Uninvited: Classical Hollywood Cinema and Lesbian Representability

Theories of Representation and Difference

by Patricia White

"White writes with considerable flair, and her arguments are always interesting . . ." ―Choice

"Uncovering a massive trove of what she calls 'lesbian representability'―images of lesbian desire, love and life―in mainstream movies, White provides an insightful look at classic American films. . . . her myriad examples and finely wrought arguments prove both convincing and engaging." ―Publishers Weekly

"Conspiratorial and witty, Uninvited is a mischievous invitation to dissect classical cinema by someone who wields the razor with glee." ―OUT Magazine

Lesbian characters, stories, and images were barred from onscreen depiction in Hollywood films from the 1930s to the 1960s, together with all forms of "sex perversion." Looking at the lure of some of the great female stars and at the visual coding of supporting actresses, the book identifies lesbian spectatorial strategies.

Genres: Film, Queer, Nonfiction, LGBT, Feminism, Lesbian, Gay

396 pages, Paperback

First published November 1, 1999

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.

Patricia White is Professor of Film and Media Studies at Swarthmore College. She is the author of Uninvited: Classical Hollywood Cinema and Lesbian Representability, coauthor of The Film Experience, and co-editor of Critical Visions in Film Theory. She has worked extensively with Women Make Movies and the journal Camera Obscura: Feminism, Culture, and Media Studies.

Reviews

[Jessica · Rating 4 out of 5]

I loved it. This was a great, comprehensive look at lesbians and female-female homoeroticism in film throughout the ages, particularly in the golden age of Hollywood.

[Liz · Rating 1 out of 5]

I started this book and it bored me, so I thought I'd come back to it.....still bores me. Although the topic is interesting it is so incredible dry. It is written like a boring university subject and it didn't need to be written like that. White uses a lot of communications/filmology jargon (from what I can remember from that wasted year of education) and I didn't enjoy it. I never understood why university lecturers who write text books have to write things in such an uninspiring/boring way.....although they might be thinkers, they are certainly not writers.

I found White's theories a little shaky and out there for me as well. As soon as she starts justifying her theories utilising the patriarchal/penis obsessive/oedipus complex views of Freud she totally lost me. Freud was a fraud and his work is so out-dated and 1970's shrink material.

Maybe I missed the point of her book or was expecting something different, but I just found it boring and felt that I should be reading it with my yellow highlighter in hand. And lets face it, with university standards these days wiki would suffice if I had to write an essay on this topic.

[marnie ♡ · Rating 3 out of 5]

logging books i read for thesis research bc if i have to suffer it may as well count for something!

[Meg · Rating 3 out of 5]

more taxing to read than it ought to be but important nonetheless!!