hostage to sexual beauty
Anna Kokkinos's film of Rupert Thomson's novel, 'the Book of Revelation', was a dark delight. Its an inversion story - according to an interview with Rupert Thomson anyway - and I guess - as the author - he should know. I am a bit weary of sexual inversion plots but this one's really brave and provocative. In this case a beautiful male dancer is abducted and sexually abused by three women for 18 days. He gets aroused against his will, 'its not my choice' he asserts early on but after being released is clearly subjectivised as a classic abusee: seeking revenge on and also fulfillment from his abusers. Of course he attempts to tell the cops but this results in hysterical laughter, poor bloke they all think - sexually assualted by three attractive women!
Why did i find it so provocative? I guess it raises difficult issues about the psycho-sexual power women have over men, powers that in western society are not a crime, powers to sexually entice against the will of the man. I mean saying that even sounds so politically incorrect. Is there a defensive implication in there for say Muslim dress? A legal sensitivity to the violence of femine sexuality? The beauty of the film is that it both avoids and highlights such moral terrain.
Could i identify with the abuse? Mmm. Not with anything so dramatic as abduction or anything i would call a physical assault. I guess I thought like many guys that any sexual experience was - well, experience and not a bad thing ... but in retrospect, in some cases, the sex happened to me - not against my will, but not of my will. My first fully-fledged heterosexual experience was orchestrated by two older women (well the older sister and friend of my school mate). I did feel pretty used and objectified and I think the experience, along with others where i was not acting out of full complicity, really affected me as a sexual subject... when i used to catch the 8.30 train to Cleveland a sultry schoolgirl used to track me down and sit nearby; I resented her ability to distract me from my book - but I was also distracted by her absence. I think she got a real kick out of her affects; she really had all the power.
Why did i find it so provocative? I guess it raises difficult issues about the psycho-sexual power women have over men, powers that in western society are not a crime, powers to sexually entice against the will of the man. I mean saying that even sounds so politically incorrect. Is there a defensive implication in there for say Muslim dress? A legal sensitivity to the violence of femine sexuality? The beauty of the film is that it both avoids and highlights such moral terrain.
Could i identify with the abuse? Mmm. Not with anything so dramatic as abduction or anything i would call a physical assault. I guess I thought like many guys that any sexual experience was - well, experience and not a bad thing ... but in retrospect, in some cases, the sex happened to me - not against my will, but not of my will. My first fully-fledged heterosexual experience was orchestrated by two older women (well the older sister and friend of my school mate). I did feel pretty used and objectified and I think the experience, along with others where i was not acting out of full complicity, really affected me as a sexual subject... when i used to catch the 8.30 train to Cleveland a sultry schoolgirl used to track me down and sit nearby; I resented her ability to distract me from my book - but I was also distracted by her absence. I think she got a real kick out of her affects; she really had all the power.