Homoerotic Archaeology: Hot Male Review (May 1986), Part Two

Friday, May 27, 2022

Hot Male Review (May 1986), Part Two

In an interview for this May 1986 issue of Hot Male Review (which has been broken into two parts), adult performer Lance discusses the abuse of his alcoholic father, the joy he receives from his fans’ attention, and the fickle nature of the porn industry: “I feel [my looks] are fading. I don’t look like I used to. Guys like young guys. I have a couple of good years left, probably.” In the second half (see the first half here) a review of the film Hot Mechanics is accompanied by photospreads of models David Cannon and Christopher George, a Dick Darling cartoon, and the artwork of Richard White.

No comments:

Post a Comment

What is Homoerotic Archaeology?

In 2016, I discovered several discarded boxes at an estate sale. Under their flimsy flaps were hundreds of well-worn issues of homoerotic magazines from the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. I purchased them out of mild intrigue and, as I perused their pages, I was startled to realize that something commonly disregarded as pornographic smut earnestly chronicled the evolution of gay culture: the social and sexual liberation of the 1970s, the crushing devastation from AIDS during the 1980s, and the gradual strengthening of the community in the 1990s. As a gay man, I was touched by the subtle narrative these publications told. As a historian, I was motivated to digitally preserve their content. And, as an educator, I was driven to create a platform to share that information freely with others interested in the progression of gay society. Homoerotic Archaeology is that venue. Here you will find the advertisements, articles, short stories, and (of course) pictures found in these magazines lovingly preserved and presented for future generations of gay men to enjoy and study.

Why Preserve Homoerotica?

As early as the 1970s, scholars such as June Rook have stressed the need to preserve homosexual history in an effort to combat repression and establish a cultural background for future generations. Much of the preservation process admirably focuses on the substantial works of homosexual artists and thinkers; however, it sadly ignores other elements quintessential to the community’s history, particularly homoerotica. Although frequently labeled obscene filth, homoerotica has, just like the significant creations of artists and thinkers, been a prevalent part of the group’s culture and has played an integral role in shaping identities and perceptions (consider how influential Tom of Finland’s hypermasculinity has been in molding the body ideals of modern gay men). Due to this factor, the conservation of homoerotica is just as essential as the preservation of major artistic and theoretical homosexual works.