Enbytion Transcendance : Tucked
Warning : In order to best elaborate on the analysis of the character, I will have to divulge his narrative arc and thus reveal a large part of the plot of the film.
And here’s the TW and CW list to prepare you before watching the film :
CW: blood; fainting; death implied but not shown; discussion of aging, cancer, impending death, parental abandonment of a child; partial nudity; drinking and smoking; physical and violent argument; mention of sexual intercourse and genitalia discussed
TW: homophobic slurs and stereotypes; transphobic and enbyphobic characters; homophobic physical and violent assault; drug use
Since the pronouns used in the film to refer to Faith are sometimes she and sometimes he, and since the character does not mention a preference and no one asks her for his pronouns, I have chosen to use the pronouns he and she in alternation, in order to highlight her non-binary identity.
Tucked is a 2018 British film written and directed by Jamie Patterson, who has not identified himself as being part of the LGBTQIA+ community.
While the feature film Tucked follows Jackie, a septuagenarian, heterosexual, white, cisgender drag queen, who wants to enjoy his last few weeks before his premature death from cancer, the figure of interest here is Faith, with whom Jackie befriends.
At first glance, Faith seems to be an example of a stereotypical trans person: a poor drag queen, kicked out of his house by her father and then saved by the cisgender main character, whom he will support without the film being focused on her story. Well, there is some truth to it but Faith is far more complex and endearing than that, starting with his identity. He proudly claims her non-binary identity even though he never uses this term, stating instead: “I don’t think what’s between my legs defines me … I’m not a guy, I’m not a girl”. Even though Faith is played by a cis man, it is a huge step forward to see that this character does not solely exist as a spokesperson for enbys, while providing a definition of her gender that can speak to many. Furthermore, he has a job that breaks out the confines where trans people are restricted to sex work, is talented in drag and singing, opens up about a romantic disappointment with a man and is supported by her friend all the time, while having a backstory that is not just about Jackie. In short, he is an endearing and well-constructed character that I would have liked to see more of in the picture, with more than just-hinted-at relationships. Nevertheless, I understand that Faith can be seen as a token (character.s included in small numbers to give the illusion that a work or a company is inclusive and diverse), since she remains the only black and sole POC, trans, non-heterosexual character in the entire film. Although there is Mollie, a drag queen envious of Faith, played by a gender-fluid comedian, her story is never developed and she is only included in the film as an exuberant 50-something who is supposed to make people laugh.
Now that Faith’s identity has been analyzed, let’s talk about the role of the camera and what it reflects when it captures her movements. First of all, Faith, Jackie or any other drag queen is never shown as ridiculous, forced into this profession or being a sex worker on the side, although Faith does mention once his (past) desire to work in the porn industry. Not that sex work is condemned in the film, but it is positive to see queer people who are not sex workers. Admittedly, all the characters are portrayed as flamboyant but this is rooted in drag culture and they are never mocked and always treated with empathy. This can also be sensed when these characters are dressing, putting on make-up and preparing for their performance, as there are no still shots or peering up and down at their every move, which I found refreshing as a representation of transidentity. Another major difference from most films about trans people is that Faith is never filmed naked, although his torso is sometimes half exposed, and the shots never focus on her crotch or chest.
Get Eleo Emil Billet’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
However, speaking of which, his genitals are discussed at least four times, either by her or others. Once was enough in the context of his definition, but it’s from the moment she meets Jackie that his intimacy is brought to the table when the protagonist tells her the policies of the place they work at : “So, whatever you’ve got in your panties, you just keep it in there.” There is an ambivalence in the dialogue here and a reminder that marginalized people will ALWAYS be more apt, but given less opportunities, to write about their identities than those fitting the norms. In my opinion, the screenwriter could have found a roundabout way to portray Jackie’s crude way of talking, without having to remind us of his incompetence in dealing with non-binary and genderqueer identities. These lines felt like “Oh! Since Jackie doesn’t know if Faith is “male or female”, he’s sometimes going to be respectful about how to refer to her gender, but we’re still going to bring it up in a transphobic way.” Even if it’s not discussed any further, Faith’s pout shows the discomfort this remark has caused.
The second time comes just after and is coupled with the most violent scene in the film, not even 15 minutes in, which is a homophobic and transphobic attack on the two main characters. While smoking in the alley behind their club, they are hailed and insulted by two queerphobic men who urge them to leave. Faith defends herself first verbally and then physically before Jackie intervenes and they both end up on the ground, beaten, and have to go to hospital. During the altercation, Faith ironically tells the group “That’s why you’re in this back alley, isn’t it ? To get in my back alley.” Indeed, this jibe is used as a defensive tactic and definitely echoes the experience of many queer people who defend themselves by using stereotypes and turning homophobia (here) against their attackers by playing up their genitals and sexual practices, in this case sodomy. But this sentence taken in the general context of the film, and of what little we know of Faith at this point, brings her once again back to his genitals and makes it even more painful since it was written by a cis man and voiced by a cis actor. Still, I appreciate that for once a trans person stands up for themselves during an attack, although I would have preferred that the attack itself didn’t occur as it is only there to remind the audience of the violence of our experiences and doesn’t contribute to the effective development of the characters, as they had already started to bond.
Then, the fourth mention is in an exchange that made me very uncomfortable, not only because of my experience with my own gender identity but also because this scene represents gender as a difficult concept for some people to grasp, without addressing the transphobia entailed. Thus, in an encounter with a drug dealer, Faith experiences a lot of verbal enbyphobia when the man asks her whether he is a guy and, while Faith replies that it depends on his definition of “guy”, the man retorts that since he has a dick (after Faith’s confirmation), that makes her a guy. As it stands, this dialogue doesn’t lead to a proper discussion around gender and identity as believed by the scriptwriter, but rather is useless to characterize Faith and her relationship with gender, since he talked about it much earlier during the so-called third time (the definition of her gender). Moreover, the scene is at odds with the joy of the characters who were going to buy drugs for recreational use, and especially hurtful to trans and non-binary people who, through Faith, see a part of their being denied under the pretext of showing the ignorance and confusion of cis people, as well as by the director’s vision that our identities are subjects of debate and education to change mentalities.
Once again, this dialogue is written, directed and acted by cis men with failed good intentions as proven by this response from the director in an interview : “ I think gender isn’t as simple as some people think, for instance Steve Oram’s character (the dealer) in the film. There’s a real ignorance towards change in general I think. I don’t expect attitudes to change overnight, it’s a conversation and adjustment but it’s important for those conversations to be had and people to be heard.” I reread this response, but I still don’t understand who he was talking about when he said “people needed to be heard”: is it trans and enby people who are hurt and angry at being reduced to their genitals and middle-school-level biology, or those who say they are lost to these same people ? Furthermore, the change he is talking about refers to the recognition and acceptance of identities other than heterosexual and outside of the cis man — cis woman gender binary. Yet the film never challenges the view that trans-identity is a novelty of the 2000s and primarily concerns white people, even though people whose genders fall outside this systemic, colonial and Christian binary exist and have been celebrated (or repressed) for millennia in other cultures and religions. Indeed, the intersection of Faith’s black and non-binary identities is never explored and the character responds to the fantasized vision of a non-binary identity that is certainly out of mainstream bounds but remains passive, only able to fully express itself in an already queer place, and never disturbs the establishment. Faith and others like her are not heard because even when a story is made around trans people, it is not our multiple experiences that are brought forward but the white cis-hetero viewpoint.
Therefore, Jamie Patterson’s message (and his relationship to gender) are very simplified and even dismissive, which can also be explained by the fact that this is not the predominant theme of the film, but rather death, love, family, loneliness. However, this does not excuse the dominant attitude adopted where the film team imagines that with their supposedly universal point of view they can tell any story, even though this narrative has yet to be embraced by trans and non-binary people of colour. And this is particularly disappointing because it is one of the few works of fiction to depict a non-binary, black person. Finally, the boldest statement in this feature film is that not all drag queens are gay and some are even straight and cisgender. This is apparently the best we can expect from a cis-hetero perspective, so let’s instead support projects by trans creators.
The film can be viewed in English with English subtitles on TUBITV .
I look forward to your feedback.
Originally published in French at http://constanceismann.wordpress.com on July 22, 2021.
