etude for a clueless queer
by Douglas Messerli
Bill Douglas (screenwriter and director) Come
Dancing / 1970
There’s something incredibly sad about British
filmmaker Bill Douglas’ 1970 work Come Dancing. First of all, the
director of this seemingly gay film was not himself a homosexual—or at least
was not able to admit it. Although he lived for years with fellow film
enthusiast Richard Jewell, who he had met while serving in the Royal Air Force
in Egypt, Douglas, as Jewell speaks of their relationship in his 2006
documentary Intent Upon Getting the Image, was not gay:
"We weren’t a gay couple. A lot of people assumed that were because [we lived] together….but Bill wasn’t homosexual…we were all sorts of other things to each other. Practically everything but sexual."
Douglas’ well received trilogy of movies, My Childhood (1972), My
Ain Folk (1973), and My Way Home (1978), although, as British Film
Institute curator Alex Davidson observes, “returns repeatedly to the subject of
relationships between male characters,” some of them—particularly Douglas’ last
film, Comrades (1987)—verging on the homoerotic,” are not properly
speaking LGBTQ films. “Come Dancing is his only work in which
homosexuality is explicitly mentioned.”
As
Jewell continues to comment on the 1970 short, “His two characters [in this
early film] bear no resemblance to Jaime and/or Robert [the two characters of Comrades].
But, with the benefit of 40 years’ hindsight, [his last film] is perhaps
autobiographical, in that Bill may have been pondering what on earth he was
doing shacked up with another guy for the past decade—as, indeed, I had waxed
poetical over the same conundrum a few years earlier.”
Just as importantly, however, is how Douglas represents the short-lived
meeting between the two figures of Come Dancing. “The visiting man”
(Clive Merrison), with whom the picture begins, is seen sitting on a chair with
a dart in hand which he hurls at a map of Britain. It hits Southend, which, we
realize is to be his destination. Behind him, meanwhile, sits a woman, intentionally
exposing her breast as if attempting to woo the man to remain with her,
obviously in order to share her now rejected love.
In
Southend, meanwhile, the “local man” seems quite joyful, dancing alone upon a
pier before delightedly pissing into the ocean below.
The
visitor already sits in a nearby coffee shop, disgusted by the taste of the
liquid he’s half swallowed and amused by the older waitress (Nicole Anderson),
utterly consumed by her telly, broadcasting what appears to be a national
competition of ballroom dancing of the kind that Baz Luhrmann satirized in his
movie Strictly Ballroom (1992).
So inattentive is the woman and so empty is the café that the stranger
is clearly bored and begins to construct paper airplanes which he sails as
close as he can to the woman transfixed by her TV set.
The local man enters, an almost immediate bond of recognition passing
between the two, if for no other reason that they seem to be the only men in
Southend at the moment. Indeed, after the Southender orders up the same vile
liquid that the stranger is drinking, they eye one another, the newcomer
yelling out, “Were is the action around here.” “It depends what you’re looking
for,” his would-be friend responds.
As they reach the pier where, one supposes, the local man has hinted
there may be a space for “action,” they briefly tussle with one another,
mock-wrestling almost as teenage boys might, seemingly just for the delight of
touching one another.
Yet suddenly, as the two seem about to share an erotic moment, the
stranger, pretending to urinate, turns on his partner, knife in hand, calling
him a fag and letting loose what Davidson describes as a “tirade of homophobic
abuse.”
It is difficult to make sense of this sudden shift. Did the local
approach him too quickly? Has the outsider randomly chosen Southend so that he
might accidentally encounter a hated homosexual? And for a second or two we
fear that the suddenly pent up hostility which the visitor has displayed might
in fact turn into physical abuse.
Yet the Southender seems unfazed, almost fearless, as he stands his
ground with a broad smile pasted upon his face, almost as if he expected the
other to finally come round and admit his transparent desires.
Defeated by his own inexplicable game, the stranger moves away toward to
end of the long pier, while the happy local begins to spin off in his own
version of a ballroom dance, just as we have seen him performing, we now
realize, in the earlier scene.
Where the homophobe might be going we never discover, although we fear
it will not end well, maybe even with his own death. Whatever might occur to
him we recognize as representing a great sadness, a great emptiness, certainly
a refusal to join openly in the dance the other offered to share with him.
If
the waitress watches her dance passively, her charming fellow citizen has
offered up his own sexuality in his dance, in which the repressed visitor has
sadly been unable to participate.
In
the end, we might describe this lovely short work as an étude to a clueless
queer.
This lovely film was one of Douglas’ first films made while he was
enrolled at the London Film School. He died of cancer only 4 years later after
completing what might be described his “bookend” creation, Comrades. It
appears that he was never able to live out the joyful sexual possibilities he
had so lovingly captured on film.
Los Angeles, September 19, 2020
Reprinted from World Cinema Review and My
Queer Cinema blog (September 2020).

No comments:
Post a Comment