(Untitled)

[c_smudge]

I need help parsing something out: so gender theorists, please add your two cents.

When is "drag" (specifically, male people performing female drag) a parody of gender (ie, a Good thing) and when is it a parody of women (a Bad thing)?

Comments

[raccoon428]

I feel like the works of E. Patrick Johnson may interest you. I saw him in Chicago, and I think he recently came to MSU to talk about his new book regarding language use in gay black men... but he's a performance major and has a book, "Appropriate Blackness: performance and the politics of authenticity"
http://books.google.com/books?id=YRdNbZkSnVcC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:E+inauthor:Patrick+inauthor:Johnson
I haven't read it, and I'm not sure if it address drag per se, but I think it may be along the lines of what you're looking for...

I think the key thing to remember is the performance aspect of drag. And I don't mean performance in just that someone is "acting". As opposed to some of your other examples, where paid professionals are attempting to "transform" into a real-life, previously existent person, drag performances are about creating a character (and caricature).

It's a little too late for me to really properly break down my views, but as a (former) drag performer I can tell you it had nothing to do with being a woman and all about doing a show. Not sure how the experience was for other queens, but I know Ryan has told me he's never felt more masculine as when he's doing drag. Take that as you will.

I wonder how you feel about things like Avenue Q, with their poking fun at stereotypes. Or Drag Kings - are they subverting gender norms? Attempting to regain power through a transformation to male? Putting on "maleface"?

PS - I saw Dame Edna in SF. She was pretty hilarious - there were some slow parts, but it was an entertaining show.

[c_smudge]

familiar with the work of e patrick johnson but he doesn't talk much about drag or blackface that i've been able to locate.

one thing that keeps popping up for me is impact vs intent. you say for you drag is about "performance" not about "women", but you are taking the trappings of femininity and using them as tools, so it is on some level always going to have a female aspect. this is in theory a major problem with drag: men temporarily take on representations outside of masculinity (mostly those of femininity) for entertainment and sometimes benefit in some way, then at the end of the day they take it off and go back to being male. women are oppressed by these same trappings of femininty and cannot take them off at the end of the day.

it's interesting that you say ryan says he feels more masculine in drag--that makes sense if masculinity is predicated on control and dominance. what could be more dominant than a man outdoing women at their own gender performance?

not familiar with avenue q so i can't comment, but from the little i know of dame edna, her shtick is to be as offensive as possible. he (humphries) creates her character as an actress who hates her audience, is flighty, superficial, ignorant etc, i must ask, why not play a male character? somehow he feels being female adds to that two-faced-ness, that superficiality, that flightiness, adds to the believability that the character is ignorant.

yes, dame edna is and can be entertaining, but it has more implications.