The Confession in Closer (2004)

To continue the theme of confessions the analysis turns now to the film Closer. Centering upon the porous relationships of four main characters, the film follows the course of the adultery and lying that takes place in each. The scenes in which the affairs surface provide support for Foucault’s thesis that sexual discourse has taken on the form of confession: that confession must expose every secret and that from these secrets will emerge some sort of truth. Foucault notes, and the film affirms, that this truth and the stability it promises require more than simple confessions.

During scenes 12 and 13 Dan (Jude Law) confesses to Alice (Natalie Portman) that he has been having an affair with Anna (Julia Roberts). First recall what Foucault has written on the confession in sexual discourse.

"The west requires the nearly infinite task of telling – telling oneself and another…everything that might concern the interplay of innumerable pleasures, sensations, and thoughts which, through the body and the soul, had some affinity with sex. This scheme for transforming sex into discourse had been devised long before in an ascetic and monastic setting. The seventeenth century made it into a rule for everyone" (History 20).

Within this quotation Foucault explains how sexual discourse derives its form from the Christian confessional. Dan’s confession follows this script; the betrayed even comes to his aid in ensuring that he tells all. For Dan’s part, he appears prepared as if for an interview; honesty was obviously the primary motivation behind his answers. “Deception is brutal; I’m not pretending otherwise.” No doubt he intends to appear as conscientious by telling the truth. Alice, though she asks for details such as “Do you bring her here?” remains unimpressed by his confession. Whereas Dan expects that revelation of the truth surrounding his sexual activity will bring some sort of understanding, however painful, instead Alice’s reaction shows him that the confession brings neither truth nor stability. In this case, the incitement to discourse fails to provide the insight promised. Instead of finding satisfaction by exercising the will to knowledge, the characters find themselves as nothing more than instruments of power.



During scenes 15 and 16, the confession between Larry (Clive Owen) and Anna follows a similar path. In this case, Larry confesses that he slept with a prostitute on his business trip. Larry, the betrayer for the moment, becomes the driving force of the confession.

LARRY: I slept with someone in New York. A whore. I’m sorry.
ANNA: Why did you tell me?
LARRY: I couldn’t lie to you.
ANNA: Why not?
LARRY: Because I love you.

What has Larry gained through this disclosure? Does he feel less guilty? Is Anna pleased with his honest revelation? Only Larry is satisfied, and only somewhat.



The conversation then develops into Anna’s confession that she has been with Dan. Again Larry, now the betrayed, insists on total disclosure. Indeed, Larry insists that Anna spare no detail in explaining her extramarital sex.
LARRY: Answer the question [regarding her sexual activity]!
ANNA: Why are you doing this?
LARRY: Because I want to know.
ANNA: Why is the sex so important?
LARRY: BECAUSE I’M A FUCKING CAVEMAN!
ANNA: [She reveals all the details of her sexual relationship]
LARRY: That’s the spirit! Thank you for your honesty. Now fuck off and die.

Larry, like Kinsey’s father in the preceding film, can be seen as the embodiment of the repressive hypothesis. His obsession with sex and its discourse presumes to satisfy the will to knowledge. Knowledge he certainly obtains but to what end? As Foucault suggests, it is power that moves Larry to locate identity and truth within sex. Though such concepts typically offer comfort and stability, neither are available to any character.
The failure of Closer’s characters to benefit from sexual discourse in the form of confession upholds Foucault’s assertion that the repressive hypothesis is nothing more than a manifestation of power.

What these scene from Kinsey and Closer indicate is an understanding of Foucault’s thesis: that sexuality has become an object of discourse; that this discourse takes the form of a confession; that power exploits the will to knowledge in a way that arouses scientific discourse; that society improperly links truth and identity to this discourse. Each film offers characters themselves caught up in repressive hypothesis and shows how their misinterpretations and delusions lead them to suffering. The scientists in Kinsey and the confessors and confessants in Closer all operate with the understanding that candid sexual dialog will in some way bring them closer to the truth about themselves, their relationships and others. Though they may make strides and obtain knowledge, the scientific discourse on sex remains insufficient. Without something else, in Kinsey’s case the encounter, a void in knowledge remains. Foucault would appreciate the filmmaker’s deconstruction of the repressive hypothesis in their depiction of power’s exploitation of the will to knowledge in sexual discourse.