Deleted
Scenes
Over
the past couple of years, I have had several people ask me about what
was left on the "cutting-room floor" during the editing of TLC: Year
With a Leather Club. Below is a rundown of some of the material
that was cut, along with some of the reasons:
Discussion
on Janet’s Firing
Janet
B., during the shooting of the video, worked for a CD music store.
Near the end of shooting, when she returned from the March on Washington,
she was informed that she was being terminated from her job for not being
a "team player". Janet felt that the firing was the result of her
public work with the March on Washington and various Gay/Lesbian causes
in the Greensboro area. The firing was written up in Ms magazine,
the Raleigh, NC Gay/Lesbian newspaper, The Front Page, and other
publications.
Janet
appeared on the Jenny Jones television program on Gay/Lesbian employment
practices. The firing was also featured in a local television news
report on WFMY-TV. I contacted the producers of Jenny Jones
for a copy of the program and to seek permission to use an excerpt, but
that particular program, again, was not aired by the time the video was
being edited. WFMY-TV refused permission for use of an excerpt of
their newscast on the incident, saying that the station did not allow
any use of their material by independent video or filmmakers. (Another
station, WGHP-TV, did allow use of footage featuring TLC members at the
NAMES Project.)
I
decided not to include a discussion of Janet’s firing because no outside
materials were available that showed the position of her employer on the
matter except a public statement in the form of a letter.
SM and Popular Culture Discussion
During
the shooting of the video, several items appeared in magazines and newspapers
about the growing popularity of body piercing. Also, SM imagery
began appearing in publications, films, and on television as interest
in the subculture was growing. I sought permission to use a short
shot of a Spy magazine cover that featured a photo-composite of
Hillary Clinton dressed as a Leather dominatrix. Spy wanted a $200
fee for use of the cover; I declined.
I
sought permission to use shots of two Akbar and Jeff "Life in Hell" cartoons
by Matt Groening that appeared during the shooting ("Akbar and Jeff’s
Piercing Hut" and "Akbar and Jeff’s Tattoo Hut"), but was turned down
by his distributor. ("Mr. Groening was pleased to learn that his
work is appreciated and flattered that you would consider including it
in your filmmaking efforts. Regrettably, due to contractual restrictions,
we are unable to grant permission at this time.")
Newsweek
magazine declined use of shots of an article on the popularity of body
piercing that they had in a 1993 issue. "Headlines that are removed
from the context of the entire Newsweek page or cover represent a distortion
of the material that my mislead the viewer or reader as to the context
in which the material was originally published." (Funny, I thought
I asked to show the entire page.)
With
no source material to show the growing interest in body piercing and the
appearance of SM imagery in popular culture, the discussion was omitted.
The Leather Contingent Vendor Space
During
the Leather/SM/Fetish Contingent meeting at the March on Washington, I
was not allowed to shoot the vendor space that was in operation during
the event by the Contingent organizers. The organizers wanted to
protect the privacy of individuals at the space.
The
video would have included a broader view of that event (ie, the speeches,
workshops, and "Leather capitalism") if the shooting could have been done,
but the feelings of the organizers is understandable considering the biased
coverage of the March by media outlets such as the 700 Club.
Public Reaction to the March on Washington
I
obtained a videotape of WUSA-TV’s coverage of the March on Washington,
along with tapes from the Christian Broadcasting Network’s 700 Club,
as well as coverage of the March and rally on C-SPAN. WUSA-TV turned
me down, saying that they did not allow independent video or filmmakers
to use their material.
After
the experience with all of the TV outlets and publications so far, I decided
to drop the discussion of public reaction to the March since I could probably
not show any of the published or televised material about the event.
If
Only There Was Time
The
time constraints of fitting over thirty-two hours of rough footage into
an 80 minute package forced me to make some tough decisions on what to
keep in the video. One of the best sections in the rough cut of
the video dealt with some of the entertainment that club members did for
various gatherings. Steve W., in his interview, discussed the evolution
of his stage character "Rev. Happy N. Harness, the Leather Evangelist",
and I had two of his routines for consideration. ("If you love Leather,
say AMEN! If you love money, say HALLELUIAH!! If you spend
lots of money on leather, say OH MY GOD!!!)
Also
omitted were some performances by Gil F. (in particular, his version of
Monty Python’s "Lumberjack Song", turned into "She’s a Lesbian and She’s
Okay" and a performance-art piece featuring Handel’s "He Was Despised",
played on accordian) and a member of another club who made elaborate large
puppets (imagine a four-foot tall goose singing Tammy Wynette’s "Stand
By Your Man" and you get the picture).
While
looking at the final cut, the material just didn’t seem to fit and took
focus away from the main theme of the club and it’s work as a group, so
this was some of the last material to be omitted.
The
Jim P. Interview
Jim
Prezwalski, author of Kiss of the Whip, was interviewed for the documentary
shortly before he left for England. Jim, while living in the Triad,
had been involved with the group for some time. Early on, I decided
not to use the interview, since Jim isn’t seen anywhere else in the footage
(he left for England just days after shooting began). Practically
all of the long-form interviews for the piece were done near the end of
the shooting – Jim’s interview shows some of the topics I initially wanted
to cover early on in the project before a more concrete script and focused
approach had been achieved.
"Fair
Use"?
Two
interesting notes about some of the broadcast footage you didn't get to
see in the documentary bear some consideration in this discussion and
have potential for short documentaries in their own right. The 700
Club presented a condeming view of the March that concentrated almost
exclusively on the Leatherfolk and "drag" queens at the event and the
footage is still being used extensively during the program's fundraising
campaigns. It should be noted that I ran into several Leatherfolk
during and after the March who were approached by reporters that specifically
identified themselves as representatives of "CNN" or the "Cable News Network"
with cameras and mics bearing CNN logos. These interviews were eventually
seen on the 700 Club -- I have been unable to verify if the 700
Club has been using CNN footage of this event or if reporters for
the 700 Club mispresented themselves to participants at the March.
These could, of course, be misunderstandings or rumors spreading within
the community and should be checked further by individuals with better
access to personnel of these media outlets.
During
the shooting of the March on Washington sequences, a friend in North Carolina
videotaped live coverage of the March on CNN and C-SPAN for me.
After returning home and looking through my original footage and notes,
I did a comparison of CNN's coverage of the March, C-SPAN and my own footage.
One of the big debates about the March was the number of Gay people who
participated -- interestingly, CNN did not include any shots of the expansive
of people on the March route or gathering on the Mall. At particular
points in the footage from all three sources -- which can be "synched"
by time of day markings and speechers or entertainers heard on the soundtrack
-- CNN had their cameras trained on parts of Washington that were not
a part of the March, such as the Lincoln memorial, while my own footage
and that of C-SPAN shows large crowds of people. A full analysis
of the coverage may be posted on this Web site at a later point.
During
the production, I contacted several people in the legal and entertainment
industry to find out just what "Fair Use" means – the definition depended
entirely on who was doing the talking. The experience taught me
that the vagueness of the current copyright laws on this issue makes for
a very dangerous situation, where independent video and filmmakers are
unable to confidently present and comment on materials from very powerful
media concerns without fear of legal reprisals for "unauthorized" use
of copyrighted materials.
Frankly,
considering how omission of many broadcast and print materials changed
the finished product – making it less balanced in showing the public perception
of Leatherfolk – I would probably go ahead and use the materials under
"Fair Use" provisions of US copyright law if I were editing the piece
again.
|