Response to The Wedding Banquet

The Wedding Banquet raises several interesting questions regarding transnationalism, assimilation, diaspora, family, and of course masculinity/homosexuality. 
 
Wai-Tung, the queer and disaporic protagonist, is reconnected to his native Taiwan through a family reunion. His parents serve as the string that ties his American life style to his Taiwanese roots, thereby making him a transnational figure. In this process of becoming transnational, cultural differences regarding family and sexuality are negotiated. However, Wai-Tung attempts to forgo this negotiation process by putting up a fake marriage, so he would lead his parents to believe that he has retained the Taiwanese concept of family: a heterosexual relationship that reproduces to prolong the family name. To Wai-Tung's father, marriage and reproduction of children is a duty to the family, as he explains on the first day of his brief trip.
 
In one of the most interesting parts of the movie, Wai-Tung confesses to his mother that he is gay and that the marriage is a fraud. His stunned mother asks him, "Did Simon lead you astray?...Nonsense! You had girlfriends in college." That question seems to imply that such concept or existence of homosexuality does not exist within the Taiwanese culture, and Wai-Tung has adopted homosexuality as his when he arrived in the United States. As Wai-Tung argues, he was born gay yet it seems like the act of coming out did not take place until later in his life. Does this mean that the act of acknowledging one's homosexuality is part of assimilating to the American culture? What happens to Asian masculinity when men settle down in this country?
 
I think Wai-Tung's parents are uncomfortable with the homosexual relationship because they are afraid that the Gao line will end, as his son will be unable to biologically reproduce with Simon. Also, it seems like they believe that Wai-Tung loses his sense of masculinity because he cannot be a patriarch like his father. How can he be a patriarch if he cannot have children? But the presence of Wei-Wei in this situation facilitates the cultural negotiation--her pregnancy solves the problem of prolonging the family name, and her status as a tenant (in comparison to Wai-Tung's status as the landowner) confirms Wai-Tung's ability to be somewhat domineering like a patriarch. With Wei-Wei, Wai-Tung is very assertive, especially in the first scenes of the movie when he goes to collect the rent money. 
 
Although Wei-Wei uses Wai-Tung to obtain the green card, it also appears that she is being used a lot more to the advantage of the Gao family. At first she is used to mask Wai-Tung's homosexuality and then used as a surrogate mother and a mother. For whom is she having the baby? For Wai-Tung's parents? For Simon and Wai-Tung? For herself? Despite she is supposed to be a tough, female artist, Wei-Wei ultimately becomes a nobody but someone who produces a baby. 

Confused: Bruce Lee in Enter The Dragon

1) Yes, Bruce Lee did not have "implied sex" with a woman in Enter the Dragon, unlike Roper and Williams.

2) However, I believe we can make the argument that Lee was not, in fact, emasculated or de-sexualized. As Vijou points out, Enter the Dragon clearly objectifies Bruce Lee's body, showing off his physique time and time again during those famous and unnecessarily-shirtless fight scenes. His body is an object of desire for both men and women.

3a) In the famous final showdown with Han, Lee enters a room of mirrors. Although the effect is largely disorienting, the set also carries with it the same sexual implications that can be found in the Flower Drum Song musical number "I Enjoy Being a Girl." The viewer can see every angle of Lee in the mirrors, objectify him, and view him sexually.

3b) I just compared Bruce Lee to Nancy Kwan. Does this a) sexualize him, b) emasculate him, or c) both? Can you be both?

4a) Regarding all the shirtlessness, we could argue that the filmmakers were trying to portray Lee as a freak, a side-show. In which case, he wouldn't be so desirable sexually.

4b) Or would he? Serious question.

In the end, I'm confused. All I know is that I don't believe the film has a clearly defined perspective regarding the issue of Asian male masculinity/sexuality.

Bruce Lee: An Asian American Icon?

Although Bruce Lee is considered such an iconic Asian American figure, he does not strike me as someone august. His jaw dropping physical performances during the fight scenes simply don't do enough to inspire a sense of reverence and admiration, as his reserved nature and unassertive mode of speech contradict his ultra-masculine body and incredible athleticism. Throughout Enter the Dragon, Bruce Lee speaks very little and when he does have a line to deliver, he talks so monotonously and unassertively that he fails to hold onto the masculine charisma that Roper and Williams so easily carry. While Williams suavely articulates his attitude, "I don't waste my time. When it [his defeat] comes, I won't even notice. I'll be too busy lookin' good," Bruce Lee only mutters, often devoid of emotion. As many people have already mentioned, the only distinctive auditory impression Bruce Lee gives is the high pitched "Whoaaah!"--a sound not only comic and but also ridiculous. It almost sounds like a monkey's shriek. To me, the sounds he makes with his mouth devalue his heroic visual image. Why can't Bruce Lee be as suave and easily accessible as Williams or Roper? Is it because he comes from the Saolin Temple? Or is it because he has yet to break away from the alien status of an Asian male?

 

Also, in comparison to Williams, who seems to fight for a common cause against racism (at least in that brief clip of him fighting the cops), Lee seems to fight for his personal cause: to defend the honor of his temple and to avenge his sister's death. But then the antagonist is Asian, an Asian who fits the evil image of opium-den owner and perpetuates the image of an asian prostitute/comfort women. If Han stands for the image of this evil image of asian, which was embraced in the West for a while, does that mean Lee is ultimately defeating the image of the horrible Asian? Maybe he does with his martial arts, but his inability to vocalize and sustain that heroic image prevents Bruce Lee from becoming the awe-inspiring, iconic figure like James Bond. 

 

*On a random note: did anyone else notice the change in music whenever Williams is on the screen? The music always turns into some sort of funk, a fast-paced guitar sound transformed with the wah-wah pedal.

“Waaaaaaa!!!” It’s Bruce Lee

Was anybody else annoyed/humored/confused by the ridiculous dubbed piercing squeals and shrieks when Bruce Lee was fighting?

Bruce Lee poises an interesting image for Asian American masculinity, one of physical strength, brute force, and bulging muscles. In essence, he is the opposite of the “yellow man” in broken blossoms.

At the same time, Bruce Lee is not sexualized in the way (even though sexism, misogyny, and women as objects are highly problematic in this film). Both Williams and Roper (the other antagonists) sleep with women every night since they arrive on the island. Choosing which woman/women to sleep with is like choosing candy from a candy store for these men (soooo problematic) however, Bruce Lee does not engage in this behavior showing a troublesome conflict: he is depicted as moral and desexed.
I’m not suggesting that Bruce should sleep with many women in the film (a way masculinity is commonly constructed), but I just question how he’s constructed in comparison to other main male characters in the film, specifically Williams and Roper.

I also want to bring up the male body in the film- there’s a bit of objectification and homoerotic undertones in this film around the male body.
Even though there’s all this male-on-male ass kicking in the film, there is something about the way Bruce Lee is visually shown especially when he’s fighting. To me there’s this sense of desirability in the male body that’s shown in scenes like Bruce Lee fighting (mostly with no shirt on) and when Williams is putting on his robe after having sex with many women.

Response to Broken Blossoms

Despite the expected stereotypical portrayal of the Asian character, I was very impressed by Broken Blossoms. Of course I can recognize the racist portrayal of the emasculated Asian male, the typical "Oriental" themes like the Opium Den, but the relationship between "the Yellow Man" and Lucy Burrows is worth a close examination. The fact that "the first [Lucy] has ever known" comes from a "Yellow Man," the fact that the protagonist saves her from a dangerous man in the Limehouse district, and the fact that he is the most human and sympathetic character in the movie are enough to convince me that this movie has portrayed Asians in a somewhat positive manner.

But it is important that acknowledge that the "Yellow Man" is still emasculated, portrayed as a complete antithesis of the Battling Burrows character. Although "Yellow Man" is a man, neither his physical appearance nor his characteristics carry a sense of a strong dominant male. In fact, when he takes care of Lucy in the room above his store, he serves her in a manner she would serve her father. In other words, "Yellow Man" is closer to a child who serves, who child who serves another child. The moment he attempts to kiss her, somewhat comical, reveals his childishness, unable to carry out the action that typical white males on screen should be able to carry out. Perhaps the scene serves to relieve the white audience from fear of miscegenation, but at the same time it is important to remember that "Yellow Man," despite the emasculation, is still a man. He is a grown up man, and Lucy is a child. The "Yellow Man" is not Humbert Humbert from Lolita (meaning he's not a pedophile), and I think the film tries to say that the "Yellow Man" has the morality to discern right from wrong. Instead of portraying him as a monster like Dr. Fu Manchu and others that Haenni mentions in her essay, the movie chooses to portray him as a morally conscious man. After all, he left for the West to spread the word of Buddha, take the "glorious message of piece to the barbarous Anglo-Saxons, sons of turmoil and strife."

Another scene from the movie that I want to draw attention to is the moment the "Yellow Man" briefly meets a British man who "leaves for China to convert the heathens." Here, I think D.W. Griffith comments on both worlds' (the East and the West) attempts to convert each other, believing in their superiority of their cultures, unable to reconcile or tolerate the differences. The "Yellow Man" comes to the West trying to spread his religion while the Brits go to China to spread their religion. Maybe the film is critiquing the parochial tendencies of missionary acts, and maybe it is also suggesting that the two worlds are very different and their powers should be balanced.

Haenni suggests that the use of white actor to portray Asian male reinforces the idea that the Asia on screen is unreal, purposely made unreal so that audience does not identify themselves with the people on screen, perpetuating the idea that Asia is a world imagined. Maybe her idea can be applied to Broken Blossoms since the actor obviously does not really look Asian, and Asian districts are characterized with Opium dens, where one could travel to the East on an imaginary magic carpet. But at least I like to believe that the film does its due diligence to emphasize the goodness of Asians with its portrayal the "Yellow Man." Honestly, I was very surprised that an Asian character in a 1919 film was portrayed with sympathy.

Broken Blossoms

After watching this movie, I was really interested in the audience for which this movie was intended. What did they think after watching this movie? What were their expectations for this movie while filing into a movie theater to watch Broken Blossoms? I definitely wasn’t expecting to watch a movie this old, and I found it very interesting and eye-opening in terms of the way Asian Americans were truly depicted in the media. For example, in the opening scene where “Yellow Man” is still in China, there are shots of a bustling city with many Chinese (who are actually Asian) going about their daily life. Then, the movie progresses to a scene in a temple, where “Yellow Man” is played by a white man. After reading about how white men always played leading roles regardless of the ethnicity in Feng’s Screening Asian Americans, I found it slightly amusing to see this manifest itself in this scene, with the actor shuffling along the street with his eyes half closed in his efforts to appear more “Chinese” on screen.

I also found it interesting that there are moments where it seems like Yellow Man is going to kiss Lucy, for he starts approaching her and then pauses, inches from her face, before pulling away. These periods seem like they were put in the movie just for the purpose of creating suspense, which shows that a Chinese man kissing a white girl was a cause for drama at the time. These racial barriers are enforced as Yellow Man does not do anything to the girl, since this sort of relationship was probably deemed too improper to explicitly show on screen.

I noticed that there is a huge difference in the mannerisms and demeanor of the Chinese characters versus the white characters in this film. “Yellow Man” is portrayed as being naïvely idealistic, which I found almost emasculated him as he pleaded with white sailors in the beginning of the movie to stop fighting, only to get knocked down as the sailors continued to beat each other up. On the other hand, Battling Burrows is introduced with scenes from a boxing match as he knocks down a man and then parades around, showing off his muscles. Yellow Man’s love for Lucy is portrayed as almost childish, as he proudly presents silk robes, dolls, and other Chinese items to her and then lovingly waits next to her bed. The fact that he gives her dolls makes it apparent that he is aware she is very young, thus making his love almost like “puppy love.” The comparison in the masculinity between Yellow Man and Battling Burrows is incredibly different, and while Yellow Man is portrayed as kind, the film does have a role in creating the sense that Chinese Americans are inherently weaker than white Americans. How cognizant were producers and directors at the time of creating such stereotypical characters?