This weekend, Bloomington, Indiana celebrated its sixth annual http://pridefilmfestival.org/. I had the pleasure of attending, now for the second year in a row. Besides seeing great films, both short and full-length, mainstream and indie, the festival reminds me that Bloomington is as gay-friendly as many of its members claims it to be. Without seeing a mass of fellow queer people, I often forget, namely because I am surrounded by heterosexuals during the week. But I digress.
The shorts are usually cute or arouse a chuckle, but it is the feature films that really move me. This year's "moving" films include XXY, La Nouveau Monde, and Were the World Mine. The first deals with the troubles faced by a young intersexed girl, particularly surrounding her choice or her parents' choice regarding the gender she would live in for the rest of her life. The second addresses some of the concerns that arise for same-gender couples that become parents, namely the contradiction they face between their own family and the biological-link required of families in mainstream discourse of family. These a good films!
But, what most moved me was Were the World Mine:
and http://www.speakproductions.com/. At first glance of the film's description, I thought "oh no, another fluff, gay musical with hot-bodied young white gay men." Well, it's certainly a musical, and features some hot-bodied young white gay men, but I found it to be nothing like the "fluff" I expected. Inspired by Shakespear's A Midsummer's Night Dream, the musical film taps into the stories of homophobia in school and at home, and unrequeted desire. Some of this seems like the tired story we see in every film about young gay adolescent males, including the happy ending of the main character ending up with his presumably-heterosexual crush.
But, there a good deal of depth to the film. The question is raised: if you could make someone fall in love with you, would you? This taps into the question of free will - would you change people to suit your needs and desires. But, aside from love, I find that the implicit question asked is whether we would change others to see our perspective of the world. The main character, Timothy, goes a bit crazy spraying "cupid's juice" (from a flower) onto those who harass him or get in his way, but his original intention was to make his crush fall in love with him. As much of the townspeople fall under cupid's spell, they come to desire others of the same-gender - thus, they begin to see the "queer" perspective. Unfortunately, this point isn't made overly explicit, thus I fear that some people may pick up the question about making people love you, but not the qestion about making others understand you.
I won't spoil any more of the film, but I recommend seeing it - for anyone who likes musicals, gay films, Shakespear, or all of the above. At first watch, it was simply cute and moving, but the more I reflect on it, the more I fall in love with it and appreciate the issues it addresses. It has left me asking the question of understanding - is the only way for others to understand queer people (namely that they are a collective people bounded by love, desire, and a shared experience of prejudice and discrimination) to make them queer? Will non-queer people never understand queer peoeple so long as they remain non-queer? Further, in a sort of devil's advocate way, I began to question whether it is fair (or even ethical) to push others toward understanding and acceptance. But, I quickly resort to noting that others (namely conservatives and/or homophobes) already make such efforts, and, that it is of the utmost necessity for our survival that we continue to educate others about our selves, our needs, and our lives. So, in that sense, I must say that it is ethical, in that acceptance is necessary for survival.
