In order to get it out of the way I should first begin with a
declaration. David Thorpe is a distant relative which is how I got
directed to Do I Sound Gay? The film, by the first-time director,
premiered yesterday at the Toronto International Film Festival as part
of its Mavericks program. It was scheduled for the coveted first
weekend which is indicative of TIFF's high opinion of the feature. The
film was funded via a Kickstarter campaign as recently as this spring.
Following a break-up with his boyfriend, David Thorpe loses some
self-confidence, which translates into worrying more about sounding
gay. Was this one of the causes of the breakup? We do not know. In the
course of some ninety minutes he recruits voice coaches, linguists,
class-mates, celebrities, family and even gay passers-by to both
explore the topic and perhaps find assurance and solace in the
experience of others. The film is half autobiography half documentary.
It explores the gay vocal sound in the context of society in general
and the entertainment industry in particular.
Incidentally, as far as documentaries go Do I Sound Gay? is more Roger
& Me and less The Grace Lee Project. The director is on camera for most
of the film as opposed to behind it.
The subject matter is clearly more upsetting to the writer-director
than he cares to explicitly admit. This is inferred amidst the abundant
comedy, jovial remarks and celebrity interviews. Nevertheless, there
are quite a few moments of hilarity and laugh-out-loud scenes peppered
throughout the film. One sees Thorpe's cats, Bruno (oh, come on!) and
Rocket, Hello Kitty merchandise in his apartment and stereotyped gay
humour displayed. Then there are classic Hollywood vignettes depicted
as not so subtle gay scenes. Family members and old friends recall a
young David and their impressions before we find out that Thorpe had a
liberating coming out during his first year of college. There are many
funny or heartwarming bits; alas by necessity serious instances are
also present as with the teenager who was bullied and beaten up at
school for sounding and being gay.
As mentioned the subject matter was prompted following a breakup with a
boyfriend, but does the film provide for a seamless or convincing segue
from this point unto the theme's exploration? Not really, as the
subject takes a valid and independent life of its own. The breakup and
the boyfriend may be personally relevant to the film maker, but not so
content or audience-wise. How it translates to attention to the gay
voice is personal to the man. Being single and alone in his 40s
manifests as piling onto an existing feeling of inferiority. With the
opening assumption being the notion that a "gay voice" is negative and
contributes to the existing self-conscious nature of the man, Thorpe
begins meeting with and practicing with coaches and recordings to
become less gay sounding identified as accentuated s's, higher pitches,
elongated enunciations, et cetra. At some point one coach offers that
leaders go high with the first syllable of a word before dropping
lower. Thorpe is seen exercising his voice throughout the film all the
while discussing the same with the aforementioned. Speaking of which,
celebrities such as comedienne Margaret Cho, CNN reporter and anchor
Don Lemon, columnist Dan Savage and actor-cum-activist George Takei are
several of the names on camera. In the subsequent Q&A at the premiere
someone wondered if there were gay celebrities who were contacted and
did not respond. CNN's Anderson Cooper was brought up as an enquiry
before Dan Savage light-heartedly interjected with a "Tom Cruise never
called you back," which had the audience laughing. For the record,
Thorpe was polite/adamant that he does not remember anyone being
non-responsive, but assumes anyone who might not have called him back
was probably too busy or likely had not received his message.
So, per Do I Sound Gay?, is there a gay voice? Yes and no. It is not an
absolute indicator and exceptions and extremes exist. The film does not
deny its existence. However, as Thorpe and the film progress in their
exploration they conclude that the voice, sound and enunciation should
not be matters for anxiety. With the increased self-confidence comes
the message that the sound comes from within. One is who he is and
one's body is he as well. Why be uncomfortable with it? The point was
emphasized at the panel as well. In fact, Thorpe plainly called the
title a political slogan. The gay voice is not a negative! The hunt and
the laughter in the film made for an entertaining and simultaneously
informative viewing.
Several personal points may be of interest. First, it is good to live
in a world where homophobia (this word or the words 'homosexual' and
'heterosexual' are curiously shut out from the film) has been pushed
back to some extent and film makers can move on to more nuanced topics
and considerations. The world (here anyway) has somewhat moved forward
from closeted difficulty. Secondly, and personally, it is hoped that
gay voices rise to defend and support other oppressed or suppressed
minorities. We are all devalued when we only care inwardly. Gay voices
for Palestine, Aboriginals supporting Ukraine, Muslims for LGBT, ALS
spouses for cancer patients, et cetra et cetra et cetra are mere
examples of how we would build a beautiful world. These may require
teaming up with members of the affected communities to give them voices
and leverage their intimate knowledge of the subject, but it is even
more precious when communities with no personal stake stand up for
others.
0