Chapter 6 — 1920–1929: The City Speaks Back

Cold open

Picture: Berlin cabaret; Paris salon; Harlem drag ball; blues performance; Takarazuka publicity still; a page of Die Freundin; a New York apartment manuscript; a silent Hollywood studio gate.

Narration: “For a moment, the city seems to answer back. In Berlin, Paris, Harlem, Tokyo, and Los Angeles, people made rooms for themselves—in bars, salons, theaters, apartments, magazines, and dance halls. The rooms were never equally safe. But they were real. And the decade’s brightest images carry a warning: what a city makes visible can be targeted, censored, scattered, or destroyed.”

Act I — Laws and conditional tolerance

Make clear that Weimar Berlin’s flourishing did not equal legal equality. Paragraph 175 remained in force, criminalizing sexual acts between men even as Berlin supported highly visible homosexual, lesbian, and gender-nonconforming social worlds. Reform organizations, magazines, clubs, and the Institute for Sexual Science existed alongside police power and the continuing risk of prosecution.[1]

Compare legal environments without turning any into a simple freedom-versus-repression story. France lacked a general sodomy statute, but police still regulated public behavior and venues. Britain’s gross-indecency law remained a tool of prosecution. In the United States, state sodomy statutes, municipal disorder rules, Prohibition enforcement, vice squads, and later liquor licensing practices exposed patrons and business owners to raids and extortion.

Tolerance was unequal by class, race, citizenship, gender presentation, and access to money. An elite salon, a working-class bar, a Black rent party, a theater dressing room, and a private apartment offered different degrees of risk and different forms of protection. The episode should make those differences visible rather than treating “the queer city” as a single shared experience.

Suggested narration: “Visibility was not equality. A magazine could publish an ad for a dance. A bar could fill with laughter. And the same state that permitted both could still arrest the people inside.”

Act II — City worlds: scenes, networks, and domestic life

Berlin: Use Schöneberg, bars, cabaret, transvestite balls, Die Freundin, the Institute for Sexual Science, the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee, and the Bund für Menschenrecht. Present Berlin as a dense but internally varied world of activists, performers, workers, readers, patrons, and people seeking medical or social support. Avoid letting cabaret imagery stand in for everyone.

Paris: Move among Le Monocle, Montmartre and Montparnasse, theater, expatriate publishing, and Natalie Barney’s rue Jacob salon. The salon should not be depicted as the whole of Parisian lesbian life; it was a privileged cultural institution whose influence rested partly on wealth, nationality, and social access. Pair it with working nightlife and artistic networks.

Harlem and New York: Use rent parties, drag balls, blues, literary salons, theater, and the racial politics of nightlife. Black queer people created culture amid segregation, racism, respectability politics, economic precarity, and policing. The visual grammar should refuse to make Harlem merely a glamorous backdrop for white fascination or later mythmaking.

Tokyo and Shanghai: Use cafés, dance halls, modernist print, commercial performance, and gender play within local systems of modernity. Do not map Berlin or Harlem identities directly onto Japanese or Chinese settings. The question is how urbanization, commerce, migration, theater, and print created particular local spaces for social and aesthetic experiment.

New York domestic partnership: Add Willa Cather and Edith Lewis as a counterpoint to nightlife. They had lived together in New York since 1908, and in the 1920s their home and professional collaboration supported Cather’s major literary work. Lewis was not merely an assistant: she worked in publishing and advertising and contributed editorial and design expertise to Cather’s literary career. Their almost forty-year domestic and creative partnership demonstrates that queer urban history was also made through shared homes, manuscripts, publishing offices, and private routines.[2]

Los Angeles: Introduce the silent-film and early studio world as a place of professional mobility and managed secrecy. Queer actors, writers, designers, and crew members formed networks through workplaces, homes, and parties, even as studios marketed strongly heterosexual public images. This world will become more central in the 1930s.

Act III — People

The episode’s roster includes Magnus Hirschfeld; Karl Giese; Lotte Hahm; Colette; Natalie Barney; Romaine Brooks; Virginia Woolf; Vita Sackville-West; Ma Rainey; Bessie Smith; Gladys Bentley; Countee Cullen; Harold Jackman; Alain Locke; Langston Hughes; Djuna Barnes; Thelma Wood; Willa Cather; Edith Lewis; Mercedes de Acosta; Marlene Dietrich; William Haines; and Jimmie Shields.

Do not deliver this as a roll call. Group people by the worlds they made: Hirschfeld and Giese in Berlin’s institutional community; Barney, Brooks, Barnes, Wood, Colette, and de Acosta in Parisian and theatrical networks; Cather and Lewis in New York literary domesticity; Rainey, Smith, Bentley, and Harlem writers in Black performance and literary worlds; Dietrich in Weimar performance; and Haines and Shields in Hollywood.

Magnus Hirschfeld and Karl Giese: Hirschfeld’s Institute flourished in the 1920s as a clinic, library, research center, museum, and meeting place. Karl Giese worked within the Institute’s world and was Hirschfeld’s intimate partner. Their relationship should be described as both personal and institutional: domestic life, employment, hospitality, reform work, and community formation overlapped. Do not reduce Giese to an assistant or Hirschfeld to a lone heroic scientist.[1]

Lotte Hahm: Present Hahm as an organizer and host associated with lesbian venues and networks in Weimar Berlin. Use surviving ads, event listings, and Die Freundin cautiously. They show organized social life, but not every attendee’s identity or relationship status.

Mercedes de Acosta: De Acosta links New York theater, Parisian expatriate culture, and emerging Hollywood. Her papers preserve letters, scripts, photographs, and ephemera from a queer creative network. Use her as an archivist of connection as well as a participant in it. A letter or affectionate message can document contact and intensity without proving every later-repeated claim about an affair.[3]

Marlene Dietrich: Place Dietrich in Weimar Berlin before her Hollywood transformation. Her early work in theater, revue, and film developed in a culture where cabaret, costume, and androgynous performance could make gender appear theatrical and changeable. Do not use a tuxedo or a screen role as automatic evidence of a private relationship; the historical significance lies in performance and the visual vocabulary it offered audiences.

Djuna Barnes and Thelma Wood: Barnes and Wood met in Paris in the early 1920s and formed a relationship that lasted roughly a decade. Their shared artistic life—Wood’s visual work and Barnes’s writing—helped shape the imaginative world that Barnes later transformed in Nightwood (1936). Do not call the novel a one-to-one key to their relationship; it is literary transformation, not documentary transcription.[4]

William Haines and Jimmie Shields: Haines met Shields in New York in 1926; the two soon lived together in Los Angeles and built the partnership that would last until Haines’s death in 1973. Their relationship is a strong, documented example of a long-term same-sex Hollywood household. In this decade, emphasize the beginning of their life together and Haines’s studio career; the studio pressure and their design business belong more fully to the 1930s.[5]

Act IV — Couples and constellations

Virginia Woolf, Vita Sackville-West, Leonard Woolf, and Harold Nicolson: Present this as a four-person constellation of marriage, affair, friendship, writing, travel, and negotiated privacy. Woolf and Vita’s relationship is well documented in letters and diaries. Leonard and Harold should not be treated as passive bystanders, but neither should the script claim an effortless or fully open arrangement. The emotional texture was negotiated, changing, and sometimes painful.

Natalie Barney, Renée Vivien, Liane de Pougy, and Romaine Brooks: Use this as a constellation across time rather than pretend that every relationship was simultaneous in the 1920s. Barney’s earlier relationships with Vivien and de Pougy had shaped the world around her; her long partnership with Brooks and her ongoing salon structured a wider network of former lovers, writers, artists, and visitors. This is an example of queer kinship exceeding the modern expectation of a closed couple.

Willa Cather and Edith Lewis: Frame Cather and Lewis as a long-term domestic and creative partnership. Their lives show that a relationship could be historically meaningful even without public identity labels or dramatic public scandal. Use manuscripts, book jackets, editorial work, and their shared home rather than inventing scenes of private sex or emotion.[2]

Djuna Barnes and Thelma Wood: Their Paris relationship provides a more volatile artistic couple. Barnes’s later work drew deeply on the emotional world of the relationship, but the documentary should preserve the distinction between biography and fictional character.

Lotte Hahm and Weimar women’s-bar networks: Put the emphasis on community organizers, venues, regular patrons, event announcements, and social infrastructure. This is a constellation with few fully recoverable names, not a gap to be filled with speculation.

Ma Rainey, Bessie Smith, and touring blues communities: Differentiate documentation from speculation. Rainey’s “Prove It on Me Blues” (1928) and its advertisement are vital evidence of queer-coded and queer-explicit performance. Claims about specific private relationships between Rainey and Smith should be attributed and presented cautiously. Their shared importance lies in the touring circuits, performance economies, lyrics, and communities that made Black women’s desire and gender play audible.

Gladys Bentley and Harlem performer/patron networks: Bentley’s tuxedoed stage persona, piano, blues performance, and interactions with women in Harlem clubs made her a powerful figure of Black queer masculinity. Her patrons, collaborators, and lovers are not all equally documented. Treat the network as a community of performance and participation, not as a list of confirmed affairs.

Takarazuka otokoyaku–musumeyaku pairings and fan culture: Explain otokoyaku as performers of male roles and musumeyaku as performers of female roles. The star pairings, gift culture, publicity, and fan attachments can be discussed as gendered performance and queer possibility without asserting that each performer or fan held a modern lesbian or gay identity.

Act V — Media: who could see a life?

Feature Die Freundin, Radclyffe Hall’s The Well of Loneliness (1928), Virginia Woolf’s Orlando (1928), Weimar film, blues, drag-ball coverage, early Hollywood publicity, and images of tuxedoed women.

Featured media: Die Freundin. The magazine connected readers to personal ads, reports, culture, and events. Show a page close-up with an explanation that a periodical can document an organized public culture without revealing every reader’s private life.

Featured media: The Well of Loneliness. Hall’s novel gave English-language readers an unusually sustained portrayal of lesbian desire, gender nonconformity, and social exclusion. Its 1928 obscenity prosecution in Britain demonstrates that literary visibility could trigger legal suppression. Use the trial as a media-and-law story, distinct from the novel’s fictional world.

Featured media: Orlando. Woolf’s 1928 novel drew on Sackville-West’s life while making gender, time, biography, and marriage deliberately unstable. Call it a creative transformation and a queer text; do not present it as a documentary report of Woolf and Vita’s affair.

Featured media: blues and drag-ball coverage. Newspapers, record advertising, photography, and club publicity often mixed fascination, moral panic, racism, and commodification. The episode should let performers’ music and communities lead, not only the hostile press that described them.

Featured media: Weimar film and Dietrich’s stage formation. Use Weimar cinema and cabaret to show a visual culture in which costume, gesture, voice, and casting complicated gender norms. Dietrich’s later international fame should be foreshadowed, not allowed to eclipse less-famous performers or the broader Berlin scene.

Suggested narration: “The decade left a dazzling archive: songs, magazines, photographs, novels, dance cards, posters. But an archive is not safety. The more visible a world becomes, the more urgently we have to ask who has the power to name it, sell it, or destroy it.”

Ending bridge

Return to Berlin: a Die Freundin page, a crowded cabaret, the Institute’s facade, a magazine ad for a dance. Then fade to a newspaper headline and an empty street.

Narration: “In the 1920s, the city spoke back—in a song, a suit, a magazine ad, a shared apartment, a room full of dancers. In the next decade, authoritarianism would try to silence those voices. But it could not erase the fact that they had been heard.”

Reference atlas: visual, press, sound, and reading

• USHMM: Paragraph 175; Robert Beachy, Gay Berlin; Laurie Marhoefer, Sex and the Weimar Republic; Pink Triangle Legacies: Hirschfeld. Use scholarly and archive sources to distinguish the continuing law from the social visibility of Weimar Berlin.
• Berlin: Symphony of a Great City (1927): verify the exact copy, restoration, and rights status before use. Do not use city footage as proof that a particular queer event occurred there.
• Berlin 1920s colorized image collection: research reference only. Identify all colorized images as colorized; prioritize unaltered archival images where possible.
• The Golden Twenties; Library of Congress Harlem photo search; Smithsonian Harlem Renaissance search: discovery sources. Confirm item-level rights and identify racialized framing in captions and collection descriptions.
• Portrait leads: Virginia Woolf, Vita Sackville-West, Natalie Barney, Romaine Brooks, Ma Rainey, Bessie Smith, Gladys Bentley, Djuna Barnes, Marlene Dietrich, Willa Cather, and William Haines. Verify each file individually.
• University of Kansas on The Well of Loneliness; EBSCO research overview; Project Gutenberg Australia: Orlando. Territorial rights checks are required for every text, cover, adaptation, and audiobook.
• Internet Archive search for Die Freundin; Gallica periodicals; Willa Cather Archive; Rosenbach Mercedes de Acosta Papers finding aid. Search results and finding aids are discovery tools, not reproduction permission.
• Music plan: research tracks through Citizen DJ and Public Domain Review jazz/ragtime/blues. Clear every recording, composition, arrangement, and performance separately. Commission original score where clearance is uncertain.

Research and rights note

Every image, periodical page, performance still, recording, and film clip requires item-level clearance. Do not make people into visual proof of an identity merely because they wore a suit, worked in a cabaret, appeared in a salon, or shared a home. State what the archive establishes and preserve uncertainty when the evidence does not support a more specific claim.

Chapter notes

[1] Robert Beachy, Gay Berlin: Birthplace of a Modern Identity (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2014); Laurie Marhoefer, Sex and the Weimar Republic: German Homosexual Emancipation and the Rise of the Nazis (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015).

[2] Melissa J. Homestead, The Only Wonderful Things: The Creative Partnership of Willa Cather and Edith Lewis (New York: Oxford University Press, 2021).

[3] Rosenbach Museum and Library, The Mercedes de Acosta Papers, finding aid, accessed August 12, 2026, https://rosenbach.squarespace.com/s/The-Mercedes-de-Acosta-Papers.pdf.

[4] Phillip Herring, Djuna: The Life and Work of Djuna Barnes (New York: Viking, 1995); J. Winning, “Djuna Barnes, Thelma Wood and the Making of the Lesbian Modernist Aesthetic,” 2019.

[5] William J. Mann, Wisecracker: The Life and Times of William Haines, Hollywood’s First Openly Gay Star (New York: Viking, 1998).

Back to Contents