MovieChat Forums > Ben-Hur (1959) Discussion > If there are gay undertones they are bet...

If there are gay undertones they are between Ben-Hur + Quintus Arrius


I remember the Gore Vidal comments. I was always suspicious since the last time I saw the movie I didn't notice anything along those lines.
Perhaps Gore was saying this to be a wise ass? Perhaps Wilder told this to Gore to motive his work?
Personally, the only relationship I saw that might be gay was Ben-Hur and Quintus Arrius.
He watches him half naked rowing in the hull of the ship. He has him, alone, unchained before battle. He cleans him up and "adopts" him. Oh, by the way, they are father and son??? Come on now.
That's a gay under current.

reply

Yes, one can see something that suggests that Judah is Arrius' 'kept man'. The same can be said for Drusus in his scenes with Messala.

Still, the Judah-Messala thing can be seen with a homesexual undertone- or you can view it differently.
-The source material- the novel- has Messala drop a lot of hints about how he wants his renewed relationship with Judah to be like, referring to him as his 'ganymede'.
-In the 1959 movie, Messala is awestruck to tears in seeing Judah again.
-Judah and Messala drink their chalices with locked wrists- like romantic couples do.
-Messala shouts at Judah: "Beg? Didn't I beg you?"

Of course, one can also view these scenes as signs of a very close and very straight bromance gone sour by political views. There were a lot of close friendships in 19th century America that were broken up by its Civil War- Hancock and Armstead for example.

reply

[deleted]

"-Judah and Messala drink their chalices with locked wrists- like romantic couples do."

- Everyone does that in the movie. Judah and his stepfather does this too. What does that scene imply?

reply

doesn't matter, gays can't call it a marriage anywhere. A union yes entitling both to benefits of each other like a marriage between two opposite sexes.


Imre Demech

reply

Your comment makes no sense. I don't mention marriage.

reply

Most of you saps don't make any sense at all. There is nothing "gay" in the film at all - it only exists in your perverse imaginations!

The internet is for lonely people. People should live. Charlton Heston

reply

"That's a gay under current."

Well, I suppose it is -- IF that's what you're looking for. I wasn't.

The "father and son" relationship makes sense dramatically and historically (such adoptions were commonplace in Rome since the founding of the Republic for any number of reasons not related to sex). There is a father/son age relationship. There is an admiration (character, courage, determination & vision - even in contrast) relationship. There is the loss of Arrius' son to be considered. Btw, it would be a little out of character for Arrius to ignore such a man when chained to his oar, whether clothed in standard galley slave kit ("half naked") or wearing a three-piece suit. Unchain him before the battle to give him a chance at life? Why not? "Clean him up"? I would certainly hope so given the above!

reply

I'm in cwente court.

I felt that since Juda did save Arrius life there was also the debt of gratitude. Arrius didn't want to live but Judah prevented him from killing himself. Then came the news of the battle win and all the glories that went with it.


It’s good to dream

reply

I don't think Arrius saw anything very much different in Judah at the oar, from what he saw in any of the others at their oars - they were All similarly underclad. What he saw different about Judah was his facial expression.
"Your eyes are full of hate, 41. That's good! Hate keeps a man alive. It gives him strength."

It is this strength, the will to live, that separates him from the other slaves. At this early stage of their "acquaintanceship," he had no thoughts of adoption - he did not even bother to find out his name. He was interested in getting another gladiator for the games in Rome - physically strong, eyes full of hate, and a will to live (that is, to survive). Later on, Arrius would see there was more to Judah than just another "fighting man." He could see him as an adopted son. I do not see anything to support a revisionist viewpoint that suggests anything else.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

It's not a matter of "one person". Vidal wrote the lines, and Wyler gave Boyd the direction, to suggest "gay undertones". If someone senses such overtones, it's probably because of ... the undertones. It would not be surprising if the Hur-Arrius relationship was also so "toned", although my view is that it's a surrogate father-son relationship for both characters.

reply

[deleted]

If you think homosexuality is "sick and twisted", you're the one with the problem :)

AND yes, Vidal sprinkled the script with "gay undertones" and Wyler so directed Boyd.

Too bad that simple facts cause you to break out in hives. But, again, you're the one with the problem.

reply

Did I say that "homosexuality is sick and twisted", bastasch8647,?
You are very stupid if you regard everything that comes out of Gore Vidal's mouth as the truth.
I don't break out into hives about simple facts ... just simple lies.

"The internet is for lonely people. People should live." Charlton Heston

reply

[deleted]

Blame that foolish old liar Gore Vidal. He's the one that has harped on about this so-called 'gay' relationship for the past 20 years or so ... and the homosexuals just lap it up as the gospel truth. Its enough to make you squirm, isn't it?


"The internet is for lonely people. People should live." Charlton Heston

reply

You must really be afraid of something - homosexuality, or your own sexuality.

- - -

"...and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped."

reply

"You must really be afraid of something - homosexuality, or your own sexuality."

Oh? Why is that? . . .

If justified, btw, wouldn't it also be justified to say -- "You must be really afraid of something - heterosexuality, or your own sexuality"?

reply

[deleted]

It's obvious there isn't a straight male character in the entire picture.

All lies and jests, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest - Paul Simon

reply

Anybody that believes anything that Gore Vidal says is a numbskull. The guy is a born liar. And anybody that finds anything "gay" concerning the biblical epic "Ben-Hur" is most certainly a homosexual.

"The internet is for lonely people. People should live." Charlton Heston

reply

Too bad for you Vidal wasn't lying about putting gay overtones into his script.
Too bad for you that homosexuality brings out your most moronic spasms.

reply

The point is, any "gay Overtones" in the script (I can believe Vidal put them there despite any controversy) are incredibly subtle. I've seen the film many times never even noting the possibility -- and, consequently, never really accepting the "alleged" overtones as being an important element in the story. (In my view, Vidal "never", as you suggest, intended such a longing between Judah and Arrius.)

As with all films (and plays) 50% of an audience's enjoyment is intended to come from their own imaginations. You've also got to admit there are plenty of people around who are, as Oswaldshot... suggests, looking for gay overtones in most "everything" they see. . . Their privilege . . .

reply

I wrote the original thread to make the point that if Vidal had written a gay subtext between Ben-Hur and Messala it wasn't there in fact you'd have more luck finding it between Hur and Arrius.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

OswaldshotKennedy, grow up. Your homophobic agenda is getting old. ;) This message when reporting your posts says it all:

"Thanks, we already have sufficient abuse reports about this user. Administrators will be processing these in due course."

Bimbo Boy
http://bimboboy.com
http://twitter.com/bimboboy

reply

I also felt that way; I was quite surprised to read that it was the relation between Ben Hur and Messala, which was supposed to have a gay background. It is much more clear with Q. Arrius. You just have to look at Jack Hawkins´face during the famous rowing scene. The script may give the excuse that Arrius is looking for gladiators but just watching him staring at Ben Hur you can clearly tell that his interest in him is from quite another nature.

Later on Arrius learns to respect Judah and they develop a father-son relationship, but thats afterwards.

reply

One could just as well "clearly tell" that Arrius' initial interest in Ben-Hur was due to Arrius being involved in chariot racing and undoubtedly always on the lookout for a strong lad to drive one of his chariots, no? He spotted a big strapping one rowing the galley he commanded- he may have used others before Ben-Hur for all we know. I think any leering gaze upon Ben-Hur was equivalent to a race horse owner ogling some magnificent horse he was interested in buying.
There's also the strong possibility that Arrius displayed interest in Ben-Hur because he somehow reminded him of his dead son.

reply

Aticusfinch. I find your take on the so-called Arrius infatuation with Judah extremely ludicrous.

"The internet is for lonely people. People should live." Charlton Heston

reply

Homophobia if I ever heard it

reply

I just bet you are one of them that go looking for homophobia, tperkin52.

"The internet is for lonely people. People should live." Charlton Heston

reply

[deleted]

Oh yeah you got me pegged Pzachlen- I'm a homophobiS from any or all of my many posts on IMDb. Lol

reply

[deleted]

turtletommy: One could just as well "clearly tell" that Arrius' initial interest in Ben-Hur was due to Arrius being involved in chariot racing and undoubtedly always on the lookout for a strong lad to drive one of his chariots, no? He spotted a big strapping one rowing the galley he commanded- he may have used others before Ben-Hur for all we know. I think any leering gaze upon Ben-Hur was equivalent to a race horse owner ogling some magnificent horse he was interested in buying.
There's also the strong possibility that Arrius displayed interest in Ben-Hur because he somehow reminded him of his dead son.


Pzachlen: TURTLE TOMMY is most certainly a homophobis [sic] person , which very often means closet case.

turtletommy: Oh yeah you got me pegged Pzachlen- I'm a homophobiS [sic] from any or all of my many posts on IMDb. Lol

Pzachlen: The mere fact that your [sic] offended proves my point.

Anyone coming to this thread, whether idiot or genius, and reading turtletommy's TWO remarks thus far, then lining them up with yours, could only conclude your insults and accusations are groundless and uncalled for. I'd almost say you're like one of those sneaky little asps that bite and poison people at their ankles; except the asp cannot really be blamed for doing what it was made to do, whereas YOU, Pzachlen, being wholly responsible and accountable for your own words and actions like any other person should be, can be counted on to spew your ad hominem bile like "Old Faithful" EVERYTIME anyone says ANYTHING that isn't in complete lock-step with your views and not chauvinistically, whole-heartedly on your little bandwagon.

Personally, I am about through with you from this point on. You're not worth wasting another keystroke over.


Whatever you do, DO NOT read this sig--ACKKK!!! TOO LATE!!!

reply

vinidici I think the bozo somehow can't follow a message board tree and possibly has confused me with another poster? But at any rate he's demonstrated how he goes about his business posting on these boards... as Bugs Bunny would say- what a maroon!

reply

Hey! Why don't we ALL just step outta that damn closet, combine the terms, call him a "confused maroon", and let it go at that?!

reply

I'm so outta the closet I'm in another universe baby!

reply

I have to say, I hadn't seen this movie for a very long time and so I was not aware of the Gore Vidal gay controversy. So I was watching the Messala/Ben Hur reunion scene last night and all I could think was "Wow, are these guys supposed to be lovers?". I mean Ben Hur's eyes are full of tears and there are a lot of "longing" looks between them not to mention the intimate drinking posture. Then I saw the same thing with Quintus Arrias. Whether it was intentional or not the fact is, there is a lot more chemistry between Heston and the other two than between him and Esther even in their supposed "passionate" kissing scenes.

I'd forgotten what a hunk Charleton Heston was, lol!

(BTW, I'm a middle-aged straight woman.)

reply

I DON'T BELIEVE YOU FlutteringButterly!

I just bet that you read all this gay nonsense before watching the film and then decided to stir it up even more. Now why don't you flutter off!

The internet is for lonely people. People should live. Charlton Heston

reply

Heston was frigging sexy!

reply

Are you serious?!! Do you have no sense of the brotherhood of man? I suppose its all but dead now, due to people such as yourself that can't seem to be able to witness any male on male affection without it being sexual. Grow up!

reply

The brotherhood of man occasionally includes sex, and there's nothing wrong with that. I certainly recommend it.

As for this film, there is surprisingly plenty to suggest something more than a non-sexual relationship between Ben-Hur and Arrius, and Ben-Hur and Messala. Just as in real life, the characters don't have to actually have sex for us to know this. It would be nearly impossible to show in this 1950s film. And a Jewish prince would certainly be aware of Jewish law in this regard. But desire is what it is.

In a real way, the homophobes of the past are to blame for disagreements over which characters were gay or had sex with someone of the same sex. The closet harms everyone, including straight people and characters, by putting everything in doubt. If writers and directors could have been honest, these debates wouldn't be coming up as often as they now do.

reply

Certainly an interesting point of view, but one with a few turns of logic I don't think I fully grasp:

First, you say, "... and there's nothing wrong with that." But, then you say, "... a Jewish prince would certainly be aware of Jewish law in this regard." So . . . isn't it true that from Judah's point of view (and many others even today who accept "Jewish law") there IS something wrong with that?

Second, you say, "... there is surprisingly plenty to suggest ..." (Personally, I don't see the "plenty".) "... something more than a non-sexual relationship between Ben-Hur and Arrius, and Ben-Hur and Messala." Hmmm. You go on to say, "the characters don't have to actually have sex for us to know this.", and "It would be nearly impossible to show in this 1950s film." (It would be "nearly impossible to show" it in a 2010s era film too - homo OR heterosexual.) So . . . how DO we know? We can "speculate", which is what this thread has been about, but -- how do we "know" as you seem to "know"? Btw, some gay posters on this board have, also, said they don't see the "plenty" either, nor do they feel the question has much to do with the dramatic proceedings in any case.

Third, you say, "... the homophobes of the past are to blame for disagreements over which characters were gay or had sex ...". Now, I would think that such uncertainties must be laid at the doorstep of the film's creators, not with the social mores of the viewing public's culture (in this case, a Judeo-Christian culture principally). Art CAN do that. Other films of the era, and before, have been pretty clear about such relationships without being graphic in their depictions (Eg., "The Sign of the Cross", 1930's and "The Uninvited", 1940's, etc.).

"... by putting everything in doubt."

Perhaps the film's creators wanted "everything" to be "in doubt"? . . . In the drama events/moments/character motivations are often presented to best effect precisely because they "do" leave the audience in doubt, or because the dubious moment is, from the director's point of view, entirely inconsequential to the story.

"If writers and directors could have been honest ..."

But, they COULD have. And, as for myself, I think they WERE honest -- a very talented team. (Wyler's "The Children's Hour", focusing on deceit, malicious gossip, AND lesbianism, was released one year after "Ben-Hur".) Anyway, this "homophobe" sees nothing in the subject relationships to indicate a physical connection (or "desire" for same) between any of the male characters that could have had any important bearing on either the events or the themes of this picture.

reply

[deleted]

The line "Is there anything so sad as unrequited love?" is frequently commented upon, as is the spear throwing scene, the scene of Messala and Ben-Hur linking arms while drinking wine from goblets and gazing longingly at each other, the campy portrayal of Pontius Pilate by gay actor Frank Thring, and the scene of men rubbing oil on each other.

reply