"Therese Does Not Belong to You" - Carol to Richard at Some Point, Probably
Carol is a 2015 film about the relationship between Carol, a soon-to-be-divorced mother, and Therese, a store clerk with hopes of becoming a photographer. The film, set in the 1950s, begins with the two meeting for dinner, then flashing back to the start of their relationship, going through their story until we are back to where we started at the beginning of the film. After its release, the film received high praise and many nominations, although no academy awards. Despite its lack of mainstream recognition, the film was and still is popular among queer circles for its portrayal of lesbian relationships, as well as its subversion of typical lesbian tropes.
For example, despite the age difference between the two characters, the older woman (Carol) isn’t framed as predatory, which is often a trope in lesbian films. Carol actually considers the age gap and is concerned about it. And instead of using her age as a way to control Therese, she listens to what Therese wants. This is an interesting parallel to Richard, who always assumes he and Therese want the same thing, despite not listening to her. What Therese wants is repeatedly brought up within the film, specifically how she doesn’t know what she wants. To me, it seemed like Therese was just going through the motions of life before and even during her relationship with Carol. It wasn’t until after Carol left that Therese became more confident in herself. She began her new job, she changed her look, and we can see her being more decisive in her actions. To me, Therese needed to be away from not just Carol but any sort of relationship. She needed to grow and become more confident in her wants and needs, and this confidence ultimately led her back to Carol.
The film also subverts the martyr/death trope that is often found in lesbian films. The two did have some rocky points in their relationship, but based on the ending we as the audience can assume the two end up happily together. This is very different from historical lesbian films where, as Heather Hogan says in Sappho Goes to Hollywood: Lesbians on the Silver Screen From Desert Hearts to Carol; “The moral of all lesbian stories…is that there’s a punishment for being gay.” Carol goes against this notion and ends with a happy ending for the two characters. There were many points in the film where it could have turned the other way; the “morality clause,” when the two were recorded for blackmail, Carol’s gun (“Chekhov’s gun” as someone pointed out in class), and the final custody meeting. However, each time the film subverts what the audience expects will happen, with Carol even stating in the custody meeting that she won’t be a martyr.
One thing I kept thinking of while watching the film was something mentioned in the article A Lesbian “Carol” for Christmas. The article mentions how many critics tried to frame the film as a love story “for everyone,” for example quoting Andrew O’Hehir’s review: “Carol isn’t just a lesbian movie… [it’s] a classic American screen romance.” Critics tried to frame it as if the film would lose something if it were labeled as a lesbian story. However, while watching the film I couldn’t help but disagree. This is not just a love story; it is a lesbian love story. So much of the film relies on lingering glances and long-held looks to move the story along, relying on unspoken words instead of heavy dialogue. This is because during the time period the film was set in, lesbians had to communicate in unspoken ways. You couldn’t just ask another woman out; you had to use unspoken communication in order to protect yourself. Without this aspect, the film would not be as captivating as it is. If you address it as anything other than a lesbian love story, you lose much of what makes the film so entertaining. Also, as a side note, there’s something that irks me about critics saying Carol “isn’t just a lesbian movie, it’s an American classic!” It’s hard to describe, but the “just” part irks me… Let me know if you get what I mean.
Citations:
- Landsbaum, Claire. “Sappho Goes to Hollywood: Lesbian Movies from Desert Hearts to Carol.” Slate Magazine, Slate, 19 Nov. 2015, slate.com/human-interest/2015/11/lesbian-movies-from-desert-hearts-to-carol.html.
- White, Patricia. “A Lesbian ‘Carol’ for Christmas.” Public Books, 6 Mar. 2020, www.publicbooks.org/a-lesbian-carol-for-christmas/.
I think your post makes a great point with how important it is to recognize how the movie is a lesbian love story, not just a love story, even though some critics believe that it's universal appeal is its strength. You're so right about how erasing the lesbian love story at the heart of the movie would erase many major details so inherent to the movie. The use of the word "just" is frustrating to me too! It's like implying that it's "as good as" straight media, as if they were competing with one another and straight is the inherent winner.
ReplyDeleteHi Milo,
ReplyDeleteI am so grateful that this film subverted the majority of gay/lesbian tropes. Carol has a gun but doesn't murder anyone. Carol makes the decision to sacrifice her custody of her daughter to be with Therese, but no one dies in a mystical or martyred way. Carol is much older than Therese but isn't a predator (although the age gap is still there and still uncomfortable- I talked about it in my blog as a trope they couldn't resist alongside motherhood/lesbianism being incompatible). And there's no punishment for being a lesbian except maybe the child custody situation.
First of all, I love your title! It made me giggle, and it brings up an important point. Richard does think that Therese is for him to own, and tries to manipulate her throughout every scene that they are seen together.
ReplyDeleteI also loved the inclusion of this quote in your post: “Carol isn’t just a lesbian movie… [it’s] a classic American screen romance.” I think it makes a good point that this movie, while it is a lesbian romance, is also just a romance. Not everything has to directly be about queerness to be queer, if that makes sense
I love your discussion on some critics erasing the lesbianism from the film, and how much of a disservice that it. While it is true that (obviously) everyone can find joy in the film, it is still very much steeped in all the realities of being a lesbian during the period which you mentioned. At the same time, I really enjoyed how much Carol felt like those classic romances - for some reason it REALLY reminded me of White Christmas, which was a delight.
ReplyDeleteI also enjoy how you discussed the importance of Thérèse's time away from Carol in terms of her growth; that section of the film is very sad, of course, but I think it made the ending much more powerful and gave Thérèse much more agency as an individual. Something about knowing yourself on your own, before growing into a relationship with someone, I guess?
I loved your comparison of Richard to Carol, and the difference in their behavior towards Therese. It is obvious who is controlling and attempting to manipulate her, and it is not Carol. I dove into this on my blog, as it was something that was really bothering me after watching the film. When comparing the men in the movie to Carol, it is shocking that she is seen as the villian and the manipulator by some viewers. Harge spends the entire film villainizing Abby, Carol, and the entire lesbian sexuality, all while stalking his wife and filing a court case that outs her during the 1950s. No question about who the villain is to me. Great thoughts!
ReplyDeleteHello! I enjoyed reading your blog and love the way you analyzed the age gap in this movie. In class we discussed how it almost seems predatorial, but your take opens a whole new perspective as Carol was concerned about the age gap. I addition, you point out how Therese does not fully know what she wants such as with the character Richard. I feel like this helps play into the experienced/inexperienced binary as Therese doesn’t fully see a concern with the age gap nor does much with the relationship with Richard but similarly lives her life as she is pursuing photography at the beginning of the film. Great analysis and blog post!
ReplyDelete