Theorising Spectatorship - Parallels Between Black and Queer Spectatorship

Drawing upon the theoretical insights proposed by Manthia Diawara (1988) and Laura Mulvey (1975), this essay will delve into the intersections and parallels between black and queer spectatorship. Specifically, it will explore how Diawara's notions of resistance within black spectatorship and theories surrounding queer interpretation and representation in cinema intersect and inform each other. By analysing and contrasting 'Being John Malkovich' (1999, dir. Jonze, S. USA) and 'Nimona' (2023, dir. Osborne, P. USA), this essay aims to examine how Diawara's ideas regarding resistant spectatorship can be applied to the experiences of non-white and queer minorities. Additionally, it will investigate how cis-white individuals are rarely excluded or made to feel like resisting spectators within queer-centric media.

In both 'Being John Malkovich' and  'Nimona,' gender identity serves as a crucial plot device, driving the narrative forward. This essay will compare and contrast the dominant and oppositional readings of these gender-queer moments to identify instances of resistance from their respective spectators, as per Diawara's conceptualisation of resisting spectatorship.

In 1988, Manthia Diawara, a Malian writer, filmmaker, and University Professor at New York University wrote a paper on ‘BLACK SPECTATORSHIP: PROBLEMS OF IDENTIFICATION AND RESISTANCE’ in which he highlighted a theoretical position of a ‘resisting spectator’ and its relation specifically to black spectatorship. 

In his seminal paper, Diawara asserted that 'Whenever Blacks are represented in Hollywood, and sometimes when Hollywood omits blacks from its films altogether, there are spectators who denounce the result and refuse to suspend their disbelief.' (Diawara, 1988, p. 66). He argued for the notion that black spectators struggle to identify with black characters due to their unfavourable representation on screen, many depictions of which show black people as uneducated, violent, or in other ways different from white characters. Further dividing this is non-black actors playing the role of black characters through the use of blackface. Diawara cited D.W. Griffin’s ‘Birth of a Nation’ (1915, dir Griffith, D.W) and Eddie Murphy’s cop movies as examples of bad or unfavourable representations of Black characters, illustrating how they contribute to the disconnection of Black spectators from characters within these films. This lack of identification leads to a refusal to suspend their disbelief in the narrative worlds presented.

Diawara also concedes ‘that just as some blacks identify with Hollywood's images of blacks, some white spectators, too, resist the racial representations of dominant cinema.’ (pg. 66), suggesting the idea that while his primary focus is on black resisting spectators, his theories on resisting spectatorship can also be applied to other non-dominant identities within Western media. Specifically in this essay, I will be applying his theories to gender queer resisting spectators within the films 'Being John Malkovich' and 'Nimona,' both of which feature gender-queer elements in their respective stories.

In defining what it means to be a resisting spectator, we must first examine the differences between a dominant and oppositional reading of cinematic media. It is assumed that, with all media, a target (or generalist) viewer is selected to be the demographic viewership of a given work. This filtration system operates on multiple layers to identify and cater to a target audience through genre, format, nationality, race, class, gender, and various other markers. By popular demand, it seeks to resonate within either a niche group or a popular one. Consequently, conflicting groups emerge, with some accepting the narrative world of a given media while others reject it due to differences in these markers.

To appeal to a generalist viewer, it is assumed that the most likely demographic is a white, Western, cishet male. The exact reason for this is systemically ingrained in the development of classical Hollywood, traditional gender roles and sexism, and the Western domination of early media.

Diawara suggests that a dominant/oppositional reading within his paper covers race, specifically that of Black African Americans. Claiming Hollywood as positioning a ‘Manichean view of race’ (pg. 68) in which black people represent absolute evil, and white people as absolute good, again citing ‘Birth of a Nation’ in which black characters are depicted as being immoral and corrupt. In contrast, the white characters are shown as being virtuous and good. Here the stances of dominant and oppositional are made clear. Those in support of the worldview that black people are inherently evil, and those who reject this reality. The result of this is the ostracisation of the black viewer (and their allies), thus creating a resisting spectator.

However, this dynamic can be applied to other types of relationship dynamics. In ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’ (1975) Laura Mulvey wrote ‘In a world ordered by sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and passive/female. The determining male gaze projects its fantasy onto the female figure, which is styled accordingly.’ (pg. 837), suggesting an imbalance between the sexes and how active a role they play within their narrative. Men are the active drivers, and women are the passive observers. In this sense, anyone who actively views the world as a non-male should fundamentally reject this reality and become a resisting spectator as a result.

In both cases, rejection is not absolute. Some individuals may still identify with the characters, while others might reject them despite belonging to a popular demographic. In all cases, the loss of immersion occurs on a spectrum ranging from; Unrealistic to world-breaking. Furthermore, this loss of immersion is not limited to a single marker (such as race) but rather encompasses a collection of markers belonging to a viewer, including that created by the work of media itself.

The story of 'Being John Malkovich' (1999) centres around an unemployed puppeteer named Craig Schwartz, who reluctantly takes a temp job at an unusual office tucked away between the 7½th floor. At this office, Craig discovers a portal that upon entering allows someone to see through the eyes of popular actor John Malkovich. While Craig is the main protagonist, our primary focus in this essay will be on his wife Lotte, a pet-obsessed social outcast, who upon entering the portal finds herself having a gender-queer awakening from being inside John Malkovich’s body. She further goes on to have a romantic relationship with Maxine, Craig's attractive co-worker, while inside Malkovich’s body. This aspect of the narrative raises important themes of identity, gender, and queerness, which I will analyse under the context of resisting spectatorship for queer spectators.

In contrast, 'Nimona' (2023) is about a knight named Ballister Boldheart who is framed for a terrorist attack that he didn’t commit and is forced to go into hiding. The only person who believes in his innocence is Nimona, a shape-shifter, and the very monster he has sworn to kill. Together, they embark on a journey to clear his name and prove once and for all that Nimona isn’t the monster society has made her out to be. The story is set in a medieval post-futurist city, blending mediaeval aesthetics with futuristic tech. A central theme to ‘Nimona’ story is society's fear of Nimona’s ability to shapeshift, claiming it to be monstrous and unnatural. This theme of shape-shifting is heavily implied to be a symbolic metaphor for gender-queerness, and transgender indenties. ‘Nimona’ creator Nate Diana (Indy) Stevenson is non-binary and transmasculine and has imbued much of their personal experience into their work. 

In comparing 'Nimona' with 'Being John Malkovich', I aim to distinguish between positive and negative representations of queerness and explore how these representations influence queer spectators' perceptions and reactions. Primarily by drawing comparisons between positive and negative black representation within film. Additionally, I will analyse how gender-queer identities are utilized within the story for character and narrative development.

The first scene containing queer subtext within 'Being John Malkovich'  occurs at 40:30, where Craig’s wife Lotte enters the portal into John Malkovich’s body for the first time. Here, we are treated to a POV keyhole-like perspective (where the sound design resembles being submerged underwater), allowing Lotte (and by extension the audience) to view the world through John Malkovich’s eyes. In this example, the spectator is placed into a space of secondary identification, where the viewer is forced to disconnect from the characters and is instead given a secondary place to view the world, similar to being a fly on the wall (Metz, C. 1975. ‘From The Imaginary Signifier’, p. 826). The scene consists of John Malkovich taking a shower, and we hear Lotte’s internal monologue as she gains pleasure from experiencing John Malkovich's bodily sensations. Once she exits the portal and the two are travelling home via car, she states, ‘Being inside did something to me, I knew who I was, it’s like everything made sense’ (41:22). This line of dialogue serves as our first indicator that Lotte, previously portrayed as a cishet woman, might be queer in some form.

On the other hand, 'Nimona' opens up early on with a queer scene. In the opening sequence, we are shown that Ballister is the first knight of the realm to be selected without a royal bloodline, and the population's response to this is very negative. At around 1:39, he sits in the rafters brooding until Ambrosius Goldenloin, Ballister’s boyfriend arrives to cheer him up. Throughout this scene, we as an audience are placed into a seat of primary identification, in which we see ourselves in the characters, and are given an ‘all-perceiving’ vantage point to which the plot is given. (1975, p. 824.)

Already, we can see several key differences in how queer viewers are treated within these two films. The first key difference between them lies in the form of identification in which we, the audience, are placed. In 'Being John Malkovich,' the audience is distanced from the characters by being positioned into a role of secondary identification. Here, as stated by Metz (1975), ‘everything out-of-frame brings us closer to the spectator’ (pg. 826), which in this case is Lotte. In this scene, her queer awakening is portrayed as a peculiar experience for the audience to observe. In contrast, 'Nimona' employs primary identification to provide a holistic understanding of the plot and Ballister’s character, introducing queer elements as the norm rather than as something peculiar. Additionally, there is the treatment of these characters within their respective positions in the plot. Lotte serves as a secondary protagonist and a sub-plot within the film, whereas Ballister is one of the leading protagonists within 'Nimona'.

It could be argued that the utilisation of secondary identification and the absence of preexisting queer markers for Lotte could be interpreted as a domestication of queer customs and culture. Manthia Diawara wrote that ‘Hollywood films are made less threatening to whites either by white

domestication of black customs and culture - a process of deracination and isolation - or by stories in which blacks are depicted playing by the rules of white society and losing.’ (pg. 71), suggesting that in his example, white people felt more secure in black representation only if they had control over the narrative. In this comparison, this could be extended to cisgender, heterosexual people feeling more secure in queer representation, as long as they control the narrative.

There are several overlapping theories about why dominant groups, such as white, cishet, males, feel the need to retain control over the minority narrative. Laura Mulvey wrote that ‘Woman's desire is subjugated to her image as bearer of the bleeding wound; she can exist only in relation to castration and cannot transcend it.’ (pg. 712) arguing that anything differing from man exists solely to remind him of his position, and the phallusy of his power there. In counter to this, Diawara suggested ‘It seems to me that the re-inscription of the image of the 'castrated' black male in these contemporary Hollywood films can be illuminated by a perspective similar to that advanced by feminist criticism.’ (pg. 70) also suggesting that ‘Laura Mulvey argues that the classical Hollywood film is made for the pleasure of the male spectator. However, as a black male spectator, I wish to argue, in addition, that the dominant cinema situates black characters primarily for the pleasure of white spectators (male or female).’ (pg. 70-71.)

Both arguments build upon each other, expanding upon the idea of male and white castration. Consider now a further argument about queer castration. In the eyes of cisgender heterosexual white males, gender-queer castration is the ultimate downfall of their hierarchical position. Not only does someone give up their gendered social position, but also, in some cases, undergoes literal castration voluntarily. Unlike race, which is a fixed element, queerness is an adopted identity, meaning anyone, for any reason, could choose to adopt a queer identity. This stands in contrast to the entire social rhetoric of cisgender heterosexual white males and must therefore pose a threat to their dominant position. The response to this threat is a need to control the narrative to dissuade individuals from considering these queer elements.

We can see examples of this shown within both 'Being John Malkovich' and ‘Nimona' in which non-queer characters attempt to discourage queer elements. At 50:34, Lotte proclaims ‘I’ve been going over and over my experience last night, Craig. It was amazing. I’ve decided that I’m a transsexual. I know, it’s the craziest thing!’ to which Craig attempts to discourage her, getting progressively more aggressive about it over the rest of the film. An important external detail to note is by the end of the film, Lotte does not in fact transition out of being female. Instead, being shown to be in a lesbian relationship with Maxine at the end of the film. Implying that she was simply a confused lesbian. In this sense, the domestication of queer elements isn’t removed entirely but is instead lessened to become a digestible concept for cishet viewers.

In contrast to this, Ballister begins the story opposed to Nimona’s shape-shifting, which is again heavily implied to be an allegory for gender-queer identities. Here, he takes on the role of the dominant cis male, scared of castration. At 22:00, he is confronted by Nimona who questions his fear of her and his use of the word ‘Monster,’ implying it to be offensive, in the same way, certain words are derogatory towards queer people. Throughout the rest of the movie, he pushes for Nimona to conform, stating things like ‘I can’t be seen with that!’ (28:01) and ‘Can you please just be normal?’ (33:00). Unlike in 'Being John Malkovich,' however, by the end of the film, Ballister, and society at large, have grown to understand and respect Nimona and her shape-shifting, stating ‘I see you’ (1:17:54) shifting their societal views and, by extension, validating those views to the audience.

In 'Being John Malkovich' Lotte conforms to the norms of cishet society and consequently loses, as her gender-queer identity is domesticated to become more palatable for the viewer. In contrast, Nimona perseveres, asserting the validity of her identity and resisting attempts at domestication. As queer spectators, we initially identify with both characters, but we are positioned in a space of resistance with Lotte. Her gender-queer identity is portrayed as peculiar, and we are discouraged from following her example. Conversely, with Nimona, we sympathize with her struggles, witnessing firsthand the discrimination she faces for simply existing and the societal pressure to conform. Despite facing similar prejudice as Lotte, as spectators, we observe Nimona's growth and eventual positive acceptance, highlighting the difference in treatment between the two characters.

Through the lens of Diawara's views on black spectatorship and Mulvey’s views on the male gaze, we have extrapolated a theoretical framework that allows us to examine queer spectatorship. In all cases, resisting spectators emerge when connected markers are misrepresented or diluted, making them more palatable to the popular demographic, as Diawara suggests through the 'domestication' of cultural norms within those minorities. The fears of castration among white, cishet males have given rise to overlapping theories, which seem to most directly apply to fears of queer castration and the fluidity of gender identity. It is in this sense that much of the suppression faced by queer individuals originates from this anxiety surrounding castration.

Both 'Being John Malkovich' and 'Nimona' incorporate queer elements, particularly concerning gender identity. However, their portrayal, treatment, and narrative approach differ significantly. In 'Being John Malkovich,' gender identity is minimized, portrayed as a manifestation of confusion about sexual orientation, and depicted in a manner that encourages only secondary identification. This narrative ultimately leads Lotte to conform to the norms of white, cishet society and lose her sense of self. Conversely, 'Nimona' challenges societal norms and advocates for change, positioning viewers to a position of primary identification with Nimona and providing a lens through which to experience her journey and the injustices she faces for refusing to conform.

In examining the portrayal of queer identities in 'Being John Malkovich' and 'Nimona,' it's important to consider the backgrounds of the filmmakers shaping these narratives. Spike Jonze, the director of 'Being John Malkovich,' is a white, cishet male, while Cameron Diaz, who played Lotte, is also a white, cishet woman. While their talents are undeniable, their perspectives inherently carry limitations when portraying experiences outside their own. As Manthia Diawara notes, the representation of marginalized identities in cinema often suffers when those identities are depicted by creators and actors who do not share those experiences firsthand. This disparity in representation can perpetuate the domestication of queer experiences and reinforce mainstream narratives that marginalize queer identities.

In contrast, 'Nimona' offers a departure from this norm. Written by ND Stevenson, a non-binary genderqueer creator, the story authentically explores themes of gender identity and queerness from a perspective that resonates with lived experience. Stevenson's insight and understanding of queer identities enrich the narrative, providing audiences with a more nuanced and authentic portrayal. By centring queer voices in the creative process, 'Nimona' challenges traditional norms and offers a space for resisting spectators to see themselves reflected on screen.

Bibliography

Diawara, M. 1988. ‘Black Spectatorship: Problems of Identification and Resistance’

Metz, C. 1975. ‘From The Imaginary Signifier’, (p. 826).

Mulvey, L. (1975). ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’.

Filmography

Griffith, D.W. (Director). (1915). ‘The Birth of a Nation.’ USA: D.W. Griffith Productions.

Jonze, S. (Director). (1999). ‘Being John Malkovich.’ Universal Pictures, Focus Features.

Osborne, P. (Director). (2023). ‘Nimona.’ Netflix. USA.