Readings:
- Francesca Britain (2006) “Women Who ‘Do Elvis’: Authenticity, Masculinity, and Masquerade,” Popular Music & Society
- Diane Torr (2010) “Man for a Day: A Do-It-Yourself Guide,” from Sex Drag, and Male Roles: Investigating Gender as Performance
Viewing:
- Youtube viewing/listening: The Mighty Slim Pickins, “Thirteen Times” and “Stray Cats”; Janny James, "Hound Dog"
7 comments:
Discussion Question:
The Brittan article states that females find it hard to impersonate Elvis because of the clear gender differences that they have to surmount. The Torr article furthers this point through the list of ways in which a female can change herself to be a “man” for a day. However, how much easier would this masculine impersonation be for a homosexual man, and would he be received more warmly than the female “Elvises”?
Artifact Discussion:
I came into this course with a minimal knowledge of Drag Kings and Drag Queens: although I had an idea of what they are, I did not analyze them from a scholarly perspective. Thus, it was interesting to read the analyses and arguments of the Brittan article, especially on the point of how Drag Kings are often “rejected as deviant copies – threats rather than tributes to the ‘original’” (Brittan 168). After watching the three videos for this blog posting, I will have to say that it’s hard to see the “tribute” aspect of the Drag Kings in these videos, but I can tell that they’re not trying to parody the original figure of Elvis Presley. In the first Mighty Slim Pickins video (“13 Times”), the lead singer does a decent job imitating the vocal style of Elvis, emphasizing the ups and downs of Elvis’s voice. Although in this video and the next the Elvis-esque singing style imitates the original decently well for a female mimic, the Drag King doesn’t really dance to the Elvis style that much. Adding more pelvic movements and creating a more lively atmosphere via energetic dancing would make the performance more those of like Elvis Presley. I will concede that the Drag King tries to do this with arm movements and some hip swinging, and his physical appearance and attire of are reasonably representative of Elvis. However, the motions that the Drag King makes in the videos are not exaggerated and overly sexual though, which is what sets Elvis apart from his imitators. The Drag King in the “Janny James” video on the blog does a better job with the dancing, making it more lively and adding more body motions. However, the movements are not really sexual: they’re manly and “rough”, but they mostly involve the arms and the entire body as a whole without much of an emphasis on the hip area.
Question:
Torr makes several generalizations about men (most of which I’d have to agree with). Some of these were especially interesting like the “lack of self-awareness” or the emphasis on the function of an action (like eating or gesturing) instead of the look of it. At the end she writes, “Whereas femininity is always drag, no matter who is wearing it (which is why it’s easy to caricature), maleness is the presumed universal” (269). Is it possible that while both genders have learned habits, masculinity is in fact the more natural, while femininity involves more learning and acting?
Artifact Discussion:
Before watching these videos I was interested to see what female renditions of Elvis would look and sound like. We had already heard Big Mama Thornton’s rendition of “Hound Dog,” so I expected these artists to have the same kind of feel. I was certainly surprised at what I found. Neither of the artists had the husky voice or sensual rasp of Big Mama Thornton. Their voices were female sounding, but clearly they were trying to sing in a lower key than most women do. The rendition of “Hound Dog” was just like Elvis’s rendition from the 1970’s, which we as a class had decided was less sexual and less genuine. We decided that he was less masculine as a figure in his later work so it is interesting, and I suppose not surprising that a woman trying to impersonate Elvis would choose songs from that period. Also, the clothes that Janny James is wearing are clearly a costume taken directly from Elvis’s later wardrobe, and not something that most men would wear.
I got a wholly different feel from the Mighty Slim Pickins. To me it seemed that the lead singer truly identified more as a male, referring to herself as a “guy” and fantasizing about “pussy” in “Stray Cats”. Although she dresses like Elvis to an extent with similar hair and styles, she reminds me much more of an earlier Elvis – one that we had determined was more masculine and sexual about his masculinity. She clearly plays the role of man in the video of “13 Times,” and in both I would consider her outfit to be Elvis-like, but not a costume, and for that reason I would more easily call it “Drag”. Still her voice could not really be described as masculine (except maybe when compared to the higher voice of the second singer), but it is more her actions and style of dress that signal to us that she identifies as a male.
Question:
Is it more transgressive for women to perform masculinity or for men to perform femininity? Which would be better received? I have a feeling the answer is the latter.
Artifact Discussion:
Leigh Crow, the woman who impersonates Elvis in "The Mighty Slim Pickins" version of "Stray Cat," was fairly convincingly masculine in the performance though she did not look much like Elvis. I think it was because of the way she was carrying her body. Britain might have been on to something when she suggested that a "convincing impersonation of the King has little to do with physical resemblance; rather, it depends on a performative recovery" (Britain 171).
Both authors talk about how what we come to believe is biologically determined masculinity is at least on some level actually just socialized into us, it's a cultural construct. The authors suggest that if women can perform masculinity effectively, then gender is truly a performance. Britain states "As Judith Halberstam points out in her pioneering work on male impersonation, “white men derive enormous power from assuming and confirming the nonperformative nature of mas- culinity. For one thing, if masculinity adheres ‘naturally’ and inevitably to men, then masculinity cannot be impersonated” (Britain 181). And Torr suggests that whilst it's often obvious that femininity is a performance, masculinity is seen as more of a natural state though it's equally a performance (Torr 269).
In my observations of others, I've come to believe that there are enormous aspects of our identity that have been culturally constructed that we take for granted as "natural." When I did DukeEngage in Dublin, I noticed that there were distinct differences in the way masculinity was constructed in Ireland versus the way Americans construct masculinity. And my dad, who grew up in India, constructs masculinity in a different way than my brother, who grew up here. It's not a unique phenomenon; I've observed it throughout my extended family.
Discussion question: After reading Man for a day, and again being exposed to the view that men and women are polar opposites, and whatever is exhibited by men is seemingly absent in women, I wondered, what is the impact of exhibiting “dominant” male behaviors described without physical transformation? How are male behaviors exhibited in females received and perceived? Is the physical change more for the person exhibiting the behaviors or the people looking on? Also what meaning does it bear that presumably more restrained/ confined, when at the same time, they are associated with taking up space?
Artifact discussion:
It seemed that some of what the article touched on regarding how males hold things in and females don’t was explored in the videos of the Mighty Slim Pickins. The wardrobe difference between the male and female personas who were out front promoted a very obvious portrayal of gender differentiation. The “male hair” was much shorter and the “female clothes” were much more revealing. Behaviors of the masculine and feminine portrayals were both very sexualized but in different ways, and as usual, the female role seemed much more objectified and body seemed a significant component of gender identification.
However, in the impersonation Janny James presented of Elvis Presley singing Hound Dog, just based on what the article describes as masculinity, being more conserved, refraining from too many hip movements, and the like, Janny James almost had a more “masculine” quality owed to a more rigid/ stiffer performance than what Elvis’ gyrations often lent to. That in effect caused me to question then in what instances masculinity is a fluid or varying construct and where is the line crossed, because in earlier discussions of some of Elvis’ performances, he was deemed as definitely masculine, and that may even have been owed to his suggestive dance moves/ more sexualized performances. How far did Janny James have to go in embodying Elvis in order to pull off a convincing performance? How authentic did it appear to audiences and critics? (If possible) How might gender as performance be translated into everyday life in a way that enables male privilege to be experienced by women, and female emotional freedom to be experienced by males in healthy and fulfilling ways?
Question: Why do reactions differ when women perform as men and men perform as women? Both are stepping outside their gender and doing something that is not typical in our society. I feel like most people are more accepting of women performing as men rather than men as women. Do you think this is true?
Discussion: After watching the second video it made me think how difficult it is for women to pass as men on stage. The women in the second video certainly had some things that help her seem masculine (clothes, hairstyle), but her mannerisms were very feminine. I think it is hard for anybody to replicate some of the moves we see by men on stage. In relation to that point, Brittan made it a point to realize that if women can successfully perform as men and pass as men, that gender is merely a performance. While men and women have accomplished passing as the opposite gender I dont necessarily agree with gender being classified as just a performance. There are just some things (actions, appearance) that the opposite race cant duplicate while performing.
Question:
Why do you think that women were the larger proportion of Elvis Presley imitators? Britain argues that females felt "liberated" by breaking gender roles. Do you agree with this reason? Did men not have as much motivation to impersonate Elvis, even if they made up the larger percentage of Elvis fans?
Artifact Discussion:
I find there to be a huge distinction between The Mighty Slim Pickins and Janny James as Elvis impersonators. I feel that the Mighty Slim Pickins did not execute what Francesca Britain describes of female Elvis imitators as well as Janny James did. Britain claims that female imitators would reproduce the Elvis "performance" style. However, I feel that the Mighty Slim Pickins would only go so far as to impersonate Elvis's fashion style and physical persona. For example, they replicated the pompadour and his flashy clothing fairly well. However, even this is not perfected. The main singer's hair has streaks of blond jetting through the short black hair. My point, thus, is that the Mighty Slim Pickins is imitating Elvis more as a way to express their sexuality. They are not ashamed, and in fact I would argue are proud, of expressing their homosexuality. In their music video of 13 Times, they impose sexual acts on each other. While Elvis was certainly known in his performance style to be sexual, they definitely take it over the top. It becomes more of a way to celebrate their sexual orientation than to celebrate Elvis Presley.
Janny James, on the other hand though, adheres much more closely to Britain's description of female Elvis impersonators. Along with doing a good job at looking the part, Janny James also impersonates Elvis's performance style well. She is subtler than the Mighty Slim Pickins. She rocks her hips and does the fist pumps. She seems to be celebrating Elvis and is motivated by the reasons that Britain discusses.
The last quick thing I took note of, in both Janny James and the Mighty Slim Pickins' videos is that they do not sing with incredibly low voices, as Elvis does. This emphasizes that these imitators placed higher value on other aspects of Elvis's remembrance such as his appearance or performance style, than his voice.
Why do so many people identify with the stage persona of Elvis, choosing to take on his performance characteristics and attire? There are so many other rock legends (The Beatles, etc.) that are not imitated to such a great extent. Why Elvis?
In the first video, the Mighty Slim Pickins’ far surpass Elvis in their use of blatant sexuality. While Elvis was considered extremely sexual for his time due to his thrusty dance moves, this band acts out a more than suggestive sexual situation in their music video. The instrumental aspects of the song somewhat resemble the musical style of Elvis, but I see little resemblance in the band’s vocals to those of the King.
In the second video, I have trouble identifying elements of Elvis. While the band is dressed in the style of Elvis, the vocals and dance moves pay little tribute to the King. The wild dance moves of the backup female singer somewhat distract from the band’s attempt to replicate Elvis. Also, the lead singer’s voice is much higher than that of Elvis. In fact, he gives off a somewhat feminine vibe through his sultry dance moves and raspy, sensual vocals. His dance moves are much smoother than those of Elvis, who simply thrusted his hips in a rigid, jerking fashion.
In my opinion, the performer in the third video does the best “Kinging” performance. His attire, dance moves, and vocal style all imitate Elvis’ particular performance style. However, I think this artist goes too far in his imitation of Elvis, overdoing the vocals in the slower section of “Hound Dog.”
Post a Comment