Thoughts on Camp

[Angelabdc]

I was watching Strictly Come Dancing last night and thoroughly enjoyed the performance of La Voix and found myself laughing at the performers' post dance interview comments in the spirit they were made. I consider myself to be GC and wanted to do a bit of self-analysis and express possible contradictions in my own world view. I think it comes down to the idea of something being "camp" as defined by Susan Sontag and others as self-aware, frivolous and humorous. La Voix is usually Chris and has a clear boundary between his performing persona and his real identity. I do not personally find anything offensive in his drag persona anymore than I did with Lily Savage or Dame Edna but rather would characterise it as way to say the unsayable, or be bolder in a subversively funny way. I appreciate others will disagree with this and happy to engage with them on this. But I do think there is a fundamental difference between that kind of exaggerated self-conscious display and a doctor who solemnly tells a tribunal that they are literally a man because they consider themselves to be so, or to someone whose everyday drag consists of crotch grazing skirts and size 50G fake boobs. I think that stems from a lack of self-awareness and that is why it provokes such discomfiture amongst those of us who perceive it as delusional.

I think that hard an fast rules in terms of entertainment would be wrong.

I find the idea that a white man or woman should never ever ever adopt blackface to be silly. In my view the starting point should be "it is potentially deeply offensive, so we better have a very good reason for using blackface". An Al Jolson biopic might require blackface. I am sure there are other contexts too - perhaps in comedy where the laughs are so prevalent, and the comedy so clearly not attacking black people on any level - where blackface is justifiable.

But as a basic rule of thumb "white people don't need to 'black-up'" is probably a good thing to have in mind.

I think the same applies to other protected characteristics.

"Men don't need to pretend to be women" is a damn fine starting point, but it can be done well, not least when done with intelligence and self-awareness.

I would argue that as a general rule adults should not be pretending to be wheelchair bound, or children, or very old either - other than very occasionally for very specific and good reasons.

I'm GC and have no objection to drag. I do have an objection to it being overly sexualised, mocking females or deliberately shocking - like some of the things I've seen people highlight from Ru Paul's Drag Race.
Paul O'Grady made a good point when he said modern drag was just shading and make up.

I have yet to see drag that doesn’t mock women in some way. Surely that’s the whole point of it in the same way that the motivation for black face when mainstream on TV etc. used to be to mock black people. That too was excused as being artistic, kindly meant, subversive etc. Without the fundamental mockery it would have no impact or reason to exist.

I don't watch drag, so have no idea what Chris's act is normally. Given that Strictly is seen to be 'family viewing' with a large number of children in the audience, I'd expect he would have dialled down (and been told to dial down) any sexualised/risque elements - to play the pantomime dame, as it were. Is that his usual style of performance? No idea. But I would not expect his act on Strictly to offend.

Having just reminded myself that there's a large number of children in the audience, I would question if this constant pushing by the BBC of drag into the national consciousness is a good idea. Having it pushed at you from a young age that men in dresses is normal and fun is a safeguarding risk IMO.

"I think it comes down to the idea of something being "camp" as defined by Susan Sontag and others as self-aware, frivolous and humorous."
I wouldn't know Susan Sontag or her ideas if she bit me. For me it's an affectation, an attempt to appear non-threatening. Whilst that might work on a personal basis, as a wider phenomenon it starts to look like camouflage.

I tend to agree.

I would add that no group should be immune from mockery... but that there's a big difference in doing it with genuine intelligence and for a wider purpose, and doing it week in week out in the most pathetic sexualized way on mainstream Saturday night TV.

I'd like to see Chris do some dances as La Voix and some as Chris. I'm not keen on drag but yesterday wasn't in any way sexualised, so that was OK. It was interesting that he said he learned the dance as Chris and performed it as La Voix, so I'd like to see if Chris can perform.

I think seeing lots of Chris both in and out of costume may be helpful to children distinguishing men-dressed-as-women from actual women.

I still hate that caricature eyelashes and big pouty lips and fake boobs is seen as making a man into a "she". Piss off. Not Chris in particular, he's playing a stock clown character, but the whole trope comes from a misogynist place.

I liked the gender bending when Johannes was dancing with a man (can't remember who!) and they didn't skimp on swishy skirts at times but designed to fit and suit them as men.

Is pantomime a safeguarding risk?

A La Voix show has some innuendo and gentle banter, but not really sexual. It’s more classic entertainment. Chris has an amazing singing voice and sings the big Shirley Bassey, Tina Turner, Cher etc numbers brilliantly. There is a lot of self-deprecation. I don’t see it as in the same camp (no pun intended) as the current repulsive DQ era at all.

If it’s not ok to do blackface (which it’s not at all) why is it ok to do drag? All drag in some way mocks women. It uses tropes and sexualised behaviours and rude names for the performers and I do not watch it as a result.

Men dressed as women is funny and women dressed as men isn't. I honestly think it's as simple as that. Paul O'Grady as Lily Savage was one of the funniest comedians of his time and I loved Barry Humphreys as Dame Edna.
I have a problem with equating drag to black face because it was born from a time when they were only just about a generation away from slavery when it started. America had full on segregation and the whites opinion was that black music and singers had great songs and music but that they could do better. Mainly based on the idea that white voices were better than black.
Obviously women have been/are oppressed, but I think we can see the difference between someone blacking up to offend or be superior and a bloke in a wig playing Widow Twanky.

I have mixed feelings on drag. Am GC and conscious of misogyny, particularly within the trans movement.

A friend at uni used to love going out in a dress and makeup if the occasion had any call for it. He'd wear his girlfriend's, no exaggeration whatsoever but because he looked obviously and unapologetically a bloke - it was pretty funny. It's hard to explain why it was funny, but it really didn't feel like he was making fun of or demeaning women. It felt like he was making fun of himself.

I don't mind when drag owns what it is - which is a man, who everyone knows is a man, getting to have a bit of fun doing the stereotypically girly glam stuff, but it being sort of hilarious / ridiculous because he's obviously a big burly bloke.

To be fair I do think women in male-drag can be funny, if they're subverting male stereotypes. I thought Jenna Dewan's drag dance off performance was funny. She sort of leaned into the gold chains, ridiculously baggy trousers, crotch grabbing thing. But her physicality was probably against her because she didn't body-wise look that far off just being a teenage boy. Women dressed as men tend to look just like butch women, or possibly pretty/teenage boys rather than something new/different or really subversive.

I think it's also harder to be funny/entertaining as a woman in drag because apart from a few niche stereotypes, what has masculinity got really? Buzz cuts, grey trackies and suits? It's all rather boring. Everything good that masculinity has in terms of fashion, women have already mainstreamed for themselves.

A man dressed in drag has a distinctive look because men don't usually wear makeup or dresses etc. If men were normalised to wear these things then drag would cease to be subversive and would die out.

Agree re blackface. The roots are different

As to women dressed as men not being funny...I don't see why a woman couldn't do a comedy routine satirising men dressed as a man. Similarly, entertainers like Vesta Tilley were popular, though their appeal was more based on impersonation/singing rather than just comedy.

I do think that a man, esp very obviously masculine one dressing as a woman, especially in over-the-top clothes, makeup etc like Edna has more inherent potential for comedy. Male clothes are generally less intrinsically humorous since they're more functional.

Is that why you think women dressing up as men is less funny? Or other reasons?

For some reason I suddenly thought of Queen's drag video filmed for I Want To Break Free. Mercury being gay does add an extra layer & arguably Roger makes a surprisingly convincing girl, but it stays more on the panto side rather than drag. The US not having pantos may be part of the reason they banned the video! 🤣

I think panto dames are clearly different from drag queens and not sure why people keep conflating them. Wouldn't describe Edna Everage as a drag queen either.

I see a big difference between pantomime dame and a drag performer.

I have a major issue with drag performers with rude names going into libraries for eg

No immunity from mockery for any group sounds good in principle but power imbalances and vulnerability might have a bearing. For example, disabled children would generally not be an acceptable target of humour. It’s interesting that women are still very much fair game whereas TIMs would never now be mocked as they were in League of Gentlemen and other comedy shows, not that long ago. They have managed to create immunity for themselves because they are now seen as vulnerable whereas women are just expected to put up with offensive mockery as well as a whole range of misogynistic abuse on and off line.

@MusettasWaltz Yes it's just the ridiculousness of a bloke in women's clothes. I only see the disgusting things some of Ru Paul's contestants as ridiculing women. Having said that I am basing my experience on Hinge and Bracket, Lily Savage and Dame Edna. As Barry Humphreys had a few characters he'd perform I never regarded him as taking the mick.

@Taztoy I agree and in a previous post I said that I don't like sexualised drag. And I don't approve of the disgusting "performances" that I've seen other people highlight from Drag Race. It just shows how little talent today's drag artists have. They used to be actually funny comedians

I’m GC, anti-DQ, but I do like panto and the likes of Lily Savage, Dame Edna, Cissie and Ada. I was pleasantly surprised at Chris/La Voix. I think he was in the pantomime dame tradition and I found him funny. I think he’ll be in for the long haul.

@deadpan suggests that "Men dressed as women is funny and women dressed as men isn't".

I'd like to open this discussion up and include opera, where there's plenty of cross-dressing involved. I particularly like it when we have women, performing as (young) men, dressing up as women as part of the plot. Der Rosenkavalier or The Marriage of Figaro anyone?

Or, with Joyce di Donato in a trouser role in the fabulous Met production of Rossini's 1828 Comte Ory. Is she REALLY not funny?

As to women dressed as men not being funny...I don't see why a woman couldn't do a comedy routine satirising men dressed as a man. Similarly, entertainers like Vesta Tilley were popular, though their appeal was more based on impersonation/singing rather than just comedy.

Kathy Burke as Perry was pretty funny in the Harry Enfield show. Obviously there's a straightforward joke in there, which is that this is an adult woman playing a teenage boy, and so the audience enjoys the impersonation. It would be much less funny if the character were played by a teenage boy. Much of the humour in drag done well is the pure joke of knowing that this is a man playing a woman, and vice versa, whereas drag done badly is simply a grotesque caricature.

John Whaite bakeoff winner

I love it when they do that! But it doesn't seem funny in the same way- maybe tho there's sometimes a more subtle kind of mocking of gender roles, a bit like plays like As You Like It.
That's one aspect of women dressing as men.
Another is the principal boy panto role or the kind of breeches role Restoration actresses like Nell Gwynn played, which are more about presenting an attractive lady in a costume that shows off her legs (at least to some extent..)

Good example. I remember a poster on a thread discussing this a while back mentioned the Canadian comedian Mary Walsh & a character she did for the sketch show This Hour Has 22 Minutes, Dakey Dunn, a 'masculinity correspondent'. She said that he was very funny and the fact a woman was playing him heightened the satire.

Comic cross-dressing is maybe a bit harder for women,bc as people have said men's clothes etc are more drab, but I'm certain it CAN be funny.

In his pomp , Danny La Rue was playing a panto dame in the afternoon and doing drag at night.
He said they were two completely different forms of acting. Panto is innocent and child oriented. Which is why the Tras try to wear it as a cloak of invisibility.