Leaving aside for a moment the pedagogical value of Brokeback, which can
be argued from both sides (though I do have an opinion and will get to
that in a moment), I think it is really key to think about what is going
on here.
Yes, males who do not want to see it are labled homophobic. There are
likely a few students who have serious objections on the grounds that
their faith does not permit them to view nudity--a showing involving
clips could clearly bypass these sections, as they are of limited
intellectual value anyhow. If these scenes were left out, I can't
imagine what justification besides homophobia would propell a student to
simply refuse to see the film. If the film had a similar plot but
involved an adulterous heterosexual couple (or, as long as the sex
scenes were filmed for the erotic benefit of men, a lesbian couple), the
vast majority of male students would be happy to watch the film. No,
that's not true, I can think of another justification: that of lazy
students who don't want to do their homework and are just using their
homophobia as an excuse.
Should we really let our students control our choice of classroom
materials? Should my sexist students tell me that they refuse to read an
article about the social construction of gender because it is offensive
to me? Should my Christian students be allowed to walk out because I ask
them to consider the role of Eastern religions in the contemporary
United States? Sometimes, learning makes you uncomfortable. That's okay,
and we should be able to say so.
Now, if you don't think Brokeback is a good learning tool, that's
different. But if that's the case, you should be able to make the
argument without recouse to the students' refusal to watch as the
decision-making factor. They are students; while sometimes they know
what they need to learn, often they do not.
I agree that Brokeback is probably not the most useful cinematic tool
that has ever been made. However, it (or more accurately, clips of it)
could be used to good effect to talk about stigma and sexuality in
particular as a form of stigma. I think it is actually a powerful thing
to ask many of our students to consider the fact that men who have sex
with men do not always identify as gay (and to talk about why that is
and how it relates to the social construction of sexuality) and to
consider the fact that sexuality and gender expression do not line right
up as the stereotypes would have it (i.e. the men in Brokeback are
typical cowboys--violent, tough, rough, quiet, rarely emotional, etc.
rather than effeminate as are gay men in most Hollywood productions).
If we want to have a serious discussion about the utility of the film,
we should stick with our own theoretical and pedagogical knowledge about
sociology and the classroom. We should not give in to a homophobic
classroom, institution, or society which suggests that a film becomes
automatically offensive because two men love each other in it.
And finally, Del, don't tell us any more about Good Night and Good Luck.
It's not about sexuality and therefore if one is considering a film to
use for classroom sessions on sexuality, it would be a highly
inappropriate choice (no matter its cinematic and pedagogical use).
--Mikaila Mariel Lemonik Arthur
New York University
Queens College/CUNY
Del Said:
I will address the punitive part first. By and large the post on the
list have a punitive response to most problems in the classroom,
tardiness, not working, etc. In the case of this movie
apparently the following took place with regard to those who would
refuse/object to viewing this film.
""Plenty of people e-mailed back privately that if they refuse the viewing/discussion have them do a long, awful research paper"
Next there is little data on what would be learned by showing the film. The
quality is not a question. For example, the film apocalypse now was widely
considered an anti war film.
However apocalypse now is used to charge college age males up for battle. It has already been marketed as a love story with infidelity .... so in some ways damage has been done.
Will students learn that homosexuality involves cheating on "good" women. Who knows. On the other hand the marketing and reaction to the film could be examined without showing
the film. For example, males who don't want to see it are quickly labeled homophobic .... should those who want to see it be considered voyeurs?
On the other hand Goodbye and Good Night which may not win Oscars because of
the way it was made could be more constructive in terms of learning. Unlike
Brokeback it is not fiction
and McCarthy's own words are used. Clips as have been suggested might contain
important information without risk of the doom and gloom factor. Then I favor
discovery more than
teacher/preacher classrooms and would not be likely to show films in class.
Perhaps extra credit for those who want to go and write a paper.
Del
Jack Estes wrote:
