Berto_Tony_201307_PhD .pdf - University of Guelph

159
hypothesises that this scenario may be a “subcultural myth” which portrayed many of the
anxieties circulating around homosexuality of the time (154). He notes that the cross-class
relationship allowed the higher class man to find men that would not classify themselves as
“queer”, and whose interests in such a liaison "might be . . . motivated largely by social
deference and financial advantage: probably they were married” (this kind of pairing also
has obvious resonances to “trade,” as discussed earlier this chapter) (154). Such
arrangements could disguise the relationship, and avoid the social stigma of being identified
as gay. Frank’s departure with the man appears to be marginally compensated by the
clothing he is offered. However in the brutal class system of the play social deference to the
Nobelesse class appears obligatory. Frank’s telling of how the “man” “[d]ressed me to the
part. The long leather coat, /The pigskin case, the hat and suit, /Drinkin’ cherry brandy with
a fine cheroot” suggests that Frank was disguised as a Nobelesse on their journey. If this
disguise were used to thwart suspicions of Frank’s class, then there is an implication that
the nature of their pairing needed to be kept unseen. These suggestions of both a cross-class
pairing and a gay relationship are intertwined, as is the evidence of proscription against
them. From this song the reader can infer the play’s social constructs, in that two men of
different classes aren’t meant to be seen travelling together, let alone in a sexual
relationship with each other.
Frank’s journey illustrates several anxieties about homosexuality. His departure
replays the dangerous mode of the four Ds, in that it suggests Frank has been unwillingly
taken away from his family (and suggests a forcible recruitment into a homosexual milieu),
and that homosexuals may be threatening (or dangerous) to young people in that regard. It