Andy Medhurst is a Lecturer in Media and Film Studies at the University of Sussex.

A specialist in representations of Britishness, as well as gender and sexuality, Andy is the author of "A National Joke: Popular Comedy and English Cultural Identities" and the co-editor of "Lesbian and Gay Studies: A Critical Introduction".

Andy's film criticism has appeared in Sight and Sound and The Observer, and he supervises student research on pop culture, the internet, and music videos. He spoke with Mark Adnum via email in July 2005.

MARK ADNUM: Dirk Bogarde or John Inman?

ANDY MEDHURST: Absolutely Dirk. I deeply value the traditions of British camp comedy, but John Inman is a rather minor twig on that branch, far less interesting than Kenneth Williams or Frankie Howerd or Larry Grayson. So from your two options it has to be Dirk - not, by all accounts, a very happy homo, but nonetheless one of the finest screen actors that ever lived and one who several times played landmark gay or gay-relevant roles. There is a whole secret history of British queerness in his eyebrows alone.

MA: Twenty years ago, Vito Russo asked for "no more movies about homosexuality" but hundreds, if not thousands, of such films have subsequently been made. Most of them have been a hit-and-miss affair,with a very strong emphasis on the miss. Do we need specifically gay-targeted movies, with conspicuously gay characters? Did we ever?

AM: I think the exact wording of Russo's plea is interesting. He didn't want more films about homosexuality, but I would be very surprised if he didn't want more films about homosexuals. That's a crucial difference. Any film which purports to be 'about homosexuality' is immediately on, if you'll pardon an innuendo-laden sporting metaphor, a sticky wicket. Queer audiences will, quite rightly, shred any film with such ludicrous pretensions. Films with homo characters, on the other hand, stand more chance of engaging and delighting us. They very rarely do, I grant you, because we're such a pernickety bunch of perverts, but at least they give us something to argue about. A world without The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (very flawed but mostly fabulous) or Bad Education (Almodóvar is the greatest queer artist alive) would be a deeply impoverished world.

MA: Wayne Koestenbaum suggested that amateur gay porn would be a productive inspiration for the creatively-stalled world of gay narrative film making. What's your view?

AM: I would have to disagree. Gay men's slavish adulation of pronography is profoundly tedious. For many of us, porn is the first significant encounter we have wih something that acknowledges and satisfies our desires, so I think that it is afterwards revered with a kind of nostalgic gratitude.  But that, to me, smacks of still revering baby food when you should have moved on to more complex cuisine.

MA: How would you appraise Madonna's acting?

AM: When I first saw Desperately Seeking Susan it looked like a great new film star had been born, which just goes to show how wrong first impressions can be. I can't really discuss Evita rationally, as anything involving Andrew Llloyd Webber makes me ill. Nobody can deny Madonna's place as one of the most important popular cultural icons of the past twenty-five years, but it's all been downhill since "Vogue" hasn't it?

Worst of all, she has got religion and lost her sense of humour.

MA: Why do you think Rupert Everett became the Great International Gay Movie Star in the late 1990s? Who would you like to see take this mantle in the second half of this decade?

AM: Everett was well placed to capitalise on the deeply held (and deeply stupid) North American belief that all posh Englishmen are fags anyway. So he's a comforting figure in that he confirms suspicions. Having said that, his performance in My Best Friend's Wedding is a total joy. As for future claimants on that title, I don't see any contenders, at least as long as gay men who are major Hollywood stars stay deceitful and evasive. Gael Garcia Bernal would do nicely, mind you.

MA: Do you have a gaydar profile?

AM: Of course not. Two reasons: firstly, I am in a contendedly
domesticated relationship where we stay home, watch TV and eat too much (bliss), and secondly because I have students researching gay usage of online culture and I don't want them to stumble across some demeaning and desperate stuff about myself. Imagine the embarrassment on all sides.

MA: Do you think queer theory will ever find it's way out of Foucault/Butler/Lacan purgatory, or does it deserve to dwell there permanently?

AM: I like to think that the hyper-obscure days of Queer Theory have
passed, and that we are now realising that there are some useful ideas from that field which can be utilised in a broader analysis of sexuality and culture.

MA: As a grad student, I'm usually frustrated by the excessively theoretical, obfuscating, cobweb-cluttering approach of a lot of gay academics. I remember reading an essay of yours where you mentioned the gap between theory and experience - your words were "I am not a theoretical homosexual". I always loved that ending, and often think about it when confronted with queer theory/ists that seem to float around in Saussurean UFOs. In my opinion, frank and empirical dialogues need to grow around confronting ideas such as drug abuse and the continuing high rates of HIV seroprevalence in gay populations throughout the western world, but such debates are instantly stifled by accusations of homophobia, right-wing politics, essentialism, and so on. What's your view?

AM: There are academics in every sphere who see it as their mission in life to be as pompous, reader-unfriendly and indecipherable as possible, but the tragedy with those types when they surface in queer studies is that they lose any connection with the fact that sexuality is a lived experience as well as a topic to be dissected. I hope, fingers crossed, that work of the high-abstract kind is on the decline, because all it ever did was secure professorships for a handful of neurotic bookworms.

Queer Theory was useful in that it shook up some prevailing assumptions, but all too soon it became just hot air except in a minority of cases. The really significant academic writers about queer culture have never been fully paid-up subscribers to one inflexible theoretical religion, but mavericks who cross borders and ruffle feathers, people like Richard Dyer and Mandy Merck.

MA: The Australian national broadcaster, the ABC, has recently been screening hysterical 1970s British horror films at midnight, such as The Devil Within Her and The Wicker Man. They're such a joy, and I had no idea Joan Collins was so prolific before "Dynasty". Does she carry any particular meaning for you? When should we expect a revival of the marvellous 1970s British creepshow aesthetic?

AM: British cinema in the 1970s was an industry in steep decline, and the only two genres guaranteed to pull in audiences were vulgar comedy and sensationalist horror. Both genres look really interesting now, both as camp treats and as unwitting glimpses into the times that produced them. (The Wicker Man is pretty wonderful & not just camp, though.)

As for Joan Collins, you have to admire someone who can go so far with so little, or who can routinely turn so little into too much.

Film Reviews - Interviews - Features - Film Festival - About - Contact