I see Arsenic and Old Lace as a pivotal piece of male bondage in popular culture. If I were to write a textbook about male bondage, this movie/play would probably get it’s own chapter because it exemplifies exactly what I find appealing about male bondage. First, what leads to the main character getting tied up is comical and ironic because he's criticizing some play he watched for having such an obvious setup without realizing that he's giving his captors ideas for how to subdue him. Plus, the acting is a bit over the top, seeing as how the movie is from the 40s, but the characterization of Mortimer is meant to be a somewhat uppity, self-righteous writer and critic, which is essentially what makes him easy to subdue since he's so caught up with professing his thoughts. And this doesn't really change when a gag is in his mouth. So, the end result is an iconic scene of an attractive, well-dressed, pompous man being bound and gagged, then trying to escape and alert the fumbling police with his muffled speech. Something that adds to this scene's iconic status is the fact that it keeps being replicated with different actors playing this role over and over again. This is an idea of heaven for a male bondage enthusiast like myself because I get to see different handsome, dressed up actors get bound and gagged, as well as struggle and talk with a gag on. Therefore, I find it necessary to break down what's so great about this scene. Summary
The general premise of the story is that a theater critic, Mortimer Brewster (played by Cary Grant) falls for girl-next-door, Elaine Harper (Priscilla Lane), and marries her on Halloween in spite of his anti-marriage sentiment. When the newlyweds return to their respective family homes to deliver the news, Mortimer finds a corpse hidden in a window seat to realize just how unhinged his family is. While Mortimer is digesting the fact that his aunts are murderers who lure in tenants to poison them, we meet his brother Jonathan and Jonathan's alcoholic plastic surgeon Dr. Hermann Einstein. Jonathan is also a serial murderer who is wanted by the police and is trying to dispose of his latest victim. As an attempt to disguise himself from law enforcement, Dr. Einstein altered Jonathan's face while drunk, making Jonathan look like Boris Karloff's Frankenstein. In the midst of Mortimer frantically attempting to control the situation, Jonathan declares his intention to kill his brother, then ties him up with the help of Dr. Einstein.
The setup for subduing Mortimer is pure comedic irony. At some point, Mortimer is distracted from his sordid situation to discuss a recent play, expressing an opinion of disdain, which is something right in his wheelhouse. Mortimer addresses things like the play's obvious setup of a scene where the main character is clearly going to be attacked, but is completely oblivious of his situation. As Mortimer speaks, his brother and Dr. Einstein clumsily lumber around the room, trying to find a way to knock him out or tie him up. Then, Mortimer points out how stupid it was that the assailants in the play use curtain cords to tie up the character, prompting Jonathan to grab the curtain cords in his house. Mortimer still hasn't caught on to what the other men in the room were plotting because he's so wrapped up in his critique, so his Frankenstein-like brother lurches toward him with the cord in his hands. This build-up and irony seems to go full circle when he addresses how “the poor dope” in the play keeps his back to his assailants (as his disfigured brother creeps behind him) as if were “just waiting to be trussed up and gagged.” With that being said, the curtain cord gets wrapped around Mortimer, securing him to his chair. Before Mortimer has a chance to say anything, Dr. Einstein stuffs his mouth with a handkerchief. In the movie version, Mortimer’s surprised reaction is over the top as he comically looks right into the camera with an expression that says "oh no! This happened to me!"
To limit the amount of Mortimer's struggling, Jonathan ties a noose-like thing around his neck that connects to his lap, forcing him to bend forward slightly. If he tried sitting up straight or putting up any kind of fight, the noose would tighten and strangle Mortimer. I believe that this added element is only in the movie because I haven't seen this in any of the plays, probably for safety reasons. Dr. Einstein seems hesitant about killing Mortimer and does what he can to stall Jonathan. Then, their dramatic killing ritual is interrupted when the dorky, would-be playwright, Officer O'Hara, chimes in. Jonathan and Dr. Einstein try to keep tied up Mortimer out of sight from the cop, but when Officer O'Hara finds him, he's more concerned about the fact that Mortimer stood him up from seeing a play together, the very play that Mortimer was criticizing before he got bound and gagged, than why Mortimer was tied up. Because of this, Mortimer's assailants say that they were just re-enacting that play, which not only gets them off the hook, but puts Mortimer in the hot seat with O'Hara for seeing the play without him.
Of course, Mortimer tries explaining himself and alerting his cop friend of what his brother and friend are trying to do to no avail because of his gag and O'Hara's incompetence. Furthermore, O'Hara takes advantage of Mortimer's captivity and inability to interject by explaining his latest play that Mortimer has refused to read. At one point, O'Hara even motions to take Mortimer's gag out, making Jonathan and Dr. Einstein start to panic, but stops when he decides to take advantage of Mortimer's silence. In one iteration, O'Hara even pushes the handkerchief further into Mortimer's mouth. When other cops arrive and ask what's going on, O'Hara explains that he was just pitching his play to one of the most acclaimed theater critics to which one of them replies "did you have to tie him up for it?" Then they free Mortimer.
Revenge Bondage for Pompous Men
Mortimer is clearly the protagonist in this story, but he shares some villainous qualities with a lot of quid-essential browbeating, pompous asshole characters we often see in media like Mr. Hart in 9 to 5 or Gaston in Beauty and the Beast. First, he's a media critic/writer, which in and of itself carries connotations of smugness with a "refined pallet" for media and art that people at the time only got from a combination of an upper class upbringing and college education. Not to mention, he was also very opinionated and critical of new plays that came out. With this, Mortimer even seems too snobbish to take Officer O'Hara up on his offer to see a play with him or give his script the time of day. Plus, seeing as how his family hasn't left his hometown and are fairly quirky to say the least, while Mortimer is fairly normal and worldly, the contrast between him and his family further emphasizes Mortimer's pompousness. Even though Mortimer is more relatable and not a murderer like members of his family, there seems to be an aire to him that needs to be taken down a notch.
I feel like the bondage revenge of an uppity man is a legitimate trope in the bondage world. Bondage revenge, on its own, is a trope that involves some bully, oppressor, or overall bad man getting punished with bondage and all the things that come with it: physical torture, humiliation, or even just the feeling of vulnerability from being helpless. This is especially popular in bondage porn because people usually understand being tied up as some form of punishment, but we as fetishists also see bondage as desirable. So, getting to punish oppressors with our ropes as karmic justice is a common way of dealing with this conundrum. When bondage revenge narrows its focus to pompous men, the revenge scenario is the same, but other qualities that relate to pompous men are added to the mix.
Like with Mortimer, these men are usually pretty vocal. Oftentimes, these types of characters are bosses, teachers, or any other type of man with some kind of status that comes from an esteemed specialty, who wears a suit, and has no problem with voicing his opinion. All of these qualities are fuel for wanting to restrain and gag him because it would obviously shut him up, as well as shake his confidence that has been made apparent with the pride he takes in his appearance. I've mentioned it in other articles, but a man's expressed vanity is a way of calling attention to himself and could be interpreted as a subtle failure in primitive masculinity. Since being detail oriented and critical appears to be the polar opposite from being "the strong silent type" that you would expect from a man with a blue collar job, this character's tendency to be vocal about things like art, refinement, writing, etc. furthers his failure in masculinity. Therefore, physically dominating him and his body seems to be a way of putting him in his place and punishing him for that failure, making his revenge bondage have another layer to it. Even though Mortimer didn't really seem to do anything to Jonathan, there appears to be an underlying jealousy and resentment about Mortimer's attractiveness and conventional life that contrasts from Jonathan’s lumbering stature and disfigured face, as well as the fact that he stayed behind in his hometown, becoming a mediocre criminal instead of an acclaimed writer.
When we get to the specifics of the bondage scene in this movie, the thing that primarily connects with Mortimer's pompousness is used against him. He’s tricked into getting subdued because his captors know that having him stroke his own ego by critiquing a play, they can distract him enough to plan how to tie him up. Mortimer criticizes how cliche a play is for having it’s main character have his back turned to the villains as they prepare to tie him up with curtain cords. Meanwhile, the captors take his suggestion and Mortimer doesn’t realize it until it’s too late. The irony in this setup comes from the fact that Mortimer is saying how stupid and obvious that setup was in the play that he's talking about, yet he fell prey to it "in real life." Not to mention, if he hadn't been going on about that play, he would have made it more difficult for Jonathan and Dr. Einstein to overpower him because he would have been more alert and they wouldn't have thought to use the curtain cord on him.
Furthermore, when Officer O'Hara enters the scene, Mortimer’s pompousness works against him yet again. Unlike the seemingly jealous Jonathan who probably doesn’t see the value and prestige in what Mortimer does, O’Hara respects Mortimer as a critic and seems to want to be his friend, which explains why he’s so excited to pitch his story to him and get his opinion/ approval. However, Mortimer doesn’t seem interested in being O’Hara’s friend or hearing his pitch, which is probably why he stood O’Hara up and hasn’t taken the time to listen to his pitch. Therefore, O’Hara takes advantage of the fact that Mortimer is tied up and gagged because he wouldn’t be able to get away from him or cut him off from speaking. Perhaps, if Mortimer wouldn’t have been as snobbish and brushed off O’Hara, the bumbling cop might have been more inclined to untie his friend. Although, this context makes for a fairly arousing and comedic scene as we see Mortimer fumble to tell O’Hara what’s going on with Jonathan, then try to explain himself for standing O’Hara up with a gagged mouth. Conclusion
Similar to Arsenic and Old Lace, 9 to 5 involves the bondage revenge of a pompous man. However, actor Dabney Coleman's character, Mr. Hart, is a sexist asshole who winds up being objectified and humiliated by his female employees, making the revenge element more apparent. Since Mr. Hart often humiliated and exploited his female employees, they fantasized about doing the same to him, then kind of delivered on those fantasies when one thing led to another and Mr. Hart wound up tied up and gagged. I find this turning of tables particularly appealing because there's something about getting to see some powerful person who never felt belittled or objectified feel these things for the first time. So, aside from the mere bondage, which is extremely hot because Coleman gag talks really well, this kind of thing is so arousing to us because we usually only see women as vulnerable because our culture makes it taboo for a man to show vulnerability since the preservation of masculinity is always at stake. I think it’s especially appealing for us to see that straight men aren’t always as powerful and manly as they pretend to be most of the time because they too are capable of being made helpless and embarrassed. This might be the key thing that connects Mortimer to Mr. Hart: they are both powerful and esteemed men who get to experience the silence, helplessness, and humiliation that others usually experience for the first time in these stories. Witnessing this experience unfold is probably the only thing I can appreciate about pompous characters.
Considering how old and over the top this scene is, it might seem out of touch and outright silly to most modern audiences. I think this scene in Arsenic and Old Lace is so good because it shows one of the only ways that I can enjoy bondage revenge that seems somewhat authentic. Even though Mortimer is the protagonist, he shares qualities with a lot of attractive pricks we see in media. Although I usually appreciate pompous men for being well-dressed and stylish, they are usually unlikable for obvious reasons, which makes them valuable only when they're being tied up and humiliated. So, it's fun to see Mortimer in his neat style squirm and others kind of enjoy his helplessness. Since he is the character that he is (an esteemed man who has never been physically restrained, silenced, and humiliated), he doesn’t let the rope keep him from struggling or let the gag actually shut him up. Even though he’s completely helpless in this situation, he still has the drive to fight his bondage, instead of letting himself be mentally subdued. This is probably what we find most attractive: men who aren’t too embarrassed to speak through their gags or who give into their physical helplessness; men who are really vulnerable, but aren’t willing to admit their vulnerability; men who can still be masculine, while having most elements of control stripped from them and even still be feminine in a sense when you consider their artifacts (wardrobe) that contribute to these kinds of characters’ pompousness.
I even find it worth mentioning that aside from Mortimer being physically restrained in this scene, his masculine, "lone soldier" identity as a perpetual bachelor who was completely against marriage got compromised when he married Elaine. Not to mention, he was also so proud that he went home to announce his marriage to his family. This shift in Mortimer's philosophy shows growth and maybe his experience with Jonathan contributed to his growth by making him a bit more well-rounded and aware of how people see him. In a lot of abstract media, bondage is used as a metaphor for being trapped in some way that forces you to go inward and engage in self-reflection. Since, like with Mortimer, bondage keeps you from running away or speaking, it prevents you from avoiding your problems and interrupting those who are talking to you, which forces you to be more perceptive and open. This seems to be the case in most bondage revenge stories, like in 9 to 5 because Mr. Hart eventually grows to understand what he put the women through, as well as the fact that they deserved more respect and appreciation because they did his job better than him while he was captured. So, even though Mortimer wasn't a particularly bad character, he still had things to learn while he was tied up. Thus, I believe that male bondage seems to be about emphasizing the fact that men can still be attractive when they are in a vulnerable or feminine position, as well as the fact that it isn’t possible for anyone to be masculine and in full control all the time because everyone has their weaknesses and unique qualities. To go a bit further in Mortimer's case, it seems to extend to that meta-understanding that you eventually have to grow up and accept the inevitability that people find themselves in helpless positions that have to be dealt with, as well as the fact that you can't always control other people's perceptions of you.
Comentários