What bothered me was that he kept wearing women’s clothes even after it was obvious his plan had failed. All of us here in the real world know the reason was it made a good running joke. But what was Klinger’s reason?
BTW Jack Benny: Affected or gay?
As the photographer in the “Our Gang” short “Wild Poses,” Pangborn is showing Spanky (“I don’t want my picture took!”) how to smile, showing an extremely prissy smile. Spanky deadpans to his dad, “Hey, Pop, you see what I see?”
Yes, because there are so very many effeminate costume designers who are heterosexual.
I’m well aware the day to day lives of many gay men are fairly similar to my own mundane existence, except they like to fuck men. I know there are burly, knuckle cracking, no nonsense gay men that have trouble expressing affection, and would kick your ass before they would kiss you on the lips. In fact I suspect you are one of them (so don’t hurt me).
I understand it’s not a definitive marker, hell sometimes I’ll look at a pair of fancy shoes or a watch or jacket and try imagine what they would say about me as I model them mentally. I will do a dead sexy King of Queens style pole dance at the drop of a hat if the alcohol and opportunity presents itself. If will sing along to “The hills are alive with the sound of music” if I am sure no one is watching.
Having said this it’s entirely possible to have a prissy, queeny heterosexual man, but 99.99 percent of the time that kind of overt behavior is associated with gay men.
Openly gay? What about Osgood Fielding III(Joe E. Brown) in the final scene of Some Like It Hot?
Zowie!
Thats what bugs me, Klinger had an entire wardrobe of women’s clothing that he wore for years even after he knew it had failed. This wasn’t a “don’t give a fuck” thing either as he exclusively wore women’s clothing.
I think he stopped wearing them shortly after he refused the discharge. In the final seasons, he wore fatigues.
Did audiences from the period understand that these heavy handed stereotypes were meant to portray gayness, or did it just go over their heads? I’m guessing that a writer in Hollywood was probably aware that he was writing a cliched gay character, but did a Kansas City banker sitting in a theater in 1931 know that’s what was on the screen?
Gives new meaning to the line in Give My Regards to Broadway…
~ “Tell all the gang on 42nd Street that I will soon be there!” ~
He stopped wearing them after Radar was discharged and he took over Radar’s job as company clerk, I believe.
Made ME laugh, I tell ya.
As an incidental note, are there any early movie references to “The Ramble”, a section of Central Park known for gay cruising? I only learned about this while researching a reference in De-Lovely (released in 2004) during a scene that was set in 1932.
I can picture someone saying “He’s bird-watching in the Ramble”, for example.
He got so used to women’s clothing that he started having trouble wearing anything else. There are a few mentions of him wearing a slip under his fatigues because they cause hives otherwise.
There’s also an instance of Sidney visting the camp, during which Klinger expresses concern that when he sees a pretty girl in a nice dress, he fixates on the dress rather than the girl.
Well, you’re wrong about me, at any rate. I love kissing and am very affectionate. I am not burly by any stretch, although I have been known to crack my knuckles. I am, in fact, among the huge majority that falls between studly muscle monsters and nellie queens.
My original point was two-fold: 1 is that it’s not news that there were effeminate characters in movies before gay lib, who may or may not have been intended to be gay. That man’s sex life was of no interest to the plot of the movie; all they needed was for him to act in a fussy prissy way, and he did that. The humor was intended to be derived from seeing a man, any man, behaving that way.
The 2nd point was that in the OP was the all-too-common conflation of effeminacy with gayness without any disclaimer. I sought to provide that disclaimer, just as a reminder to the general public. It is that thoughtless conflation that I am sick of, not discussions of particular stereotypes in movies.
Roddy
There’s some ignorance fighting to be done there. But luckily someone pointed out in the first response that he wasn’t overtly gay, but *stereotypically *gay. I’m hoping the OP simply misused the term overtly.
How could he miss it? I can’t believe that people in 1931 were so naive that they didn’t know what homosexuality was, or when movies were using stereotyping to signal “this character is as gay as green on Thursdays”.
Certainly they were mistaken in thinking that all effeminate men were gay and that all gay men were effeminate, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t know what was being signaled when a character started to camp it up.
Are there any examples of characters who were that flamboyant, and then turned out to have a wife or something?
Regards,
Shodan
YouTube: “I just went gay all of a sudden.” And the 42nd Street reference.
The character of Randy in 1957’s Designing Woman, who responded by pulling out his wallet to show pictures of his wife and kids.
Here’s another early example from Chaplin in Behind the Screen. Go 14 minutes in. Note that in the movie, Edna Purviance has disguise herself as a boy. Keep watching until the 15 minute mark.
Remember that the Korean War lasted three years and the television program over ten. So Klinger wore womens clothing for may seasons in the program, fit into the context of the war, it was not as long as it seemed.
I’m not familiar with the film. Was this a throwaway joke, a plot twist, or where they playing with gender roles?
Regards,
Shodan