Torchwood: Captain Jack's sexuality...

[fajrdrako]

becky_h initiated an interesting discussion about how Captain Jack is not a slut on torch_wood yesterday, and while I've only read part of the commentary so far (and plan to return to read more) I wanted to first voice a few thoughts of my own about the subject.

And let me start by saying it's okay if he is a slut. I have liked many heroes who were promiscuous, some of them even bisexual and promiscuous, and I love them all the more for it. And that's what I thought I was getting with Captain Jack. We had all sorts of reasons to think so. The Captain Jack we met in Doctor Who was flirty and sexy and introduced as seductive from the beginning, with both Algy and Rose. Even in "Bad Wolf" and "The Parting of the Ways", after he's been with the Doctor and Rose for a while, he's a exerting his charm towards those around him, and the Doctor accuses him of flirting.

Then we get the advance publicity for Torchwood. Lots and lots of talk about 'omnisexual' Captain Jack. The producers say he'll go for anyone with a postal code. John Barrowman says he'll go with anyone with a hole. Lots of talk about his general sexiness, his bottom, hints of graphic sex and/or nudity.

The truth is, it isn't hard to have more graphic sex than you get in Doctor Who.

So then we get Torchwood and Captain Jack's flirtation is notched down a peg. Over the course of the first half dozen episodes, he talks about kissing alien life forms, having had a twin acrobat boyfriend, having a long list of past lovers.... But in the present, what? He kisses an alien to keep her alive. He kisses Ianto when he's half-conscious. (Nice moment, though.) He is sweet and loving to an old woman he'd had an affair with when she was seventeen. He cuddles Gwen a little in the gun room, but when she kissed him in "Day One", he didn't even kiss back. The only time he flirts with Gwen at all, is when he thinks she won't remember afterwards. When Gwen shows interest and curiosity in him, and possibly more, he sends her home to Rhys, telling her not to mess up the relationship she has with distractions.

And really, in a show where sex is an ongoing theme, it was soon pretty clear that everyone was getting some except Jack. We see him sleeping alone, obsessing over his work, apparently spending all his time at the Hub. The only lovers he mentions are past history.

And more and more we see his sense of compassion - towards Tosh, Gwen, John Ellis, Jasmine and her mother. By the end of "End of Days" we see his capacity to love everyone on his team. And yes, we know he has sex with Ianto - presumably on more than one occasion - but what we see is the warmth and the human connection, and it's Ianto who propositions Jack, not the other way round - Jack is, in fact, surprised when he does.

And for the original Jack... Attracted from the first moment he saw him, our Jack backs off, and keeps sending the other Jack back to Nancy. What we see between them is more romance than sex. Jack isn't chasing after Jack for his body. Jack is weeping because Jack will die and he can't save him.

So it's more and more clear that Captain Jack isn't all about sex, like we might have expected. He's all about love. He cares.

I like that.

He's also obviously very sensuous, and would probably be having sex with any number of people if it didn't bother him so much to lose them afterwards. I like it that his capacity for love is not equated with monogamy.

I was surprised when he criticised Gwen for her infidelity to Rhys, but it made sense when you look at it from his point of view: he didn't want Gwen to hurt or break that relationship. He saw the love there, and saw its value, and didn't want it lost - or worse, thrown away through carelessness.

Comments

part 1

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I agree that the publicity fanfare over his sexuality has never quite matched up to his characterization in the show.

I don't think this is accidental. I think they ... roped us in. I think we were (slightly) conned, in the best possible way. I think John Barrowman is sincere in hoping and suggesting that Captain Jack may in sereis 2 get more in the way of sex scenes. Given the parameters of sexuality we have seen in the show so far, I suspect this might mean sex with a woman, since they are still shy about showing anything more than a kiss between men; we shall see.

I am so tired of the media talking about his sexuality etc.

I'm tired of hearing about Barrowman's sexuality, much as I enjoy the subject - as he said, if an actor is straight, they don't keep referring to them as 'the heterosexual actor' so why should he be so often called 'the gay actor'?

Well, there are reasons for it, though not necessarily good reasons. It's newsworthy because most actors are not gay and out. It's newsworthy because sexual orientation is still a contentious, controversial issue. It's newsworthy because he married Scott - formed a legal partnership, rather - and that's still a controversial issue. And it's newsworthy because he is not playing a straight character on Torchwood, which is amazing in itself.

So the question of Captain Jack's orientation is significant because he is a first. There's always been a default assumption that action heroes are straight. And there's always been a defaul assumption that if a hero isn't straight, he's homosexual - bisexuality is on the radar but only barely, and usually reserved for villains. So this makes it an important issue on a sociological level, including the attitude of the producers and the reactions of the public - and the critics. And the fans, like us.

but to move away from the level of character and toward the level of structure:

I love talking about structure. I worship at your feet for raising the issue.

Jack's sexuality is always, always other.

Hmm. I'll have to think about that.

his sexuality, when it appears, always appears with multiplicity: twin acrobats is a good example, because it's not "I had a boyfriend" but rather "I had a boyfriend...and also had sex with his twin."

See also the plural executioners, whatever their gender, mentioned in "The Empty Child". I've heard Jack's sexuality referred to as ambiguous and I think that's totally the wrong word. It may be elusive, or complex, but I don't see ambiguity....

More to follow immediately...

Re: part 1

[coneyislandbaby]

It's newsworthy because he married Scott - formed a legal partnership, rather - and that's still a controversial issue.

While I agree with you that sometimes John's sexuality is overly talked about, this one isn't quite as cut and dried - how often do we see huge magazine spreads of the latest Hollywood wedding, like Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes or Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban or insert recent marriage here. And the photo shoots with the babies (Gwyneth Paltrow springs to mind).

Slightly tangential but this one isn't quite so all about the sexuality as the others, IMHO.

Re: part 1

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

this one isn't quite so all about the sexuality as the others,

No, this is a case where it would probably be the same regardless of the gender of the person he married. It's celebrity news. But it stills falls under the heading of 'why the media talks about him being gay' - it's all part of the parcel that is his life. So sometimes the media just reflect that and sometimes it's labelling. That that isn't something the celebrity gets to choose.

And it seems to me that I hear way too much about Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, even when I try not to. (groan)

Re: part 1

[bluealbertaskys.livejournal.com]

Forgive me for butting in here but I think I understand why fajrdrako pointed it out.

For someone like John Barrowman it's his sexuality which is always being pointed out.

With the latest Hollywood wedding it would be mentioned about the actor (e.g. Tom Cruise) probably something like:

"and of course you're married to the lovely Katie Holmes and have a daughter, Suri (?) with" and on with the interview.

But for someone like John the interviewer is more likely to say something like:

"and of course you're gay and have recently (married/legal partnered)... Scott (is it?)" and on with the interview. His sexuality is nearly always mentioned whereas for the straight actor it's just mentioned that they are married to whoever and carry on with the interview. They don't mention that the actor concerned is specifically straight.

Sorry for jumping in here it just seemed you had misunderstood the aspect of that comment.

*Note to self, need Torchwood icon*

Re: part 1

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yes, this was pretty much what I mean, and what Barrowman was getting at. The emphasis is different, and the news is given a different slant related to his sexual orientation. I've never heard Tom Cruise described as "straight actor Tom Cruise" the way Barrowman is so often described as a "gay actor".