accept that this is a personal opinion and not many people will have seen the plays or films or know what I’m trying to explain. So, I defy anybody to watch the film versions of A Streetcar Named Desire (1951), Howards End (1992), Wings Of The Dove (1997) and, especially, The Deep Blue Sea (2011) and not be moved. All the films get right to the heart of relationships. I’d be interested to hear what you think.


9 thoughts on “Why do homosexual writers get right to the essence of relationships?

  1. I think that you’re drawing a lot of conclusions from very little data here. In my experience as a bisexual man, homosexual men are, in general, more obsessed with sex and less interested in relationships than heterosexual men. Heterosexual men tend not to talk about relationships casually, but men who know each other well discuss the issue quite a bit.

    I suspect that the writers you mention are good at writing relationships not because of their sexuality, but simply because they are good writers.

    • I know what you mean. I was going to mention that gay men are obsessed with sex, but it’s actually irrelevant. My point is that they are not interested in women – doesn’t matter how sex mad they are. I know it’s all arguable, but I think I’m making valid points, especially if you study the plays/films mentioned.

      • I think that gay men in general are more aware of the fact that both members of a relationship are characters in themselves, while straight men are more prone to focus on the men as characters and the women in terms of what they mean to the men. (And I think straight women do the same, focusing on the women.)

        Does that fit what you mean?

  2. I enjoyed reading your post very much, and shared it as part of MondayBlogs too (suck up, I confess innocence) . . . Everyone is sex obsessed to a certain degree, men and women, gay and straight, but there is a mindset that is able to hide this fact with greater success. It takes two to have an affair, and it’s usually men who are cads, while women suffer more when an affair goes public (so they tend to hide better—just my opinion). Gay men are always stereotyped as sex-crazed, and there are a ton of promiscuous gay men, but then, what about lesbians? Are they as promiscuous? I loved the film Bound for showing that they are equally aroused. Back to what I was saying: the gay population is a smaller subset, and I bet more straight men, overall, are equally promiscuous, as a percentage, than all the gay men out there getting hitched right now. The right to marry will hopefully chip away at the promiscuous stereotype, but I have my doubts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s