Crazy thoughts about life in general from my own amazingly insightful point of view.
Showing posts with label Homosexuality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Homosexuality. Show all posts
Sunday, May 26, 2013
BEHIND THE CANDELABRA
I watched the Liberace biopic Behind the Candelabra and I have to admit I was impressed. I was never a big fan of Liberace because I thought he was for old ladies. I remember one of his big selling points was the fact that he was a "confirmed" bachelor and good son. I remember that my grandmother was a huge fan of his. I would constantly hear of his prowess at the piano and his showmanship. Liberace's homosexuality was one of those thinly disguised secrets that you knew was true but was skirted in order to respect his privacy and the old school " keep it in the closet" mentality.
What really stuck out for me was the insinuation that Liberace actually felt liberated after his mother's death. Liberace was considered the top showman of his time given his passion for flash. I think the film did a great job of making sure that Michael Douglas looked over the top at all times. I think that the performance by Rob Lowe as plastic surgeon Jack Startz could not have been more entertaining. The film was a bit of an eye opener because all those old ladies could never have imagined Liberace as an oversexed, depraved, man cougar in sequence.
I guess if you look at the outfits and cars it's not hard to imagine that Liberace was really working in an atmosphere all his own, breathing glitzy air and what have you. Liberace was in a world all his own, making seven or eight million per year when the biggest stars in film and mainstream music were not even close to those types of paychecks. The film does portray a deep insecurity and somewhat perverse nature that was a clear product of his desire to remain young, vital, and appealing. Liberace was one of those entertainers that simply commanded too much attention.
Perhaps what made Liberace so successful was that over the top flamboyance that he added to his spectacular talent for the piano. While I am still not a fan I can say that the film really portrayed multiple sides to the man, which I find fascinating. Liberace was more than his ridiculous outfits and toys, he was a man living in torment to some extent. I think that the film does a great job showcasing Liberace as a bit of a narcissist that wanted to put his "stamp" on everything, including his boy toys.
Ultimately his AIDS related death and all the things that came out about him did not really do anything negative to his legacy as a performer. The film does a great job of building sympathy for all involved. Everything that's negative and positive about Liberace's life seems to enhance his legend. While everyone talks of Elvis Presley's addictions and Rock Hudson's negligence, no one seems to comment on Liberace. Behind the Candelabra is not and overwhelming attack on Liberace's promiscuity, homosexuality, and death but rather a commentary on the over the top nature of his life as a whole.
Today Liberace is a legend known more for his flash than his supreme talents, the film does a great job reminding us of that. While Liberace is a name associated with Vegas lore whose talents are more known to previous generations I think this film re introduces him to a whole new audience. I have vague memories of televised specials and the news of his real cause of death. I'll never share memories of what a good son he was because I did not grow up during a period where he would be a significant participant. I can only really say this, based on his life, his glitzy style, and even what's been reported about him and portrayed in this film, Liberace was no one other than the glitter man that everyone saw on stage. I guess Liberace was too much of a good thing for himself and his public, kudos to him for his shine.
Labels:
Aids,
Candelabra,
Classic Music,
Elvis Presley,
Film,
Homosexuality,
Las Vegas,
Liberace,
Mainstream,
Matt Damon,
Michael Douglas,
Pills,
Privacy,
Rock Hudson,
Scott Thorson,
Television,
Vegas
Saturday, March 30, 2013
THE DEBATE
I finally understand the meaning of the red equality sign. To be honest I think this is a sign of progress in the debate over gay marriage. This entry is not to fight fiercely for gay marriage and certainly not to stand against it. I am a firm believer that things should always be talked out in a civilized manner and that this is the kind of debate that's allowing ignorance to reign supreme. The fact is that you have two sides taking extreme views one way or another with not as many people taking a common sense view.
It doesn't mater if you agree or disagree with gay marriage but it does matter how you defend your view. I can't really support the argument against it because it generally cites the bible as the principal source of moral authority. You can read the bible and quote it as often as you want but, how many members of congress and of the bible belt have been caught violating the very biblical principles that they cite? The fact of the matter is that you cannot use one source as the way to firmly stand against an issue.
Let's really study morality for a second and see what we come up with. If you have a gay couple and they lead a quiet and respectful life, and are upstanding citizens, are they immoral on the basis of being gay? Is it okay to have orgies, threesomes, and sex in public if you are straight? I have heard the whole it was Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve deal but once more I say let's all look at the facts. Do we really know that the bible story is true? Everyone has their own set of beliefs from Muslims, to Jews, to Christians, to Atheists but said beliefs are somewhat theoretical and based on more assumption of record than proven and verified.
I think it's also fair to ask if people against gay marriage are living under the assumption that you chose to be gay. It has not been proven if being gay is genetic, a choice, or a matter of conditioning in a specific environment. I think it's fair for gays to want a fair shot at legalizing gay marriage but from state to state it's a debate that's going to vary. In a way I find myself agreeing with Bill O'Reilly's sentiments that it's a state matter and it should be decided as such.
Some places are more liberal than others and I understand that making this a federal issue is more about benefits issues for same sex partnerships, going beyond the whole recognition of a person's chose to openly love with someone of their own gender. Gay marriage, equality, and recognition are all a part of the new civil rights debate that much like the civil rights movement of the 50's and 60's will rage on for a long time to come.
Labels:
1950's,
1960'S,
Civil Rights,
Civil Rights Movement,
Congress,
Debates,
Equality,
Equality Sign,
Gay,
Gay Marriage,
Gays,
Genetics,
GLAAD,
Homosexuality,
Homosexuals,
Lesbians,
Marriage,
States
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)