1950s Lesbian Pulp Fiction: An Analysis of Spring Fire

Padma (she/her) 

In the 1950s, lesbian pulp fiction gained immense traction as publishers realized it had a strong male market. Despite this seeming like a big win for lesbians, this was at a time when homosexuality was outlawed. By law, publishers had to villainize “lesbians”—both the characters and their explicit content. They would often do this by defining lesbains as predators, mentally ill, or just confused straight women, often at the end of the novel. For example, Vin Packer’s Spring Fire (1952), one of the first in the genre, describes the lesbian relationship solely as a conversion. Packer’s Spring Fire, like many others, reflect popular thought in the 1950s that still permitted lesbian sexual content: real lesbians were predators trying to convert manipulated straight women.

Photo courtesy of Amazon.

The majority of Spring Fire focuses on Mitch, a “not lovely and dainty and pretty” freshman joining a sorority and beginning an affair with senior Leda. The novel includes dialogue of Mitch apologizing for her sexuality and concern that she is hurting Leda for beginning their relationship. Mitch is the first to admit feelings saying, “I think that I—love you,” while Leda takes the moral high ground, thinking that confessions are “ludicrous and holy.” Mitch is depicted as an instigator of Leda’s homosexuality. Further, their discussion of bisexuality is rendered inaccurate as Mitch describes feeling guilty for her lesbian identity– which she learns is “abnormal” in a psychology textbook. It is portrayed that one girl must be a predatory lesbian and the other must be straight for the relationship to make sense in a 1950s context. In general, the first part of the novel invalidates lesbian romance by making their relationship seem inauthentic. Further, the emphasis on confusion and denial portrays the thought that the “true” lesbians are not real, but rather a byproduct. Mitch, the “true lesbian” turns to Leda initially because she is assaulted by a man, and Leda responds by comforting her. This action started each of their homosexuality, rather than it being an everlasting identity that they have. These chapters generate doubt in the romantic story, and subtly imply that their relationship is not genuine, as lesbians could not exist in a genuine relationship. The 1950s did not have a place for genuine lesbian romance in popular media, but rather used lesbian interactions as a part of a negative storyline. These interactions themselves would cast doubt, and even fear, of lesbians in seemingly progressive pulp fiction.

The end of the novel focuses on Leda’s descent into madness after the two are caught about to have sex in their sorority house. At first, a warped narrative is told to their community by Leda: Mitch came on to her, predatorily, saying “she [Mitch] attacked me!” However, a shift occurs: school staff and other sorority members find Leda to be the instigator and perpetrator of the relationship. All of a sudden, her sorority sisters and academic advisor believe that “Susan Mitchell [Mitch] would be a perfectly normal girl if it hadn’t been for Leda.” The negativity and demonization continues as Leda not only faces academic consequences, but also gets in a car crash and becomes psychotic. Lesbian couples in 1950s pulp fiction had to have negative endings, due to strict publishing rules. This novel satisfies multiple tropes by having a main character become physically and mentally ill. These tropes allowed lesbian sex in popular culture, while perpetrating long standing homophobia. Spring Fire emphasizes Leda as the villain in the end with everyone blaming her for this injustice. Her age (being a senior) is now heavily emphasized (she always calls Mitch “kid”), and other characters describe Mitch as a vulnerable, naive girl. In the end, the trope about conversion is just inverted: Leda was trying to convert Mitch into being a lesbian. The idea of bisexuality is brought up again, this time with Leda doing a 180 and admitting she’s lesbian, and Mitch, in the end, saying she never truly loved Leda. The relationship cannot have a happy lesbian couple, but rather must have a lesbian villain and an innocent straight female. This dynamic provided a comfort blanket for straight men who may be worried about their significant others; if she seems queer, she must be being persuaded by a scary villain.

The idea of lesbianism being the result of something is resurfaced, this time focusing on Leda as the “true lesbian.” Readers later learn that it is Leda who has been abused sexually since childhood. Leda is seen as the troubled, crazy lesbian taking out her trauma on Mitch. On the other hand, at the end of the novel, Mitch’s relationship with her family is nicely wrapped up in a bow; her father has sent the sorority house new silverware that they are excited about. This ending highlights the absurdity of Greek Life, how two girls went through so much “suffering” because the house wanted new silverware from Mitch’s rich family. The end explains that lesbian relationships always involve suffering and are not worth the trouble. However, the silverware arriving highlights Mitch's return to normalcy; she is a “normal” girl with a supporting family and kind boyfriend. Her relationship with Leda had nothing to do with emotional connection but rather a mistake and a crime, only written about to appease the male market. Leda’s insanity and troubled connection with her mother imply that homosexuality can be explained, and sometimes fixed. 1950s thought wanted a logical explanation for homosexuality, and literature used tropes to answer these questions.

Despite the immense negativity put on the lesbians of the novel, their relationship was allowed in one sense: titillation. Many lesbian novels, such as Spring Fire were created because of their inclusion of sex scenes, which appealed to the average male consumer. Spring Fire certainly included thrilling scenes with Leda and Mitch, emphasizing that what they were doing is “wrong.” Following an argument where Leda accepts her homosexuality, Packer writes,“her hands stroked Mitch’s body gently.” Despite the general consensus that lesbianism was immoral, lesbian sex was still exciting, and was the reason these pulp fiction novels did well in the marketplace. However, the novels’ plots had to include bad endings to fit within the logic of the 1950s. Consumers were not reading lesbian romance, but rather borderline pornography with expected consequence for the characters.

Despite the overall demonization of lesbians presented in the novel, Spring Fire was actually considered one of the better 1950s lesbian pulp fiction novels. The novel itself does have a cohesive plot and focuses on character building. The girls each have a distinct personality, and do not particularly fall into the butch/femme stereotype. The novel itself was actually written by a lesbian, showing just how strict publishing rules were. It does not fall into typical traps of lesbian pulp fiction; the novel does not have a male main character and does not overemphasize the lesbian sex. Despite the inclusion of titillating sex scenes, many are tame and tender as well. For example one reads, “she said her name and held her” during a kissing scene. Many lesbians in the 1950s actually enjoyed these works, despite the negative portrayal and bad endings. It was an opportunity to learn about lesbians in the first place, and find a place for themselves to be represented. Lesbians had to take whatever media they could get because of the scarcity of material. Though an unintended consequence of publishing these works, it is important to note that queer culture celebrated the pulp fiction being created. 

​In conclusion, lesbian pulp fiction was created in the 1950s to satisfy males seeking another form of titillation and excitement through a taboo topic. Due to both the government and popular culture emphasizing the immorality of lesbian sex, a loophole was created to satisfy this want and fit within the logic of the 1950s. Lesbians, such as in Spring Fire, were not only portrayed negatively but were demonized, and faced consequences for their actions. Though there were lesbian authors and readers who enjoyed these novels, the representation of lesbians in popular culture truly encouraged a traditional lifestyle and made lesbians out to be villains who converted confused, straight women. The little romantic connection between the lesbian characters was heavily sexualized, and was always tragically destroyed in the end. ​