Hudson Kramer

Chicano 135B
Fresa y Chocolate: A “Fruity” Adventure of Understanding

Do you like strawberry ice cream? Or do you like chocolate ice cream? According to the

film Fresa y Chocolate (1993), a liking of one of these flavors over the other may lead to some

“assumptions”. Regardless, the film Fresa y Chocolate directed by both Tomás Gutiérrez Alea

and Juan Carlos Tabio is an extremely influential film and will take you on a “fruity”

(homoerotic) adventure. This film takes place in 1970s Cuba, 20 years earlier from the film's

creation, in a very strict and rigid society as it was under the rule of prime minister Fidel Castro.

In this oppressive time, the film centers around Diego (played by Jorge Perrugoria) an outwardly

queer religious mixed-media artist and revolutionary alongside David (played by Vladimir Cruz)

a Univesity student and passionate communist. Their sudden meeting, initiated by Diego's

immediate attraction to David, evolves into a story of political and social commentary, and a

beautiful tumultuous friendship. Not only does this film regarding the Cuban revolution, but also

a queer revolution that unintentionally became a device for audiences to revolutionize their

positions of the LGBTQ+ community alongside the protagonist David. In this essay, I will begin

by discussing the queer Latinx film genre, or the lack of it, I will then go deeper into Fresa y

Chocolate addressing the main themes as well as its positive and negative representations that

include the use of stereotypes, as no film is perfect. Lastly, by using readings and film sequences,

I want the reader to understand the multiplicity of this movie and why it's so effective in creating

understanding in multiple realms.

As a queer person, I actually had not heard about this film prior, however, after

researching and seeing the impact it had I needed to dive deeper into it. Additionally, I cannot

speak on the experiences of Latinx people and Cuban individuals specifically, rather I will be

looking at this film with Queer Theory. This film was released in 1993, and surprisingly was met
 Kramer 2

with lots of praise as being queer almost anywhere was still not accepted or “legal”, even as a

“foreign film” to us in America. “Outside Cuba, the film attracted attention for being the first

Cuban film to feature an openly gay protagonist and for its treatment of gay issues, an area which

was formerly taboo on the island. It was this which was undoubtedly primarily responsible for

the film's international success” (Wilkinson, 17). What other examples of well-received queer

films can be named, especially with Latinx actors or context? Its because it wasn’t a “gay film”

from the jump, both Senel Paz and Gutierrez Alea have said Fresa y chocolate was not a

homosexual film”(Santi, 418) but it inspired many queer people, radicals, and artists, many of

the critics have said. It is because the directors note they address “homosexuality well enough,

but it strictly from a heterosexual point of view” (Santi, 419) which strengthened its more

mainstream appeal. Nevertheless, from a queer standpoint, the fact that Diego is not queer in real

life and is “acting” queer ultimately makes it more comfortable for heterosexual homogenous

audiences to be “okay” with it, as then they can still seek attraction in even Diego outside of

film; Even when an underlying theme of a possible homoerotic connection between the two is

prevalent (Schultz, 45). Most films with queer representations that skyrocket sadly most of the

time still involve a completely straight cast and crew, such as Call Me By Your Name (2017).

Regardless, any representation truly mattered during this period even if not all of it was

necessarily positive. It's important to understand its context (time period and relation to other

queer films) and to appreciate its impact and success even with the problems in it that will arise

later.

Although this film isn't solely about the homosexual experience, Fresa y Chocolate still

represented the LGBTQ+ community on screen and even with its acclaim, still upheld many

patriarchal ideals when it came to masculinity, as well as emphasized queer stereotypes. The

most obvious stereotype is that of the “exaggerated flamboyant gay man”. With the actor not
 Kramer 3

being queer, the directors must have emphasized a level of flamboyancy that could be conveyed

from the get-go. As they follow this archetype, it strikes me as one of the least problematic

things about this depiction as it is a real depiction, the issue is that it's done in a way to mock this

role, and not necessarily represent it. From constantly scouting men, the urgency to make a

specific tea, to the music he plays, to his choices of words/phrases, it is not romanticizing his

queerness but expending it for the viewers in a “stereotypical manner” (Schultz, 43).

Furthermore, from the beginning of this film, Diego is painted to almost be “predatorial” which

illustrates this narrative to heterosexual audiences that if you’re a man, a queer person engaging

with you is only because “they want you”, or from a femme perspective it could be seen as

“stealing your partner”. The movie continues to make homophobic regards such as Davids's

friends emphasizing that even though they don't know much about Diego, because he's queer he

is the “enemy” and needs to be “watched” when there is no real evidence to support his

“wrongdoings”. David’s friend, Miguel, even says “the man’s unfaithful even to his own sex”,

declaring his homophobia and emphasizing how it is not okay or normal to be queer. These men

think it's their duty to uphold the patriarchy and convey this masculinity that those in power

during this time emphasize, especially because of their communist comrade environment. Even

in the final sequences, although I praise the ending later, queer theorists agree that the ending of

the film, although the viewers are finally “comfortable” with Diego's queerness, the directors

play into the same trope of the “gay protagonist falls victim to discrimination and is ultimately

ostracised from the realm of society (regarded as heteronormative)” (Sebero, 2014). These

stereotypes and upholding of toxic masculinity are problematic but, in turn, do play into this

revolution of acceptance that takes place by the end of the film.

This film follows the “villain” to “hero” plotline, as the film does immediately

problematize Diego to viewers. From the beginning, Diego's house is seen as very “odd” and it's
 Kramer 4

almost as if through the soundtrack, shots, and facial expressions of David you are supposed to

agree that everything about this person, their home, and their art, is “unnatural”. The movie uses

this and Diego even talking to inanimate objects as a way of “othering” him from David and the

rest of society. They even refer to Diego as “weird” which they then just swap out for the “f-slur”

as if they are interchangeable. Later in the film, we see this full circle when Miguel (David’s

roommate) refers to Diego as the F-slur, and David rebuttals and says his name is “Diego”.

These homophobic remarks make sense for the time period as it was not accepted to be queer,

however, by explicitly emphasizing the “other” in the beginning, it aids the transformation of

Diego being just “Diego” by the end of the film, from seen as a “mission” to a real

person/friendship. In this process of David understanding Diego more, we get peeps of the

“queer experience” of this time such as Diego explaining to David in his apartment the amount

of himself he has to suppress because of society and how he is constantly watched and targeted.

A scene that is really crucial in this understanding is when David tries to understand why Diego

is queer and says some very uneducated things such as “Diego is gay because his dad left” or,

“its (the gay) in his glands and he should have gone to a doctor”. Diego explains how he is the

same as everyone else, decent and patriotic, and how it's perfectly normal. Both of them have

had aspirations, they love Cuba, and they are both revolutionary, but if it's not in the same way

that society asks of you, you’re ostracized. The audience gets so many answers in this same

sequence to questions they may have been thinking that gives those who are uneducated greater

understanding. By the end of the film, both David and the audience finally understand Diego

through this tumultuous journey and explicitly root for him, he is not a villain, he is simply

another human. You are ultimately laughing with Diego and not laughing at him anymore.

We end the film with how it started, Diego and David sitting down for ice cream, both

ordering their usual, strawberry for Diego and chocolate for David. The most symbolic gesture of
 Kramer 5

the film and the final confirmation of understanding is David switching the two ice creams.

Ultimately, dismantling these patriarchal standards of masculinity and gendered stereotypes he

upheld in the beginning, and Diego getting that hug from David he had been longing for. The

viewer savors this moment and it confirms he finally sees everyone as equal in a sense, no matter

who you love, no matter what side you're on, or what ice cream flavor is your favorite (even

though they were right, strawberry is my favorite).

Works Cited

1. Wilkinson, Stephen. “Homosexuality and the Repression of Intellectuals in ‘Fresa y

Chocolate’ and ‘Máscaras.’” Bulletin of Latin American Research, vol. 18, no. 1, 1999,
pp. 17–33. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3339472. Accessed 24 Oct. 2022.
2. Santí, Enrico Mario. “‘Fresa y Chocolate’: The Rhetoric of Cuban Reconciliation.” MLN,
vol. 113, no. 2, 1998, pp. 407–25. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3251482. Accessed
24 Oct. 2022.
3. Shultz, Andrew Zachary (2009) "The Crisis of Identity in Post-Revolutionary Cuban
Film: A Sociological Analysis of Strawberry and Chocolate," Kaleidoscope: Vol. 8,
Article 9.
4. Subero, G. (2014). Preface. In Queer Masculinities in Latin American Cinema: Male
Bodies and Narrative Representations (pp. xi–xxi). London: I.B.Tauris.
5. Foster, D.W.. (2003). Queer issues in contemporary Latin American Cinema. 1-186.
6. Ebert, R. (n.d.). Strawberry and Chocolate Movie Review (1995): Roger Ebert. movie
review (1995) | Roger Ebert. Retrieved October 26, 2022, from
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/strawberry-and-chocolate-1995