The Year of Paper

While generally overlooked, America's civil rights struggle is all but gone. It has, in fact, just cleverly changed form, one of its many skins the issue of same-sex marriage. In contemplating the controversial topic, Nikki Parker and Kelly Rouse's The Year of Paper works on both the levels of emotion and education. While telling the stories of three couples, all negogiating the challenges of marriage with and without licenses, the film shows how the personal evolves in the political, how the actions of one couple can incite or excite the social climate. In such, the film transforms a talking point into a reflection and sheds light on blatant discrimination.

Over the course of one year, Alma & BluJay Hawk, Joel & Steve Connor and Adam & Sharon Purkiss share their lives and stories with the co-directing team. While their stories are not meant for strict comparison, there are noticable parallels in the themes of each section. The Hawks and Connors were issued legal marriage licenses by California and Oregon states respectively. The Connors plan the picture perfect wedding that the Purkiss' had, and while the Hawks attempt to start a family by artificial insemination, the Purkiss' get the news that their expecting. And so, regardless of their sexual orientation, each of the couples is generally searching, with little deviation, for the same things--happiness, stability and purpose. It just so happens, however, that each of those three elements is easier to attain for these particular couples with the full protections of a marriage.

By focusing on the economic arguments and benefits of same-sex marriage, Parker and Rouse avoid the slippery slope of religion. Instead of falling back on emotional arguments, they release fact after fact, sometimes even to the point of redundance, to support their claims of discrimination. The emphasis on these facts is the truly brilliant mark of the film in that not only does it lend the filmmaker's credibility but it puts the issue into perspective for the straight community as well. So, it happens that when the Hawks' and Connors' marriage licenses are rescinded, there's a very tangible understanding of how that action hurts the pairs. Then add to that economic reality, the emotional reality of the pain lived on screen, and the fact of the injustice stands out prominently.

The daunting idea to contemplate when looking at this film is that it merely follows three couples, two of which face discrimination based on social mores and sexual identity. Just two couples out of thousands who experience the same difficulty daily. That is perhaps the greatest truimph of the documentary, that it utlizes three couples to help explain the many, many others which are not spoken for, the voices still unheard, until again the civil rights struggle changes.

Reviews
Written by Noralil Ryan Fores
Monday, 15 October 2007