The Horrors of Suburbia

Analyzing Edward Scissorhands from a Queer Perspective

Introduction

Tim Burton’s Edward Scissorhands is a loose retelling of the classic Gothic novel, Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley. However, this retelling draws inspiration from the time period in which it was written and filmed — the late 80s and early 90s — to provide the audience with more than just the stereotypical monster story. Instead, Burton’s film gives commentary on the rigid and biased social structures surrounding homosexuality, the topic of what exactly it means to be a “good parent”, and an insight into different subcultures, namely the Gothic subculture. 

Edward Scissorhands uses its 105 minute runtime wisely, scattering social commentary throughout the piece while not making the film any less entertaining than it is. The first thing to note is that the film honors the traditional monster story while also challenging it, making the monster not the perpetrator, but the victim. One of the first things we note about Edward, other than the fact that he has scissors for hands, is his childlike and rather anxious demeanor. As Mark Walling points out in his book, The Philosophy of Tim Burton, Edward’s innocence and childlike manner is often cited “as the primary source of viewer empathy and appreciation” (73). This is at direct odds with the portrayal of Victor’s creation in Shelley’s novel and makes us ponder what exactly is supposed to be the source of horror, then, if not the monster figure. Especially considering the score of the film and how the musical score seems to lift at the beginning of the film as Peg makes her way through the gardens and into the Gothic-style mansion (Walling, 74). Shelley’s depiction of the creation is that of someone who is very easy to be terrified by at first glance while Burton takes the opportunity to reflect Edward’s intellectual downfalls in his appearance, countenance, and mannerisms as well. It’s a lot easier to, at first, despise a creature who looks the way Shelley’s  monster does without any thought for how terrifying it must be to wake up in a world you don’t understand with no one to guide you.  It seems that the horror is actually supposed to be the perfect, pastel-colored, suburban wonderland down below. When Peg makes her way through the mansion, she is also making a path away from the neighborhood and into something less judgmental and repetitive. Here is where we see the beginning of an understanding that Edward is not the antagonist in the story and that Burton purposely flips the Gothic trope and makes the clean and pristine suburb the horror as we see it through the eyes of our “monster” and protagonist, Edward. 

A Queer Perspective

This monster trope is already attractive to queer audiences as it provides us with a character, whether that be our protagonist or antagonist, who is considered an outsider and is “opposed to a requisite heterosexual romance embedded in the horror film” (Dubowsky, 173). In this case, the “requisite heterosexual romance” is that of Kim and Jim. Jim, our real antagonist, represents everything bad about masculinity and the patriarchy: men who are insecure taking their frustrations out on those more confident than them; the baseless accusations on those they deem inferior; and the drastic measures to pursue and keep a girl that has expressed multiple times she would like to have nothing to do with him. In this way, the monster, Edward, and the straight white couple are presented as foils to each other. Jim being the antagonist in this rendition and not the Inventor character is also an interesting switch from Shelley’s narrative; Burton uses this to say that yes, our parents are sometimes our biggest critics but the biggest issue faced by those who are on the outskirts of what has been deemed normal is the perception of others.  In addition, as Dubowsky also points out, the pairing of Kim and Jim are also more underdeveloped than that of Kim and Edward (173).  Kim and Jim’s relationship is based on public appearances and what the community they’re in considers a respectable relationship. Both parties are part of families that are similarly perceived as the stereotypical good family. This ideal match is even reflected in the rhyming of their names but, at the end of the day this is all there is to it: aesthetic appeal and surface level attraction. Kim expresses in multiple different ways that she is not as interested in being with Jim anymore as the film progresses and, instead of complying with her wishes, Jim takes this as a reflection of him and as a jab to his masculinity. How can this woman, his prize, possibly like someone that is not only more effeminate than him, but is also not even a real man. In his eyes, Edward would never be able to satisfy Kim the way he can and so he turns it into a competition. 

In addition to being commentary on the issue of toxic masculinity and the problems that arise because of it, an added layer of this and why Jim felt his masculinity was being so challenged when Kim rejected him for Edward, is because Edward is coded as queer. According to Benshoff, as quoted by Dubowsky, Edward’s hobbies and interests — dog grooming, gardening, doing hair — are stereotypically queer things (179). At the time this film was being created, the AIDS epidemic was incredibly relevant. The AIDS epidemic shifted the perception of gay men as invisible to being symbolic of death and destruction. Gay men were feared by all because people were misinformed of the way you could contract the disease. This is reflected not only in the neighborhood’s initial disapproval of Edward but also in his Gothic and Otherly appearance — his all-black getup compared to the soft, dreamy pastels of the suburb causes him to stand out as something to be afraid of; they judge him only based on what they see at first glance. Another character this relates to is Esmerelda, who is an allegory for religious fanatics, primarily within Christianity. Esmerelda never takes the time to actually get close to Edward the way the other people in the community do; she automatically assumes him to be sent by the devil and refuses to have any kind of interaction with him. However, she is still afraid of him and despises him. This is very reflective of the Church’s traditional view on gay people; that they are abominations and you need to pray for them because their sexuality is a choice and is unholy. For some, a queer person could, quite literally, be the nicest person in the world in every way imaginable, but because they are queer that takes away from all the good they do. This is the case with our innocent, queer coded protagonist, Edward. Esmerelda doesn’t care that he’s gentle, loving, sweet, and talented because she can’t get over the way he presents himself and the way she perceives him. This is why we need Burton’s portrayal of the monster being a lonely child, as it “forces the audience to respond to the character’s innocence” (Walling, 75) and allows us to point out all of the societal pressure that causes him to lash out in the end and, hopefully, relate these thoughts and emotions to our real life experiences as well. 

Edward as Asexual

Here seems to be the perfect place to circle back around to Jim feeling as if Edward cannot give Kim what it is he thinks she wants, which is sexual gratification. This could be interpreted in a variety of different ways. For starters, it could be interpreted as Edward being unable to sexually appeal to Kim because of his queerness. This makes some sense, especially when considering Edward’s inability to even touch Kim without hurting her, which he realizes himself when she says she would like for him to hold her and he replies with the words “I can’t” (Edward Scissorhands). It is possible that Burton included this line to signify that although Edward does care for Kim, his feelings are not romantic or sexual by nature and he cannot be the man she needs or wants him to be. When paired with his intellectual and social disadvantages, it is wholly possible that he does not even understand what love really is. However, it is more likely that Edward is just asexual. According to The Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN), there is a very distinct difference between sexual and romantic orientation and desire. AVEN defines asexuality as not experiencing sexual attraction or an intrinsic desire to have sexual relationships (General FAQ). While the heteronormative culture would like us to believe the two are supposed to coexist, that is not the case for some people. It is possible to be romantically attracted to someone without feeling the desire to interact with them in a sexual way. This seems to be the case for Edward. It is apparent that he and Kim are on the same level when it comes to romantic attraction; they are clearly drawn to each other and are in love but Edward cannot compete with the ideal man of this world, someone like Jim, because it is something that he is not. He is unable to provide sexual gratification in this space where it seems to be important. Whether or not it is important to Kim herself doesn’t matter; societal expectations are what influence the characters, not personal beliefs. This also makes us question why sexual interactions are or seem so important to a majority of the people around us. Why do we place such importance on the physical aspect of things when a deep, romantic connection should be just as, if not more, important. The answer really isn’t as complex as it seems; the answer is heteronormativity, which assumes that people are attracted only to, and therefore want to have sex with, people of the opposite sex and, as a result, doesn’t give any thought to the queer community, which is full of people of different genders, sexual orientations, and romantic orientations as well. Sexuality and attraction are not as clear cut as it seems and Edward is a perfect example of how difficult it can be to navigate this world that treats anyone who does not fit into the cisgender, heteronormative box as Other. As Timothy Jones points out, Burton cleverly uses Edward’s hobbies and interests, his goth appearance, and his innocence to show the difficulty Edward faces living in this perfect suburbia (182). 

Queer in Suburbia

Another way this interpretation is upheld by Burton is the way in which the dark, scary mansion of Edward’s origin is on the outskirts of this “perfect suburbia”. The way everyone seems to ignore this building without any thought for who might be in there feels indicative of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy of 1993. While this military policy was not made official until three years after the release of Edward Scissorhands, it was still the overall belief of the decade. Edward’s home is so close to the rest of the neighborhood and is also sort of looming over it, which can be interpreted as queer identities being seen as dangerous and scary to the heteronormative structures that are in place. If we don’t acknowledge that they’re there, we don’t have to ask or answer hard questions about the issues within our societal structure. We don’t have to think critically about the harm we cause them, even if it’s inadvertently. We can continue living in blissful ignorance while people with identities that don’t align with the societal norm are harmed due to our actions and policies.

 Oftentimes, queer people are only accepted, with their sexual identities overlooked unless brought up in conversation, when they bring something new and wanted into the lives of the people who would normally scorn them. We see this in the film as well. The people of the town shun Edward as well as the family he is staying with until they see his hedge art. The film implies that, in the process of not opening their minds to ideas that differ from what they have been told is the norm, they have secluded themselves into this boring, cyclical life. From the moment the film starts, we see that the people of this town are miserable and really have nothing better to do than repeat the same things every single day. However, when Edward is introduced to them, they are filled with a sense of scorn that is then transformed into awe. Edward serves as a distraction from their everyday lives; he brings new, stylish ways of dressing and living. He also gives them something else to cater to and nurture that isn’t their own internal misery caused by their suburban life. As Adriana Raducanu states, “His being scarred is obvious, as his being different is all too visible. That being so, Edward’s presence is almost cathartic for a while, as it helps to divert attention from the suburban characters’ better disguised but perhaps deeper wounds” (163). This is how a lot of people are about queer people to this day; they aren’t seen as people but rather objects and projects to distract from the boredom of everyday life by providing something new and exciting to think about or, for those like Esmerelda, someone new to direct their prayers for salvation to. 

Passing as Cis in Suburbia

Another thing that is touched on by this film is the idea of ‘passing’ which, according to Baker A. Rogers, is “the ability of trans men to be seen as the gender they identify with (man, male, trans masculine, genderqueer, etc.), rather than to be seen as a woman based on the sex—female—they were assigned at birth by others” (640). For Edward, it is hard for him to “pass” in this plain, suburban neighborhood due to his hands; there is clearly something different about him that is easily perceivable by everyone around him, similar to transgender people who aren’t able to pass as cisgender. However, the concept of passing is a very interesting and controversial topic. On one hand, the concept of passing is just anti-trans rhetoric in a very cis-normative world. This kind of language suggests that if you are trans, you need to hide that part of you as well as you can. For example, “some trans men feel the concept of passing implies deceit, or that they are trying to be something they are not. Other trans men wish to pass but are afraid of the invisibility and other issues passing can cause” (Rogers, 640). There are two sides of passing: for one, not being able to pass can be dangerous for some trans people in different areas around the globe. However, passing can cause other issues, such as violence because someone they are intimate with not knowing that they are trans and then becoming violent with them  as a result. We can see with Edward that not being able to pass can cause shame, violence, and ridicule within a community, especially one as small minded as the one portrayed in the film. So, what is Burton saying then? Is he arguing for or against being able to pass? One could say that he is arguing for it; Edward is not able to fit into the community because of this and, in the end, is literally driven out of the neighborhood and, essentially, back into the closet. There could be an argument made that being able to conform to the society in which you live equals comfort and stability. If Edward had just been normal, none of this would have happened. However, through the points that have been made thus far in the paper, it is safe to say that Burton is actually doing the opposite. Trans people shouldn’t be forced to pass. In fact, being part of the LGBT community at all shouldn’t be as taboo as it was in the early 90s; they should be able to walk around freely and comfortably just like everyone else and not have to worry about pretending to be someone they aren’t or what could still happen even if they did.

Esmerelda and Christianity

The characterization of Esmerelda is so specific and over the top that it’s hard not to think that Burton wants our attention to be brought back to her specifically. The criticism of Christianity is very blatant; Burton could have made her religious practices more ambiguous but he purposely chose for her to be a part of the Christian church, most likely because, ironically, even though their motto is that only God can judge them, they also seem to be some of the most judgemental people on the planet. As Anthony Venn-Brown notes in his article, “[n]egative beliefs about homosexuality were deeply entrenched within the religious world; being gay was a sin, perversion, and abomination” (82). In this article, Brown gives a firsthand account of his time in a conversion therapy camp and how they believed that “only God could heal the homosexual”,  that they incorporated exorcisms into their conversion practices, and that they also thought it was only gay people who masturbated (83). These extreme homophobic beliefs are directly addressed through the characterization of Esmerelda. We can see how absolutely delusional her fear of Edward and beliefs about him are because we, as an audience, have firsthand knowledge of just how kindhearted and gentle he is. Another thing about Esmerelda is her name, which is a Spanish word for Emerald. For those who believe in the metaphysical properties of gemstones and crystals, the emerald stone is said to represent patience, balance, and wisdom (Emeralds and Magic/New Age Metaphysics). Again, the irony is comical. Edward’s hands being made of scissors is also interesting to analyze in this context. As mentioned above, the suburbanites seem to take to Edward because he gives them something, almost like a charity case to pay attention to and distract themselves from their everyday lives, especially because his scars — the ones on his face and body from his own hands — are more obvious and physical then their internal struggles and overall dissatisfaction with their lives. Within the context of Christianity and queer people, it is intriguing to think about how, to them, sexuality is a choice; this is why they believe in conversion therapy. If you can choose to be queer, you can also choose not to be. It seems they also see it as self-inflicted wounds and oppression — you chose to be queer which also means you chose the hardships that come along with it such as being treated differently in public, being in danger when visiting other countries, and not being able to marry the person you love because they are of the same sex. So, in this way, we can think about Esmerelda’s reactions to Edward as her not understanding that it’s not as if he gave himself these hands made out of large scissors. Rather, he was born with them and can’t do anything about it but is doing the best he can to navigate this world that judges him based on his biological qualities.

Fatherhood and Procreation

The next thing that should be discussed is the Inventor roles in both Mary Shelley and Tim Burton’s versions of the Frankenstein tale. In the novel, Victor Frankenstein is seen as the villain, at least after we get the monster’s perspective of the events that took place. He is much more concerned about himself than with that of his creation and child and is so afraid of his own work that he abandons it. It is an interesting contradiction to each other: Victor’s entire mental breakdown after his creation wakes up and runs away versus the creature’s experiences during that time. This further reinforces Victor and the monster as foils to each other. However, in Tim Burton’s film, the inventor is seen as a much better father figure than Victor. He actually puts care and effort into Edward; he is portrayed as the only person around that understood Edward and treated him like he was worth respect. Unlike Victor Frankenstein, he doesn’t abandon his creation by choice; he dies right in front of Edward right before he was to give him hands. In her article “Son, Lover, and Scapegoat”, Raducanu points out that bad parenting is what first exposes children to the feelings of loss, betrayal, and trauma (159).  However, I think that the real issue that is being pointed out by Burton and perhaps even Shelley isn’t bad parenting but lack of a parent, paired with isolation. In both stories, the issue is the creation being forced into isolation. This is what causes them to eventually turn on the human race; for Frankenstein’s creation, he is isolated from society and forced to live on his own at what should be thought of as a very young age. For Edward, he faces a more social kind of isolation than physical, at least in the beginning stages of the film. The people shun him and are only respectful to him when they want something from him. This, again points back to the way queer people are isolated from their communities — especially those who are asexual — because it is something that is deemed as unnatural by heteronormativity. 

Another thing about the film that was interesting about Jim’s aversion to Edward and Kim’s relationship is that it feels parallel to Victor’s aversion to providing his creature with a female counterpart due to a fear of the creation of a whole new species that would destabilize the human race. In Burton’s adaptation, the Jim is so set against Kim and Edward being together that it makes a critical audience wonder if it is really about the perceived jab to his masculinity or if it is because of a different kind of bias against the “other” in the story. In her article, Jessica Hale points out about Frankenstein that “[t]he threat posed by the monster is perceived by Victor as a sexual one, and it echoes the sexual threat posed by the intermixing of races” (17). So then, in the case of Jim, it is possible that he feels his masculinity as well as the heteronormative structure he is trying so hard to adhere to, is somehow being threatened by the assumed sexuality of Edward. However, it is also possible that his aversion to Kim and Edward’s relationship is that it opens up the possibility to a new race of beings that threaten not only the social structure of this town but also its image. However, from a queer perspective, there is also this belief that children of queer parents will also be queer (even though these same people also tend to believe that being gay is a choice, which is very contradictory). With this in mind, it can also be thought that Jim’s issue with Edward and Kim being together isn’t that he perceives it as a threat to his own masculinity but, rather, that he is afraid that their children will be queer “abominations” as well and that his goal is to save Kim from this future familial embarrassment. Throughout the film, Jim also tells Kim in multiple ways that Edward is a threat to her and finally, at the end, he says “He hurt you” as an excuse to finally get what he wants, which is for Edward to leave the town, whether that be dead or alive.

Conclusion

Although the entirety of this paper has been analyzing Edward Scissorhands from a queer perspective, I feel it is also important to underline the fact that Edward’s otherness is very ambiguous. He is not only representative of the queer community but also racial others, people with disabilities, and any other group of people that has been deemed as inferior to or as a threat to the “majority” of the population. With that being said, the film is a perfect example of the many intersecting identities that are present within the world. Nothing is simply black and white; people’s identities are made up of so many different factors and Burton’s film is a great reminder of this. In conclusion, Burton’s film gives commentary on the rigid and biased social structures surrounding homosexuality, the topic of what exactly it means to be a “good parent”, and an insight into different subcultures. The film gives plenty of examples of multiple intersectionalities and how they all relate to one another as well as how they are all so similar when it comes to the prejudice and exclusion they face from the white, patriarchal, heteronormative, able-bodied majority.

Works Cited 

Diamond, Lisa M. “Emerging Perspectives on Distinctions Between Romantic Love and Sexual Desire.” Current Directions in Psychological Science, vol. 13, no. 3, June 2004, pp. 116–119, doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00287.x.

Catri, Florencia. “Defining Asexuality as a Sexual Identity: Lack/Little Sexual Attraction, Desire, Interest and Fantasies.” Sexuality & Culture, vol. 25, no. 4, Aug. 2021, pp. 1529–39. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-021-09833-w. 

Diamond, Lisa M. “Emerging Perspectives on Distinctions between Romantic Love and Sexual Desire.” Current Directions in Psychological Science, vol. 13, no. 3, 2004, pp. 116–119., https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00287.x. 

Dubowsky J.C. (2016) Queer Monster Good: Frankenstein and Edward Scissorhands. In: Intersecting Film, Music, and Queerness. Palgrave Studies in Audio-Visual Culture. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137454218_7 

“Emerald History - Usage in Magic and New Age Metaphysics: The Natural Emerald Company - Emerald Rings & Jewelry since 1939.” Emeralds.com, 15 May 2021, https://emeralds.com/education/emerald-history/emeralds-magic-new-age-metaphysics/. 

“General FAQ.” General FAQ | The Asexual Visibility and Education Network, https://www.asexuality.org/?q=general.html. 

Jones, Timothy. “Every Day Is Halloween – Goth and the Gothic.” The Gothic and the Carnivalesque in American Culture, 1st ed., University of Wales Press, 2015, pp. 179–204, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt17w8hdq.11. Accessed 21 Apr. 2022.

Percec, Dana, and Adriana Răducanu. “Chapter Eight.” Reading the Fantastic Imagination: The Avatars of a Literary Genre, Cambridge Scholars Publ., Newcastle upon Tyne, 2014, pp. 156–168. 

Rogers, Baker A. “‘Contrary to All the Other Shit I’ve Said’: Trans Men Passing in the South.” Qualitative Sociology, vol. 42, no. 4, Dec. 2019, pp. 639–62. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.hpu.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s11133-019-09436-w.

Venn-Brown, Anthony. Sexual Orientation Change Efforts Within Religious Contexts: A Personal Account of the Battle to Heal Homosexuals. Sensoria: A Journal of Mind, Brain & Culture, 1 Jan. 2015, https://web-s-ebscohost-com.hpu.idm.oclc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&sid=5b9dd5af-5853-491a-9f46-35b6085d47a7%40redis. 

Walling, Mark. “Johnny Depp Is a Big Baby!: The Philosophical Significance of Tim Burton’s Preoccupation with Childhood Consciousness in Edward Scissorhands and Ed Wood.” The Philosophy of Tim Burton, edited by Jennifer L. McMahon, University Press of Kentucky, 2014, pp. 67–82, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5vkkxt.7. Accessed 21 Apr. 2022.