"The contradictions of a gay man falling in genuine love with a woman — while retaining his attraction to men — are captured..."

"... in a lovely passage using Bernstein’s score for the ballet 'Fancy Free' (which would morph into the Broadway musical 'On the Town'), turning the dance into a metaphorical pas de deux. (Or is it trois?).... Lenny is the free-spirited, wildly charismatic star of his and Felicia’s lives, but it’s Felicia who grounds him.... When tensions in their relationship reach their apotheosis, [Bradley] Cooper stages the showdown in their bedroom at the Dakota apartment building while the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade tootles by outside. Just as Felicia is hurling the most hurtful, damaging things she can say — warning her husband that if he isn’t careful, he’ll end up 'a lonely old queen' — a giant inflatable Snoopy floats by the window, a sad, whimsically surreal rebuke."

Writes Ann Hornaday in "Bravo, Bradley Cooper: ‘Maestro’ is a grand, messy symphony of moments/The director and star of the Leonard Bernstein biopic tells the conductor’s story, and that of his wife (Carey Mulligan), with electric, sometimes scattershot verve" (WaPo).

Okay. I'm all for such tootling. But is there any of "Radical Chic" in this new movie? (Read Tom Wolfe's great essay here, where it belongs, at New York Magazine.)

I had to google, and the answer is no.

The New Yorker review says: "No effort is made, thank heaven, to dramatize the party that Felicia gave in their Park Avenue apartment, in 1970, to raise funds for the defense of imprisoned Black Panther members, thus igniting Tom Wolfe’s incendiary charges of 'radical chic.'" 

Why thank heaven? I'd like to see it!

Here's what Vanity Fair says: "Though Maestro confronts queerness head on, it is curiously silent on Bernstein and (perhaps especially) [Felicia]’s political activism. The famous Black Panther Party event [Felicia] held at the family’s apartment in 1970, which led to the writer Tom Wolfe sneeringly coining the term 'radical chic,' is not mentioned at all in the film. Nor are any of the couple’s other noble causes. One gets the queasy impression that [Bradley] Cooper wants to keep his film free of those particular complications, lest they too rigidly define and contextualize these two lovers so fiercely vying for our affection."

This desire to be "free of those particular complications" sounds more like a recognition that one is not free these days — and dares not to claim freedom — to look critically and satirically at left-wing politics.

Decontextualized, it might be interesting to consider the possibilities of a gay man somehow happily married to a woman. Wait 'til December 20th and it will be on Netflix.

ADDED: At least Vanity Fair is "queasy." And he's not really "happily" married — is he? — if his wife is "hurling... hurtful... things." Also, I think the real reason to leave out "Radical Chic" is that you'd have to pay Tom Wolfe's heirs.

AND: On the general topic of gay men paired up with women, read "'Yes I'm Gay And Yes I Have A Girlfriend' — Man & His Partner Explain How Their Exclusive Relationship Works/If love is love, then all relationships, even the ones that don't fit into distinct boxes, should be celebrated" (Your Tango).

“We wanted to open up about our relationship because it’s been so confusing for a lot of you,” Jacob stated at the start of the TikTok post. “I am gay. I don’t label myself as bisexual. My preference is men. But I have been in this exclusive, closed relationship with Samantha for six years, and it has been a dream.”...

Samantha explained it simply, saying “Sometimes a soulmate is just a soulmate.” She spoke of how “completely open and loving” Jacob is with her, noting, “When he looks at me and talks to me, he makes me feel like I am the most treasured, loved human being on this Earth.” She emphasized that their connection isn't based on physicality, stating, “We have just chosen each other in this lifetime because we love each other’s souls.”