sundries

[rm]

There's a lot of comment out there about Amanda Palmer's new project, Evelyn Evelyn, which for those of you who don't know is one of those concept project with fictional characters presented as real things. Think, kinda sorta, Ziggy Stardust & The Spiders from Mars, except in this case it's about conjoined twins rescued from the circus.

Now, I've seen people upset because it's fiction being presented as truth and bilks the audience. I've seen comment on the ableist narrative that drives the thing, and I've seen comment on the now removed child pornography element of the backstory.

And, it turns out, I have something to say too, although it's about none of those things, largely because I don't feel qualified as I am neither immersed in the project or the activist issues from which other people are writing to eloquently.

On the subject of the band itself, I don't know what my opinion is at present, but I think these discussions are important.

On the truth/fiction issue, I probably have a lot to say (some of it, apparently, in the comments to this post -- short version: the "all fictions should be consensual" argument is one I've little patience for), but that's a discussion I can have over less murky subjects on other days.

I probably also have something to say about the sexualization of twins (conjoined or not) and the whole lesbians for your entertainment narrative, but again, that's for another day.

What I want to talk about is a current segment of pop culture's obsession with the first half of the 20th century in general and the period between the wars, specifically. The steampunk "movement" which historically focused a bit earlier, by and large, is also at issue here (and as is noted in the comments, us REgency-era fans are not excepted either). And everything I am about to say I say as a full and at least partially guilty participant in these aesthetic fixations.

I think in America we do this thing where we divide time from itself. WWII exists, apparently, only in the years we fought in it and most high school educations don't really look at Hitler's rise to power or the social and economic conditions in the 1920s and 30s that precipitated it. And because of that, I think we are, as a culture, incredibly blind to the racism, antisemitism, and a host of other evils that flourished in the 1920s and 30s, while we're all sitting around talking about decadent parties in a Berlin we never saw instead.

And it makes me uncomfortable.

It makes me uncomfortable when I hear that the new hot thing in YA literature is "hobos" because they're "scary". I haven't missed that it's apparently fashionable to call the homeless on Americas streets hobos either. Whether we're romanticizing or making that monstrous with that nomenclature, I'm uneasy with it.

It makes me uncomfortable when I go to an event like Dances of Vice and the only time I've ever seen a PoC perform burlesque there it was a recreation of Josephine Baker in a skirt made of bananas while a crowd of nearly entirely white people stood around and ogled. Great dancer and savvy as hell and as an audience, ogling was our job. But still, at a painfully pale party, it was icky. And I've written before about the presumably unconscious but no less distressing for its use of race in other burlesque performances I've seen.

It makes me uncomfortable every time there's another Asian-themed party about opium dens in the 1920s.

It makes me uncomfortable every time there's another "evil circus people" (because apparently women who actually have sex, people with disabilities and con men as best friends forever is a narrative we cannot escape) party.

Look, I'm not saying we shouldn't play with these tropes and historical facts as artists. I go to these parties, often with great excitement (and a bit of concern). Nor, am I saying you can't have a theme party about Germany (or anywhere else) between the wars. But I think people think it's easy. I think they think it's an instant sell (okay, and let's face it, I think it probably is). I think they think it says decadence and comes at the expense of no one.

And I don't think that's true (hi, non-gender conforming person of Jewish and Catholic origin here). I think if you want to work with the perceived decadence of this period and its tropes, you need to know your history and have something to say about something than your own clever wickedness.

There's really nothing I like more than a good bit of 1920s German cabaret stuff (I'm thinking of the very smart/aware Isengart here who has managed to move me to tears more than once because he talks about the bad stuff as bad stuff and frames the joy or the partying than coexisted with the bad stuff in that context). But the cheap/easy show of privilege as our own opportunity to dress up in a casual society is something I've found unsettling for some time and as our cultural fixation with the era gains a lot of mainstream steam, as evidenced by things like and including Evelyn Evelyn, I'm more and more uncomfortable.

Circus freaks. Nazi experiments. Hobos. Racism. Anti-semitism. Playing dress-up.

We need to think harder about how we're designing parties and performances. Which isn't to say we can't use ugliness (or beauty) to critique ugliness. But if no one notices the critique then there starts to be a problem.

Gay conservative group triggers Republican discomfort and infighting.

Haiti, voodoo and the media.

Women and werewolves. As you might guess, a lot of it is about the sin of hair. via catherineldf

Tonight Patty and I are joining a friend and a person we've not met yet at a swanky bar. It'll also be the debut of my tux, since I have this _thing_ where I decided I had to wear it once before Gallifrey for the sake of my mental health. If I ever manage to finish one of the eight billion half-written fics on my hard drive, it'll become clear.

Anyway! I am excited. Less about the tux than going out and functioning. I've been dead dead dead since my trip to DC and I hate that feeling of exhaustion and underwaterness. I'm looking forward to seeing friends and having a date night.

Buffy! We're continuing to watch, and I have to say, I remain very impresed about how plot lines are not just dropped. Giles was tortured and we see that acknowledged after that episode (fine, fine acting in those acknowledgments too). I'm really impressed and moved on that front. Also it really matters how much grieving/mourning we see on the show. It completely changes the audience response to various events that there's a blueprint and that we're not left to do it alone. Meanwhile, I really the Willow/Oz getting back together/virginity-and-OMG-Barry-White soundtrack thing was handled SO WELL, and I thought Giles dealing with the scorned woman fairy raised some interesting gender issues that I'm wondering if the shoe will develop further as I'm having thinky academic thoughts on that front.

The winning look on Project Runway last night. How much do I want the jacket for the adult?

Comments

[fmanalyst.livejournal.com]

Yes, this continuity, even when it was rejected (ie Dawn) was always the strongest thing about Buffy. When I compare story arcs across series, I've always thought that Whedon did that aspect of scripting better that Russell T Davies or Chris Carter. I suppose I should watch Supernatural to see how well or badly they do it.

[laughingacademy.livejournal.com]

Supernatural continuity has gotten interesting because the writers have (1) started deploying retcons and (2) appear to have decided that the central conflict of the show isn't necessarily Good vs. Evil, but Destiny vs. Free Will.

[fmanalyst.livejournal.com]

Are the ret-cons self-aware, or does it seem that they are trying to avoid addressing that the narrative has changed?

[laughingacademy.livejournal.com]

It's definitely self-aware. Whether it's all successful is open to debate (I'm thinking of a revelation concerning the nature of a recurring foe), but some of it is damned clever. I'm really impressed by how far the writers have taken a show that, in its first season, looked like it was going to be all about two hot boys in a cool car killing monsters while searching for their missing dad.

[fmanalyst.livejournal.com]

Does the lighting ever get better? I had started to watch the series once, and I started complaining that the lighting director could surely do better than 25 watt bulbs.

[laughingacademy.livejournal.com]

Um. They have some daytime episodes?

There was an ep in season three (I think) called "Hollywood Babylon," where the boys investigate a haunted soundstage being used to shoot a horror film, and the script has some fun with viewer/network complaints about the show -- including the lighting, or lack thereof.

[rm.livejournal.com]

I don't watch the show, but it's the breaking the fourth wall stuff that interests me about it the most, although I have also been made aware that that is also the subject of the most fan wank regarding the show and I'm not sure if I have room for more of that type of stuff since I'm about all full up of irritation on the "RTD is a homophobe" wank.

[laughingacademy.livejournal.com]

I love the fourth-wall We see you out there! material, even when it makes me wince in embarrassed recognition. I think the motive for creating characters like Becky the Fangirl and the cosplayers at the first (in-show) Supernatural convention is affection more than anything else (though there is a strong element of You realize you're kind of nuts, right?). Plus, I'm much more disturbed by the show's ongoing FAIL in re: race and gender.