The last detail: Trouser pegs: Gilbert Adair on the comic absence of pants and the hilarious presence of sock suspenders

Gilbert Adair
Thursday 30 July 1992 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

ALMOST every reviewer of Noises Off tended to feel that a major problem left unresolved by its director, Peter Bogdanovich, was his (mostly) American cast's unfamiliarity and unease with the quintessentially British tradition of trouser-dropping farce.

Now, there is a lot wrong with Bogdanovich's film but its failure cannot honestly be attributed to a collision of cultures that simply does not exist. One of the finest of Hollywood's early burlesque shorts was Putting Pants on Philip, an amazing movie even now, in which the desperate endeavours of Laurel and Hardy to switch trousers (don't ask why) in back alleys and on construction sites are continually thwarted by snooping neighbours whose suspicions of a pair of grown men huddled together in their underpants are precisely what they would be today. And it's hard to think of any prominent male star of the Thirties and Forties whom one has not seen at least once sans pants.

The director Howard Hawks, in particular, savoured the spectacle of his leading men scampering about in what used to be called their BVDs. But virtually all the masters of screwball humour had a perverse penchant for pantless heroes, and it sometimes felt as if the sole difference between slapstick farce and 'sophisticated' comedy was that, in the latter, the same crude knockabout gags were performed by actors better-known for debonair nonchalance. Low comedy was Abbott and Costello falling into a horse trough, whereas high comedy was James Stewart and Jean Arthur falling into a horse trough.

There was, though, another distinguishing feature, one which has remained for me the very signifier of classic American comedy: the sock suspender. An indelible image of Hollywood's golden age (pallidly revived by Christopher Reeve in Noises Off) is of Cary Grant trouserless in a hotel corridor, not knowing which way to turn, his boxer shorts (never, never briefs) half-obscured by his shirt tails - and the focus of my attention, the punctum as Barthes would say, the ostensibly peripheral detail that nevertheless makes everything else fade into insignificance, his pair of sock suspenders.

It may be that men's suspenders were once considered as erotically arousing as those worn by women, although I seriously doubt it. For modern spectators, at any rate, what they convey is not the potency of nakedness but the impotence of 'unclothedness' (as in a nightmare). Their principal effect, in short, is to keep nudity at bay, to hold not only socks but sex in suspension.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in