Category: Yeah, but is it art?

Reviews and Opinions

47 Things I Talk About When I Talk About the Dallas Buyers Club

Screen shot 2014-01-09 at 10.52.52 AM
In 1994 Tom Hanks won a Golden Globe for his portrayal of Andrew Beckett, a gay lawyer who cries foul when fired due to his HIV+ status, in the film Philadelphia (Jonathan Demme). Twenty years later, and there may be an echo of history this Sunday, as Matthew McConaughey is a 2014 Golden Globe nominee for his portrayal of Ron Woodruff, a heterosexual outlaw type who cries foul when diagnosed with HIV, in the film Dallas Buyers Club (dir. Jean-Marc Vallee). Is this a case of the more things change, the more they stay the same? Or is something deeper worth exploring? With this in mind, just in time for the Awards, writer and artist Ted Kerr shares 47 things he talks about when he talks about the Dallas Buyers Club (the title, an homage to Raymond Carver’s short story collection, What We Talk About When We Talk About Love).

1.     Matthew McConaughey’s butt is resilient. Despite his much discussed weight loss for the film, his backend was buoyant, and, I would suggest, supple.

2.     I didn’t hate the Dallas Buyers Club the way I thought I would. I didn’t hate it at all.

3.     My liberal arts collage education has made it possible for me to tear the film apart but as I was watching it I thought about the guys I know who really liked the film. How a film that makes people feel matters.

4.     I can see why people would like the film. It is about a person living with HIV standing up against authorities, winning, looking for love and surviving longer than others thought he would.

5.     Ron can be seen as a charming, powerful man. At a time where people living with HIV are increasingly criminalized—adding to HIV related stigma—Ron’s character is refreshing. He is complicated. He is not a demon, nor does he care what most people think about him. For better or worse, he is seen as brave, and is rewarded for his tenacity. This does not happen very often for people living with HIV in real life.

6.     While Dallas Buyers Club didn’t make me think of Philadelphia while I was watching it, later I saw the obvious similarities: both tell the story of a white able-bodied American man living with HIV who must the fight the systems to improve his life chances, all with the help of a reluctant outsider—Denzel Washington, the African American lawyer in Philadelphia, and Rayon, the trans co worker in Dallas Buyers Club.

7.     Both films derive a sense of identity through a city, Philadelphia and Dallas, the City of Brotherly Love, and the capital of oil and “Who Shot JR?” Is this worth considering further? 

8.     Released twenty years apart, Dallas Buyers Club is actually is about a time before Philadelphia.

9.     What has happened in 20 years that a film about AIDS of the past can be greenlit, meanwhile there are no major studio films about AIDS now?

10.Is the past really that appealing?

11.While watching Dallas Buyers Club I did think about the recent AIDS response related documentaries released in the last few years: How to Survive a Plague (dir. David France), United in Anger (dir. Jim Hubbard), We Were Here (dir. David Weissman, Bill Weber).

12.One could see the documentaries and Dallas Buyers Club as films laying claim to history and how a specific chapter of AIDS “was won”. What changed the course of AIDS? Was it a group of smart young gay white men? Was it through a diverse community response? Was it empathy and love? Or was it through capitalism?

13. Dallas Buyers Club is not really about AIDS.

14. The film uses AIDS, AIDS as spectacle, as umbrella.

15. The film is a libertarian critique of government from a capitalist, white supremacist point of view.

16. The film uses the historical moment of the early North American AIDS crisis to put forth a suggestion that the only remedy to an ineffective government is unregulated capitalism.

17. Ron’s heroic journey is through capitalism. Does he really care about Rayon, or is it that Rayon is part of his empire?

18. In the film Ron never really has to answer to others for his bad behavior, but as we see in the grocery store scene, he is seen as a hero for making someone else answer for their behavior, while putting Rayon in an uncomfortable position. 

19. And yet, of course the film is about AIDS.

20. I found the nods to early American AIDS activism—the ACT UP T-Shirt, the Gran Fury Poster—nauseating, it was clearly a signal to those within the ongoing AIDS movement that the filmmakers “got it”.

21. The casting of two older men living with HIV—the ones who give Ron the house—their faces marked a medical response to the virus, felt manipulative to me, as if the filmmakers were trying to quell my frustration with the film by showing me who had signed off on it.

22. How does the theory of the uncanny relate to these historical films about AIDS? Or does it?

23. I am thinking here of the hours of ACT UP footage at the NYPL, and the films on view as part of Macho Man, Tell it To My Heart exhibition at Artists Space. Why as a culture do we go to see replications of the past in droves, while only handfuls of us leap at the chance to watch original footage?

24. I am abusing the theory of the uncanny maybe to make a point.

25. Dallas Buyers Club is part of this moment of AIDS Crisis Revisitation, in which AIDS is repackaged as history and served to a mass audience as something contained and over. In doing so it both has the possibility of making space for engaged audiences to think about what is going on now, and allows others to think that the crisis is over.

26. I think of Sex Positive as the first film of the AIDS Crisis Revisitation. It was made by Daryl Wein, a young straight man who had no real connection to HIV/AIDS beyond being alive; he was just amazed that his girlfriend lived next door to Richard Berkowitz, one of the men who basically invented the practice of gay men using condoms.

27. But thinking of AIDS Crisis Revisitation, how do we understand the ongoing production of films from directors like Jean Carlomusto, Alexandra Juhasz, James Wentzy, and others? Here then is maybe the problem with categorization, an attempt to reign in history.

28. Sitting in front of me during Dallas Buyers Club was a man who shortly after the film started pulled his hoodie over his head, drank a big boy of beer and fell asleep. It made me think of Samuel Delaney’s Times Square Red Times Square Blue, and for no good reason, Will Ferrell’s character in Old School (dir. Todd Phillips).

29. It also made me think of the man at the 34th street screening of 12 Years a Slave (dir. Steve McQueen) who walked out, yelling, “I don’t have to take this shit.”

30. It is interesting how Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto get rewarded for losing weight, and acting sick, while people living with HIV have to fight to be well, appear well and be recognized. #everydaysurvival

31. In the movies, why does the trans woman always have to die?

32. What does a filmmaker, or any artist making work about HIV/AIDS, owe people living with HIV/AIDS, those who have died, and those most impacted? What about studio heads, curators, or museums directors, what are their responsibilities, if any?

33. People currently living with HIV, both long term and the newly diagnosed, are also finding amazing ways in which to survive and thrive, while looking after themselves – and finding ways to look after each other. Examples include VOCAL-NY, and the posterVIRUS campaign – to name but two.

34. I still have not seen Bumming Cigarettes (Tiona McClodden).

35. Nor Heart Breaks Open (Basil Shadid).

36. In her book Tangled Memories, Marita Sturken writes, “ the desire to memorialize the AIDS epidemic while it is still occurring reveals the need to find healing amid death”

37. Which made me think of Heather Love’s quote from her book Feeling Backward when she proposes, “For groups constituted by historical injury, the challenge is to engage with the past without being destroyed by it.”

38. Why isn’t there more discussion around the fact that R.Kelly’s In the Closet is basically about HIV/AIDS?

39. It is amazing and interesting how close Dallas Buyers Club gets to really talking about AIDS denalism; how hard it can be to get laid and find love if you are living with HIV; and the inner-epidemic dynamics of demographics (the sense of isolation experienced by non-white gay men within the epidemic).

40. In 30 years is there going to be a film adaptation of one of the many PrEP diaries one can find online? What will be the message? What will the future think we lived through?

41. If you told me Jennifer Garner played Kimmy, the next-door neighbor on Full House, I would believe you.

42. A friend recently reminded me that Jenny in Forrest Gump (dir. Robert Zemeckis) dies of AIDS. Man that guy really did see everything.

43. Sometimes I prefer films not about AIDS, but that include AIDS. Like Joshua Sanchez’s Four, based on Christopher Shinn‘s play of the same name.

44. Because AIDS is an assemblage it is impossible to fully capture the epidemic in a single artwork. And yet, Untitled  (dir. Jim Hodges, Carlos Marques da Cruz, Encke King) does a pretty good job.

45. So does Vincent Chevalier’s, So When Did You Figure Out You Had AIDS?

46. Before the current crop of films about AIDS was making the rounds,  writer, performer and activist Cyd Nova compiled a list of his favorite AIDS related films in an article for Pretty Queer called The Best and Worst of ARC: AIDS Related Cinema.It is a bit outdated now, but both the article and the comments section are worth checking out again and again.

Oh, and lastly, #47. Steve Buscemi is everything in Bill Sherwood’s film Parting Glances.

Serious Clowning Around: a Review of Guðmundur Thoroddsen’s Hobby and Work


In the Flesh’s Aldrin Valdez published a review in ArtSlant Magazine on the artist Guðmundur Thoroddsen’s Hobby and Work show at the Aysa Geisberg Gallery (running through December 21st). Below is an excerpt:

“Museums are reliquaries of the past. They influence the present and future by determining whose work is important and worthy enough of permanence and visibility in the scale of a museum exhibition. Most often, they maintain the status quo. In Thoroddsen’s work, the museum is a closed system built by patriarchy. Only the stories of masculine men get told and retold in a series of one-upmanship and constant reference to predecessors in this insular world. It’s a parody that isn’t so far from the reality: white, heteronormative stories and images get to be shown, while the stories and images of people of color, queer folks, and women are marginalized. Thoroddsen’s criticism of patriarchy takes the form of serious clowning around that only thinly scratches the surface. I don’t know if he’s interested in truly challenging convention though. That would be a different kind of art. But we can find value in the work he makes now, with its prickly ambivalence, because of the questions it asks. And questions can be disruptive to convention.”

Notes on Smut


In 2010 Google Instant began saving us two to five seconds per search. Before that time we were forced to type an entire word, sometimes even a whole phrase, before hitting send. Thankfully search engines now anticipate our needs, often before we’re aware we have them. Unless of course, your needs include looking up anything about lesbians. This is because lesbian, as a search term anyway, more commonly precedes a phrase like “gang bang” than it does “literature.” It may not be fair, but it’s true. It’s not that Google doesn’t want to help you find both pornography and lesbian literature; it just wants you to put in a little extra effort. This keeps mundane searches for “Les Miserables” and “Le Sport Sac” from sending you down a rabbit hole of live web cam pop ups.
The search term problem is just one little piece of the larger task of how to represent queer female desire in the text. We all want to feel special; like what we are looking at is meant just for us. So if everyone is used to objectifying women, like it’s just a thing used to sell toothpaste and jeans and trick us into watching romcoms, how do you write about sex and the erotic in a way that only the intended audience is picking up what you’re putting down? Continue reading

Stop Making Sense: Looking at 3 exhibitions about AIDS


AIDS The First Five Years in New York—a current exhibition at the New York Historical Society—is heart breaking in its boredom. They have reduced the genesis of our ongoing crisis to a pedantic collection of papers, videos and pull quotes. And even though there are real political problems with the exhibition—the lack of people of color represented, and the relationship set up between gay sex in the 70s and AIDS in the 80s—it is the sheer lack of sex, despair, creativity, survival or urgency that is the shame of the Historical Society’s efforts. Continue reading

Thoughts on “Revisiting the AIDS Crisis and the Ongoing Pandemic”


This weekend, the New School and Visual AIDS presented the 3-part series: Revisiting the AIDS Crisis and the Ongoing Pandemic: Health Challenges is the 21st century. For In the Flesh, one of the organizers shares his thoughts on the kickoff event, Surviving, Uniting, Anger and the Plague: a Conversation with David France and Jim Hubbard. To learn more about the series visit:

Continue reading