Introduction

Many things can be said of Alfred Hitchcock’s 1948 film Rope. Firstly, that it’s a murder un-mystery, as viewers watch the murder and its consequences unfold throughout the course of the film and aren’t left to wonder who committed it and by what motive they did so. Regardless, it is secondly a film of immense suspense, as the audience waits for other characters to learn what they already know and flinch when the victim’s body is nearly discovered. Thirdly, it can be interpreted as a comment on the social issues of the time, namely America’s horrified reaction to Nazi Germany and the Holocaust, but also on an issue that was just beginning to emerge- homosexuality. Underneath the drama of the murder lies a compelling relationship between the two men who committed it. In this essay, I will analyze this relationship and how Hitchcock’s constructs it in reference to the times in which his film was created and released.

A Little Background on the History Surrounding Rope

In the 1940’s, being a homosexual was entirely unheard of. Human sexuality wasn’t up for interpretation. Right-minded, healthy, normal people were heterosexual. In fact, homosexuality was considered a gender altering disease by most psychologists and physicians. Men were supposed to be masculine and gayness made them effeminate gender failures (Martin 255). Medical professionals believed that, since it was a psychological disorder, homosexuality could be cured through treatments such as electro-shock therapy (Chiang 301). It was forbidden and un-discussed until about 1948 which, perhaps not so coincidentally, is the same year that Rope was released.

            In 1948 behavioral studies scientist Alfred Kinsey and his collaborators published a report called Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. This report redefined male sexuality, although it was largely rejected by the medical community. It attempted to normalize heterosexuality by using statistical evidence to demonstrate that  no male is entirely straight or gay. All men exhibit some homosexual tendencies from time to time (Chiang 302). This horrified and upset the American public. They feared that if these sexual deviants could blend in with society, it would be harder to target and “cure” them and easier for them to corrupt the minds of innocent heterosexuals (Corber 63).

            Because of their ability to live their lives undetected, the government likened homosexuals to communists. On February 28^th, 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy- famous for the “McCarthy Trials”, in which government officials were accused of being communists without much evidence- accused the State Department of hiring a homosexual official despite the fact that the country was currently facing a massive security crisis in the form of the threat of communism (Corber 62). Gays were feared because, just like communists, they have no morphologic features that outwardly distinguish them from normal people and could work in secret to undermine the government and pervert American citizens (Corber 63). Gays and communists were evil and needed to be eliminated.

A Little Background on Rope

Rope centers on two men, Philip and Brandon, who, within the first five minutes of the film, have killed their so-called friend, David, and hid his body in a chest. They later host a dinner party and serve all the food from the chest which has now become David’s grave. The guests at the party include David’s father and aunt, his soon to be fiancée Janet, mutual friend Kenneth, and former house master Rupert Cadell. The four men became close with Rupert during their time at an elite all-male boarding school.

            Brandon believes that he can kill because he is a privileged, superior being. Therefore, he gets to decide who should live and who should die. This is a belief shared by mass murderer and evil dictator Adolf Hitler. They were both elitists, who find it necessary to eliminate inferior beings to make the world a better place for the superiors. Brandon represents the type of figure that America was deathly afraid of at the time.

            There are all kinds of actions that suggest that Philip and Brandon share a homosexual relationship, which this essay will later analyze in depth. However, both men are completely normal looking. They don’t outwardly appear to be murderers or homosexuals. Despite this, they are very dangerous, evident by the fact that they committed a cold-blooded murder. With the Holocaust still haunting the American conscience and the Cold War brewing on the horizon, Brandon and his beliefs represent the terrors that Americans were grappling with. Nazi’s, communists, and homosexuals could be hiding in plain sight, waiting to corrupt their children, kill their friends, and shatter their morals. As quasi-Nazi supremacists and homosexuals, Brandon and Philip are the ultimate fear.

But These Guys Aren't Like, Actually Gay, Right

Oh, but they are.

            When Rope begins, we know nothing of the relationship between Brandon and Philip. All we know is that two, well dressed young men have just murdered a third, equally well dressed young man by method of strangulation in an elegantly furnished apartment. Hitchcock never explicitly defines the relationship- as in neither one of the characters comes out and says “I’m gay!”- but provides visual and vocal clues that hint at their homosexuality. Many of theses occur in the first ten to twenty minutes of the film.

     Note the position of Brandon behind his victim. Both of his hands are placed on David’s chest. He’s clutching him to his body. It’s a very homoerotic stance. Immediately after the murder, both men pant heavily, as if they’ve just finished having sex. The skeptic may be thinking “wait, these guys just murdered someone. That takes effort- they’re panting because they’re tired, not because they’re recovering from the throes of sexual passion.”

            There’s more.

The stereotypical, post sexual encounter cigarette smoking scene. How often have we seen two lovers lying next to each other in bed, each a little weary from their recent activity. The man, satisfied with himself, casually lights a cigarette. Both remain silent, perhaps reflecting on the encounter or simply because no exchange of words is necessary. These two shots evoke that same tone of post-intercourse haziness and satisfaction. Brandon, the dominant “male” in the relationship, smokes a celebratory cigarette while Philip, the submissive “female”, appears exhausted, leaning on the chest and breathing heavily. If the murder is a metaphor for the physical act of homosexual intercourse and the crime is homosexuality, than it can be interpreted that Brandon and Philip have just concluded having sex and are recovering from their encounter in a very Hollywood cliché way.

            Note also, that the blinds are closed. Brandon explains that they “couldn’t have done it in the bright sunlight” and Philip is expressly averse to opening the blinds even after the “murder” has been committed. Since Hitchcock doesn’t define what “it” is,  viewers can take this lack of specification as an innuendo. “It” is referring to sex, implying that Brandon and Philip could not have had sex in the bright sunlight. Just as they have to keep the murder hidden, so must they keep the nature of their relationship. The two are still “in the closet” about their homosexuality. They had to be. Being a homosexual in 1948 was considered as bad as being a murderer. Their sexual activities had to be completely hidden, for discovery would mean being labeled as a diseased sexual deviant- a societal outcast in need of medical help. This is why Philip is so uncomfortable with opening the blinds. He fears exposure and discovery not only as a murderer, but as a homosexual as well.

In the 1940’s, straight men didn’t remove the gloves from the hands of their straight male friends. This scene suggests that there is a level of intimacy that exists between Philip and Brandon. Brandon, the dominant figure in the relationship, takes care of Philip. Philip submissively obeys. He appears to be at the mercy of Brandon, hunched over and non-resistant to his partner’s touch.

            Shortly after the murder is committed, the men leave the living room and enter the kitchen to drink champagne and celebrate their murderous success. It is in this scene that Philip and Brandon engage in the most homoerotic conversation of the entire film.

 Philip asks “how did you feel… during it?” to which Brandon responds “I don’t know… I don’t remember feeling very much of anything. Until his body went limp and I knew it was over.” Philip: “And then?” Brandon: “And then, I felt tremendously exhilarated.”

            Once again, the ambiguity of “it” urges Hitchcock’s viewers to interpret this conversation as a reflection on a highly erotic homosexual experience. The dialogue certainly alludes to it.  The sexual exhilaration experienced by Brandon draws a rather titillated reaction from Philip, who seems to quiver as if aroused by the story. The homoerotic tension between the two is off the charts.

Once Brandon is finished describing his side of the event, he asks Philip to do the same for him. It seems almost like foreplay. The two are standing so close to one another that the viewers half expect Brandon to grab Philip and engage in some form of sexual congress. This is how the audience sees the two men before the camera pans away from them and over the dining table in front of them. When it pans back, the tension seems to have dissipated and relatively normal, considering the circumstances, conversation resumes.

            Alfred Hitchcock is a master at building suspense. For example, through much of the film viewers are just waiting for someone to open the chest and discover that it’s actually David’s casket. There is one scene in which Mrs. Winston, Brandon and Philip’s housekeeper, walks back and forth between the chest and the kitchen. She removes the food, the tablecloth, and then the candlesticks that sat upon David’s grave. She and Rupert lift the lid of the chest ever so slightly in order to place a stack of books in it, but Brandon intervenes and closes it before they can see anything. The whole time the audience anxiously awaits the look of fright and shock on Mrs. Winston’s face when she discovers the dead body in the chest, which she is sure to do. The suspense only subsides when Brandon intervenes. Hitchcock builds the same suspense in the relationship between Brandon and Philip. In scenes like the one depicted above, the sexual tension is high. The viewer anxiously awaits Brandon’s next move. Will they get closer? Will they prove their homosexuality with a kiss or an embrace? Just when the suspense has reached its climax and it appears as if Brandon is going to pounce on Philip, the camera pans away, slowly eliminating the tension that seemed almost electric just a few seconds prior. Still, the audience is left to wonder what happened in that one short instant before they were forced to look away.

            Another thing we never get to see? The bedroom. Are there two separate bedrooms, one for each man, or is there a singular bedroom with two beds? We are led to believe the latter because of a conversation that occurs between Janet and Brandon. She asks to use the telephone and he tells her that it’s in the bedroom. Not “my bedroom” or “Philip’s bedroom”, but“the bedroom”, indicating that there is only one. To this Janet replies “how cozy” and leaves to find the phone. Just how cozy is it? Are there two beds in the room, or one that both men share? This can never be confirmed because the audience is never allowed to see the bedroom, a location commonly associated with intimacy and sexual activity. Perhaps Hitchcock is choosing not to reveal the entire truth of the relationship in order to spark imagination and keep his viewers guessing, another method of adding suspense to the apparently homosexual relationship between Philip and Brandon.