Gaylore? No?

Being a student of literature, I am always more than baffled at the sheer amount of queer literature that often lies within the easy grasp of any growing-up student. I, for example, was completely convinced of Antonio and Bassanio's erotic romps far before I had even finished the first reading of 'The Merchant of Venice'. Further readings have convinced me and now it is beyond argument! Bassanio was the top and Antonio his loving bottom. Case dismissed!

Treason, treason! Do I hear? Did someone say William Shakespeare was gay too? Well, I wouldn't be surprised! Half of his main male characters were huge sore drama queens anyway and who can ever say his sonnets weren't addressed to some cute prince in tights? Who really can? All jokes apart, however, the gay-ifying, or let's be more politically correct and say the reading of 'possible homosexual tendencies' in great literary characters, has always been up for argument in every possible literary circle. From claims that the Bard was gay to more recent claims of the 'possibly gay-like behaviour' of Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes -- great literary works have always romanticised the relationships of two leading male protagonists, especially if one's a submissive sidekick.

I know of at least 10 literary critics who will swear that Frodo and Sam from J R R Tolkien's 'The Lord of the Rings' had 'something special' going on between them, while another 20 will be extremely cross at the mere mention of such a possibility. I mean, why did Frodo never ever marry and what about his strange fascination for the fairy-like elves? Was Bilbo Baggins gay too? Who can ever tell?

India's no different. Various readings into poets like Kabir and Kannadasan keep implying that their fabulous pieces of work were often in praise of some such young strapping lad. Why, a well-known Mirza Ghalib fanatic quite sheepishly agrees of such 'wayward inclinations', but always warns off the curious questioner by saying, "It's just a possibility!" A friend once even read into the Carnatic masterpiece Alaipaayuthey and said it was more than divine love from Krishna that the writer sought. I know I'm treading on dangerous ground now, but religious fervour for the divine and sexual obsession often have a thin line of differentiation. Yes, you will throw the lust versus pure love debate at me, but then again, aren't those concepts subjective after all?

I just watched Guy Ritchie's Holmes and while I must say the film is marvellous and probably the best watch in the last three months, I did notice some sizzling chemistry between the male protagonists too. Let's blame it on the raw sensuality of Robert Downing Junior and uber-sexiness of Jude Law if you want, but as far as I see it, the faults all Guy Ritchie's. The man has quite obviously tried to allow these characters to share more than their undying loyalty to each other and any one with a flair for the 'wayward' will catch those vibes. Maybe I am reading those signals far too strongly because I am gay myself. But then again, maybe those signals were true! Who's to ever say?