Woke appropriation of old films: Your opinion? - Page 2

Originally posted by: atominis

Good post by you. Read my response to Clochette. It was an Indian site called The Swaddle. They built their hypothesis around SRK kissing John at a Pathaan success event, and showed characters like Jai-Veeru, Chandramukhi-Paro, Hrithik and Tiger in War as example of queer relationship hints in Indian cinema.

Though the first time I read about a gay angle to Jay and Veeru relation in Sholay was indeed a blog by a White American woman.

They do seem to view every form of touching or relation as sexual. 

I haven’t seen the video of SRK kissing John at the Pathan Success party, but I’m guessing it wasn’t a smooch on the lips or anything. So again, very cultural. There’s nothing sexual about two male colleagues or friends kissing each other on the cheek in south Asian or Middle Eastern cultures. At the risk of contradicting my original post I have actually seen some Hollywood actors or famous personalities here in America kissing their male colleagues on the cheek.  Joe Montanga (Criminal Minds) has done it, Chris Meloni (L&O, SVU) actually posted a throwback picture kissing Richard Belzer on the cheek after it was announced the latter had passed. Chris Cuomo (news anchor) has done it on more than one occasion … and I just realized all these gentlemen are Italian Americans, so perhaps it’s still very cultural even within celebrity world in America. 

This is highly presumptuous of me, but I’m wondering if this Indian Blogger is queer themselves. If perhaps they are projecting some of their own experiences being in the closet due to family and culture onto these fictional characters. Or maybe they have adapted the American way of thinking so strongly that they genuinely cannot see a cultural context to these kisses and affections and have convinced themselves that there has to be some underlying and subtext there.  Or some combination of the two.  

Yes I remember posts hinting male leads of RRR have gay or queer hint at their relationship. 

Two men being besties or dancing together are not gay always.

I do agree on editing or rewriting old novels.

Or appropriating icons from history as LGBTQIA.

For eg I have seen some lit clubs now claim Jo in Little Women was a lesbian. I have read all books in the series by LM Alcott and nowhere it shows she was lesbian. Why such re reading then?

There is also trend of appropriating single, unmarried by choice or cross dressing women (who were forced to disguise self as men or adopt male pseudonyms to bypass gender discrimination), from history as lesbians or queer which I find totally desperate. Unless there is clear admission or even a hint by that person or any historical evidence to ascertain their orientation, it is totally unjustified to claim a cis het woman was lesbian or queer or bisexual just because she was unmarried or had no kids or used male pen name or dressed like a man to disguise herself. 

I understand LGBTQIA need role models but they can find their own icons or create own new characters in fiction and films than appropriate previously existing ones.

I agree on keeping old books as it is so that I know what author originally was like. There is no need to rewrite Blyton or Dahl books and erase what they actually wrote. 

I agree with all of your post.

I have often seen some people claim SRK is queer or bisexual just because he is touchy feely with his male co stars too.

Like why go after him if there is no evidence nor an admission by himself?

SRK kissing John on cheek has nothing to do with queerness. I do agree that Swaddle's journo or expert might have been a closet queer person or perhaps views things from a western lens.

Dharmendra too has habit of kissing his younger co stars and colleagues on forehead or hugging them. He has often kissed Amitabh on forehead or patted his cheeks as he considers him like a younger brother. That does  not mean he is queer! 

The Swaddle, in my opinion, while having some good thought-provocative discussions, often does veer to the far left woke end of the spectrum. Queer interpretation of classic media is a western phenomenon that has spread to other nations. 

----

But let me offer a queer perspective on why this happens. There is no malintent to appropriate or woke wash content. 

A queer reading of any content is not meant to rewrite or overwrite existing interpretations and understanding. It is meant to coexist harmoniously with other interpretations. 

Queer interpretations happen when queer people find something relatable or resonate with a character. Despite the growth in modern-day representation, queer characters still tend to be a very small percentage of characters. And among those queer characters, characters who aren't tragic or don't have tragic lives or ends are even fewer. So it is normal for a queer person to resonate and find queer aspects in a canonically straight character. 

Many gay Indian men do identify with Jai and Veeru from Sholay. They are straight characters in the movie, and they're meant to depict steadfast and emotional friendship. However, there is a tenderness that appeals to gay men. Their ability to frolic and sing about their love for each other makes gay men yearn for similar freedom in their relationships. And it makes gay men wonder if there is a possibility that they were gay and suppressed their feelings or if the makers wrote them straight due to moral expectations. 

Chandramukhi and Paro are unique characters. They are two women in love with Devdas who very expressively share their love for him with each other. Add to that Madhuri and Ash are super expressive, portraying yearning and love. So out of context, some of their scenes or the song Dola Re Dola could be easily be misinterpreted as lovers expressing their love to each other rather than two women expressing their love for the same man. And when you're queer, you're more like screw context - I will assume the misinterpretation is true because it makes me happier and seen. 

It isn't something woke trying to appropriate something made for straight audiences or turn everything gay. It's just humans expressing their emotions over something resonating with them. It's just humans trying to find little bits of joy and acceptance in unexpected places. 

And I'd appeal to straight folks to take these things in good stride and let it go. It's ok. After generations of being erased or forced to be in the shadows, don't you think queer folks deserve to have some nice things? Just because someone thinks Jai and Veeru are gay doesn't mean you can't enjoy it for the testosterone-fueled desi-western as you interpret it to be. And Devdas dies in the end. Is it really so bad to have Chandramukhi and Paro have a shot at happiness in my headcanon? 

What others see or want to see lies in THEIR thinking...I don't even question male or female or male-female bonding....it doesn't interest me if they are hiding or hinting or just very good friends...neither in movies nor in books nor in real life...

Karan plays openly the homo-erotic instrument with either hinting at or showing homosexuel love...so may do other filmmakers, too.

and no, that ShahRukh's kiss on John's cheek has something sexual did not even cross my mind. I equally didn't think that Deepika giving SRK a kiss on the cheek had an underlying sexual innuendo.

Actually, to me it's more important how people treat each other. And like I already wrote...human beings have all colours of sexuality in them (are born with)...one colour may prevail at one moment in life or perhaps more than one...colours can even change throughout life...so what...

In Pathaan, their "chemistry" told me that they (their characters) could have been very good friends under different circumstances...they had an equal dedication to their job, for example.

Not just Westerners, many desis too (including and esp in this forum) -  maybe they are NRIs - when analyzing anything Indian, either movie or real life incidents talk from Western perspective, without giving any thought to local culture and customs 

Maybe this Swaddle website is run by NRIs too

In Rajnikantha the heroine visits her old friend who's married and they share a bed, her friend playfully puts her leg on the heroine's leg, I remember a western blogger who writes Indian movie reviews, emphatically stating that it refers to some hidden sexual attraction between them

And for some reason Indian movies used to  portray friends, brothers and sisters as being overly touchy, feely than most Indians were in real life but Indians were trained to expect, actually preferred movies to be artificial, overly emotional, hammy etc

 and we did not take it the wrong way until Western influence came along

Originally posted by: BettyA1

... and we did not take it the wrong way until Western influence came along

Something bad comes with something good and vice versa...one has only the choice what one values more...

Originally posted by: Clochette

Something bad comes with something good and vice versa...one has only the choice what one values more...

Clocehette, I am not trying to blame Westerners or saying Western influence is bad or anything like that

It's different, that's all 

The onus is on people doing the reviews, analysis etc

Yes, I understood you this way.

Still I think that the good economic boosting because ot the West entering Indian business life quite prominently brought also bad things...

like I think that the BAD colonialisation brought also good things.

Actually...Western influence most often had/has a destroying effect, I feel.

Actually I've seen people doing this with old American movies and TV shows too, long before this extreme woke thing became prevalent 

When reviewing old classics, If two men appear even remotely friendly, people write comments like - I am sure they're gay but they couldn't mention it cz of the time period 😛

I saw an old  Hitchcock murder mystery TV show ( the story was little twisted) where a son was close to his father and loved him very much, in those days due to Victorian influence people were more elaborate and flowery in expressing love and emotions... So I was annoyed when I saw a 21st century comment that said there's something going on between them 😕