French New Wave Cinema and Society Term PaperWord

FRENCH NEW WAVE CINEMA AND SOCIETY 1

Homosexuality as Represented in

the French New Wave French New Wave Cinema and Society

Dr. Leonard Koos

FSEM100F

Noah Goodwin

Fall 2014


The French New Wave occupies a strange placement in the world of filmmaking. As an

era when directors were unafraid to tackle difficult and controversial topics, one topic seems to

be brimming just under the surface of many films, and that topic is homosexuality.

Homosexuality within the 60s and 70s was bordering on the cusp of the start of the gay rights

movement and, like many movements of the time, was just gaining traction in the underground

networks of many leftist movements. Within the French New Wave, there are some films which

explicitly deal with this topic, such as Jean-Luc Godard’s Masculin féminin, and other films

which lend themselves to homosexual readings, such as Claude Chabrol’s Le Beau Serge.

Another film to come out of this time period, influenced by the French New Wave, but not

explicitly associated with the movement was Philippe Vallois’ Johan, mon été. Philippe’s Johan

and Godard’s Masculin féminin deal explicitly with the nature of homosexuality and subvert

many of the genre conventions of the romance films. Homosexuality within the French New

Wave was treated as another love story, however, like other films within the French New Wave,

it was the classic love story that gets turned on its head, held up as a genre by directors exploring

their own artistic vision associated with the movement rapidly becoming important in the social

sphere.

Within the French New Wave, very few films show explicitly any type of non-

heteronormative relationship between any two women or men. Some films, however, allow

themselves to be read in a way which would give them some type of homosexual inclination.

One such film in this matter is Claude Chabrol’s 1958 film Le Beau Serge. Even before Jean-

Claude Brialy later came out as bisexual, his relationship with Serge held some type of

understated homosexual desire. Serge, himself, is a reclusive alcoholic, constantly getting into

some type of fights with his wife since his closest friend François left the, several years earlier.


His return marks the first interaction the two have had and François is distraught at seeing Serge

in this condition. The two were so close, François does not understand how this could happen to

Serge. Serge, however, had impregnated and then married while he was still in high school,

giving up on his dreams of being an architect. Serge’s relationship has gone nowhere, with the

couple having neither happiness nor a child. Serge, having to marry and possibly even

impregnating a woman as a result of compulsory heterosexuality. There is the ever present

possibility in a reading of the homoerotic undertones between Serge and François that Serge

“drinks to obliterate his homosexual desire” allowing him to perform sexually with his wife and

consummate their relationship, despite not being attracted to her (Rich). François, as well, seems

to have something hidden; when he speaks to the priest about having left and not recalling

certain young girls from when he had left his village of Sardent, While François does enter into a

relationship with Serge’s sister-in-law, even when they are in bed together, they still spend their

time talking and thinking about Serge, having him dominate their conversations and their entire

lives. For François, especially, Serge occupies his entire life in the town. From his stepping foot

there to when he leaves, he is asking about Serge and where he is, and how he is doing. François’

concern for Serge, despite Serge’s not wanting it, and François wanting him to take

responsibility for his actions and grow up, leads to an emotionally charged fight between the two

men.

Violence has, throughout history, been linked to male sexuality. Fights between men take

on an almost sexual charge as the exposed skin to skin contact is shot in much the same fashion

as scenes where a male character and a female character are having sexual intercourse with one

another. Violence, in male culture and in male relationships, is seen to be “particularly, even

admirably, masculine” (Nelson, 68). The overwhelming charge between the two men, and the


fight, is in many ways indicative of what would be a sexual relationship with a woman and a

man. The climactic nature of the fight itself as well lends it to being coded in a sexual way. It is

at the same time reminiscent of the first time that Serge saw François back in Sardent. Serge’s

first instinct when he sees his friend who has disappeared for so long is to immediately return to

him and cling to him, grabbing him and pulling him closer to give the impression that he would

be comfortable if François never left him again, which is, in some essence, what Serge wants

with the fight. On the surface, though he is pushing François away and he is attempting to remain

alone and not have him “interfere” with his life, he is still doing so in a way that, because of

François’ nature, just draws him closer and closer to Serge. François himself refuses to leave

Serge, refuses not not let him be present when Serge’s own baby is born. The insistence which

François has over Serge’s well being after being away for so long reads like guilt. François is

guilty for leaving Serge, for leaving when he knew that Serge would not be able to love someone

else like he loved François. The two cared (and care) for each other so deeply that their

relationship in the film would not be able to be replicated at all with another person. The spaces

that each man occupies within the other’s consciousness is completely evident, from the

aforementioned way that Serge attaches himself to François, but also from the way that Serge is

almost always in François’ immediate thoughts. Even when he is in bed with another woman,

François’ thoughts turn to Serge. Especially given the context, François’ questioning the woman

over Serge’s actions and his thoughts take on almost a role of being a tool which he is using to

get himself off; by thinking about Serge, he is able to imagine himself having intercourse with

Serge, while, at the same time, being forced into a role of compulsory heterosexuality in which

he is stuck.


The ability to read films within a light that gives credence to the ideas that the main

characters in some type of homosexual relationship is one way to look at homosexuality within

the French New Wave, but there are films from the period themselves that explicitly deal with

homosexual and homoerotic natures. One such film from this period is Jean-Luc Godard’s

Masculin fémnin. Produced in 1966, after he had already released Breathless, establishing

himself as one of the premier directors of this movement, the movie gained considerable traction

as it was Godard starting to spurn popular movements and move away from the traditional

funding and narrative structures of other films before him and start to go into a path that had

heretofore been new to the New Wave directors as a whole. By showing a film where there was a

relationship that was explicitly non-heterosexual in nature, Godard was talking to the younger

generation, whose ideals and ideas about relationships and heteronormativity had radically

shifted from the time their parents were children to what they were now. Masculin féminin,

which was billed as “the lovechild of Marx and Coca-Cola!”, was a movie whose non-linear

narrative structure allowed it to explore its subject matter more fully (Godard). The plot,

revolving around a man named Paul and his relationship with Madeleine, becomes a way for

Godard to explore the themes of youth and sex. One of those themes which appeared with this

movie was the concept of fluid sexuality in women. For women, there has been a long idea that

their sexuality is defined with the ability for them to be “fluid” (Diamond). Female sexuality has

long been viewed in a context of it being less rigid than male sexuality. With the concept of

“experimentation”, it is more often, in society, that women will see themselves less labeled in

boxes of “heterosexual” or “homosexual” but fit more into categories of “bisexual”, or another

sexual identity that fits in between the dichotomy of hetero or homo-sexual. This idea is reflected

in Masculin féminin, with Paul entering a relationship with Madeline, while, at the same time,


entering a relationship with her roommate Elizabeth. There are multiple shots of Paul, Madeline,

and Elizabeth all sharing a bed together, living amongst one another as a sort of “family” more

comparable to how younger people would have viewed a family, i.e., as a group of people with

whom one wants to be around as opposed to a family that is related exclusively by blood. By

being a family that is more composed of a motley crew, all bound together because of shared and

lived experiences as opposed to a family that is just the sum of its parts, Godard attempts to tap

directly into the market of “la jeunesse.”

Moreso than simply being a family together, the use of bisexuality in the central female

character of Madeleine becomes a way to subvert the nature of family and traditional romance as

a whole. The nature of fluid sexuality of women becomes something of a caveat; by working

under the impression of woman as a fluid creature, Godard is able to expand from the constraints

of a prototypical love story created by the institution of hetero-patriarchical society, prizing what

it means to be with a man over everything else in a woman’s life. Paul, in essence, is presented

as a somewhat unlikable character. His “masculine” qualities are derided whereas him being with

a woman and being with feminine people is praised. He is shown as selfish, young, naive, and

unfeeling; the influence of the feminine in his life is treated as a welcome reprieve from the

masculine ideal he hopes to establish. Godard, in his way, is showing a critique of masculinity.

By presenting Paul as a somewhat unlikable character who grows and morphs over the course of

the film, Godard is presenting masculinity in a light where it needs to be critiqued, where the

concept of masculinity and a masculine love story is turned on its head and the true face of

patriarchal society is showing itself again. The love story between Madeline and her roommate is

somewhat more typical in terms of a love story, there is actual love present in the interactions

between the girl and the one she is pursuing. By removing so much of the masculine agent in the


equation, the feminine is allowed to take precedence over what is typically seen. The

overwhelming strength of the relationship, coming from a female dominated space, allows it to

come from a place that is typically seen as more loving than what a man gives. The shifting

gender roles in the postwar period also allowed for much more fluidity in terms of what women

were expected to do and what institutions in which they were fighting to have access. Marriage,

as well, was seen as an institution becoming “more optional and perceived as more restrictive,”

as opposed to the necessary binding contract that it was originally (Thornton). The loosening

structure of the institution of marriage allowed Godard to specifically tap into the younger

generation, whose ideas and ideals with regards to marriage were contrasting sharply from the

older generation which raised them. By being inclusive to a degree and trying to normalize the

idea of a relationship that is somewhat homosexual or homoerotic in nature, it is taking what was

typically in the shadows and bringing it out into the open. It extrapolated upon the homoerotic

tension of sexuality felt in Le Beau Serge and brought it to fruition by actually lending credence

to the idea that a homosexual (or homoerotic) attraction could be in a relationship that, in the

eyes of society may not seem exactly the norm, but would manifest itself in a way that was

beneficial to the partners involved and how they lived their lives and how they interacted with

one another. The concepts explored in marriage were and are changing, with contemporary love

in heterosexual marriages appearing more as “practicing a form of marital love that puts a greater

emphasis on mutuality” as opposed to ideas of self-sacrifice that children have seen explored in

the older generation’s relationships (Browning, 153). The idea of mutuality in a relationship that

has more than one partner, and a partner that is of the same sex, is defined via mutuality, and the

shared, mutual experience that one who is in that relationship, or is non-heteronormative,

experiences living in a society valuing heteronormativity over everything else in relationships.


The French New Wave, with its countercultural values and the way it shifted the ability

to make films and tell stories made it one of the most influential periods in the history of

filmmaking. Philippe Vallois, while not a director associated with the New Wave, took many

influences rom the new wave, especially creating his semi-autobiographical piece Johan, mon

été. Johan, made by Vallois in 1975, explores the homosexual relationship between a filmmaker

and his muse, Johan. Johan, during the film, is in prison, and the film centers around the

explanation of Philippe’s relationship with Johan, and how he is desperately looking for someone

to fill the void that Johan left inside him. While not a film associated with the new wave

movement, Vallois’ Johan utilizes many filmmaking techniques made popular by filmmakers in

the new wave, and there is a distinct influence of both Chabrol and Godard in his work. What

truly sets Vallois apart, however, is the unabashed and explicit depiction of male homosexuality

in the film. There are not repercussions shown for the behavior, it is presented as a form of love

that is as true and real as any other type of heterosexual love, and the deviation from the norm

does not disqualify the relationship that Johan and Philippe share with one another. The

placement of Johan within French cinema gives it a unique role within the history of French gay

cinema as a whole. By extending what Godard had started with Masulin féminin, Vallois made a

thesis which has a place dedicated to it in French film history. The suppression of the film itself

is a testament to the influence it had, the idea behind it was never to be “shocking” or to “offend

moral sensibilities”, but to make a film that explored a homosexual relationship in the same way

that heterosexual relationships have been allowed to be viewed since the dawn of the media.

Philippe and Johan’s relationship in the film, as well, works to subvert the notion of what a

relationship is or has to be. Johan is in prison, Philippe has not seen him in ages, but Philippe is

still very much in love with him. Johan is the only man for Philippe, the only man that Philippe


can see himself being in love with. In the film, if one is to presume that the film is attempting

some stylistic choices akin to cinema verité, then it can and should be assumed that Philippe’s

mother knows about Johan and is comfortable with that aspect of their relationship and of the

fact that she will not get grandchildren. The loving and nurturing mother is presented as the end-

all, be-all of “forbidden” love stories. Mothers, who are, in tropes, defined by their ability to be

nurturing, loving, and sweet, are the ones people, especially boys and men, want to approve of

their lovers. The film, as well, does not keep invisible the relationship between the two men (or

other men that Philippe comes into contact with), showing “explicit male- to- male

homosexuality” (Gerstner). This is contrasted to multiple other films within the French New

Wave, wherein, sexual characteristics and sexual acts may be discussed, but they are rarely, if

ever, shown onscreen. By forcing the viewer to see the sexual intercourse between two men,

Vallois forces the viewer to normalize it in their mind, to really see sexual arousal and desire

between two men in a state that is not incomparable to what occurs with men and women. By

bringing these choices into the light, Vallois also helps to subvert the necessary romantic subplot.

Vallois, in terms of what he achieves with the creation of Johan has made a film that, by using

elements from auteur-directors who have come before him and influenced him, is in line with

many ideas behind the French New Wave - except Vallois has run with them and gone further

with them than what has already been done with them.

Johan is a contradictory film. At once, it is a film uniquely French, and at the other hand,

it is a film whose creation is only possible as a result of Vallois’ trip to America, specifically,

New York, and his ability to see the “gay liberationist movement and the overt gay sexuality”

that the city had to offer him (Gerstner). However, the film itself uses aspects and aesthetics that

are French in its history and nature. Ballet and opera are two activities which are represented


multiple times throughout the film, and both are activities which have been shown in other films,

and other films of the French New Wave (such as the trip to the music hall in Chabrol’s Les

Bonnes Femmes, and the dance sequences present in Jacques Démy’s Les Demoiselles de

Rochefort). While ballet and opera are not uniquely French experiences, they do have ties to the

French New Wave, and presenting them in a way which codifies them as “gay” helps Vallois to

take what has been taken from him and give it a semblance of normalcy to show the public life.

While Philippe, in the film, is looking for his “Johan”, he has them do complicated dance

sequences, sing songs, present themselves in ways that would typically tie them to an artistic

community or a community that has found itself to be a hotbed for gay and otherwise affiliated

activity, such as the theatre, the dance community, or the opera community. Vallois’

normalization of the non-traditional sexual relationships present in these communities helps

further his goal, that which is to show, through Johan, that sexuality between two, homosexual

men is normal and should be something that is celebrated and is not too far differentiated from

the idea of heterosexuality as a whole.

Homosexuality was not too far present within the French New Wave. The ideas were

there and there were multiple films whose characters could be read as having homoerotic

tension, but the lack of explicit relationships between characters made it difficult to view them in

ways that were not heterosexual. While Chabrol’s Le Beau Serge had many scenes and aspects

that would fit into a semi-traditional romance narrative, the inclusion of the close male

relationship between the two leads allows it to be read in a fashion that would be claimed by the

gay community as a film presenting two men who are in love with one another but are stopped

by society from seeing each other. Godard’s Masculin féminin and Vallois’ Johan are films

which have explicit representation in the spheres of homosexuality and homosexual desire.


However, the two films, and the way they categorize their relationships and present them against

the traditional narrative of monogamous heterosexuality makes them two films whose explicit

representation of the non-traditional relationship speak directly to the communities whom they

wanted to target (for Vallois, the gay community and for Godard, the community of young

people in Paris). However, all three films work together to, by the readings and representation of

homosexuality in their films to subvert the traditional notions of romance presented by other

popular films at the time, and how romance grows between one or more people of the same

gender.


Masculin Féminin. Perf. Jean-Pierre Léaud, Chantal Goya, Marlène Jobert. 1966. DVD. Gerstner, David. "Choreographing Homosexual Desire in Philippe Vallois's Johan." academia.edu 1 Jan. 2013. Web. 10 Nov. 2014. http://www.academia.edu/5414950/_Choreographing_Homosexual_Desire_in_Philippe_Valloiss_Johan_ Johan Mon été. 1975. Film. James, Nelson. The Intimate Connection: Male Sexuality, Masculine Spirituality. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster, 1988. Print. Le Beau Serge. Perf. Jean-Claude Brialy, Gérard Blain. 1958. Film. Geneviève Sellier. “French New Wave Cinema and the Legacy of Male Libertinage.” Cinema Journal 2010 : 152-158. Print. Ghosh, Soumitra. “Loving/Thinking and the (French) New Wave: Cinema as is Philosophy.” The European Legacy 15.5 (2010) : 565-581. Leone, Bruno, and Terry Neill. Male/female Roles: Opposing Viewpoints. St. Paul, Minn.: Greenhaven, 1983. Print. Rich, Jamie S. "Le Beau Serge." Review. Weblog post. Criterion Confessions. Blogspot, 22 Sept. 2011. Web. 7 Dec. 2014. Thornton, Arland, and Linda Young-DeMarco. "Four Decades of Trends in Attitudes toward Family Issues in the United States: The 1960s through the 1990s." Journal of Marriage and the Family 63.4 (2001): 1009-037. JSTOR. Web. 22 July 2008. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/3599811>.

http://academia.edu/

http://www.academia.edu/5414950/_Choreographing_Homosexual_Desire_in_Philippe_Valloiss_Johan_

http://www.academia.edu/5414950/_Choreographing_Homosexual_Desire_in_Philippe_Valloiss_Johan_

Documents

French New Wave Cinema and Society Term PaperWord