Identity
Hidden identity: questions of sexual orientation?
Gerber freely admitted that there were parts of his life and self which were out of bounds for the reader. In giving an introduction to a couple of poems he wrote as a young man and included in his autobiography, he said, “I’m not going to give you all of it. Oh no. Oh no. ... Some of it is too revelatory.”9 Reading that admission toward the end of the autobiography effectively confirms the reader’s impression that Gerber may have hid a homosexual identity.
In two passages earlier in the text he raised the question of his sexual orientation. Both passages are marked by a hesitation in finding a term to describe the relation of the individual to Gerber, perhaps a self-censoring pause, and in one passage the language he did choose manages to cast further questions.
Ludwig Gerber, London, 1944
The first instance in the manuscript occurred in a discussion of a gift given to him by a soldier when he left the army. Describing who the soldier was, he said, “I was presented by one of my loyal—I was going to say servitors—he was, although that’s not really the term.” By way of explaining the possible motives for the gift, and what he received, he said,
And to show his appreciation, to show his loyalty, perhaps to show his love, he presented me with a gift. A series of drawings that he had made throughout his service with me—throughout my service in the army abroad in Europe; in London, in England, in France, in Paris, in Germany. The drawings—charcoal drawings—were very well done and very beautiful. He was able, he was artistic, and devoted.10
Gerber’s use of the term “servitor” may be related to one or all of the following definitions found under the first heading in the OED:
d. Sc. A person in a subordinate office or employment; an assistant in a school; an apprentice, spec. a lawyer's apprentice or clerk. Obs.
f. A military attendant, a squire or page. rare.
g. A lover; = servant sb. 4 b. rare.
All the variants are either rare or obsolete, which makes the word choice particularly curious and interesting. He hesitates to use the term, not knowing quite how to describe the relationship between himself and the man. It is possible that he is simply using archaic or rare language to talk about someone who was his assistant; his autobiography is filled with overstatement and impressive phrases. The overwhelming impression that the passage leaves the reader with, however, is that there was something more to the relationship that is not discussed. That this is a rare instance in which he does not name the individual he is talking about only helps to further that impression.
The second passage occurred later in the manuscript, when Gerber had broken his ankle during an ice storm in New York City. He had to get to Mount Kisco, NY, for a meeting the next day. Gerber said, “My—one of my friends, Frank D’Amico, volunteered to take me in his station wagon.”11 That pause, indicated in the transcription by the dash, gives the reader the impression that there was something he was about to say, but self-censored, and changed to the phrase ‘one of my friends.’
Taken singly these events might not give much for second thought about a possible hidden sexual identity. However, taken together, and combined with the fact that he never married, as well as the family rumor that he was gay, the impression of a possible hidden homosexuality is certainly there. Indeed, his one mention of a relationship with a woman seems more like a cover-up relationship than a genuine romance.
Talking about the movie Female Fiends that he produced in London, he said, “I liked Carol Matthews. I didn’t love her, but I liked her. For a time I even thought of marrying her. I was at that age and so was she. That, however, came to an end with the production of Female Fiends in London.”12 The movie was produced after She Gods of Shark Reef, which places it in the late 1950s. Closer to 50 years of age than 40, one wonders if he was a little past the age when men of his era settled down and married; perhaps he was uneasy about the implications of being a confirmed bachelor the rest of his life. Unlike in earlier times when the implications of being a bachelor for life—a hidden homosexuality—were ignored, the implied status of the confirmed bachelor was potentially dangerous. With the era of McCarthyism came a focus on ‘perversity’ which lingered in society and shaped perceptions of homosexuals for many years after. And while it is understandable that if he were hiding a homosexual identity he wouldn’t talk about that social current, it is perplexing that a Hollywood lawyer, who was also a socialist, did not mention the other side of McCarthyism, that which is most (in)famous, the inquiry into communist activity in America.
Incidentally, the impressions of a hidden homosexual identity cause the reader to wonder whether the threat of court martial Gerber mentioned during the war was based on something other than just a clumsy Major bumping into a Colonel in the dark streets of London.