It’s interesting that, no matter how marginal a subgroup can be in any given society, that economics is still a ruling factor. Mother Camp outlines the social hierarchy within the world of female impersonators, from the lowly street fairies to street impersonators and the upper echelon of stage queens, with the ultimate dream of being “legit” in Hollywood as a mainstream actor.
Throughout Newton’s selection, it was apparent that the relative success of an impersonator depends on how well they can compartmentalize their lives, separating their performance from their personal lives. The lower-tier street performers lived in “residential groups” that served to “fuse the work and home lives” (13), while the more successful stage queens lived shockingly normal lives, living “farther away from clubs…and they almost always live alone” (17). They have clean living quarters and appear to be almost normal, straight males. There seems to be resentment and contempt towards the lower classes who cannot clean themselves up and appear straight and “normal” – whatever normal could possibly mean in this otherwise “deviant” lifestyle. The most successful, like Wanda, are shockingly normal in their outward appearances. And the epitome of their craft would be to achieve status as a mainstream actor, to go “legit.” This seems to suggest then, that success, as defined by female impersonators, is to be as seemingly normal as possible, outside of their performances.
Part of this quest for normalcy seems rooted in economics. If one lives their live – both professional and personal – immersed in “street” affairs, then it’s likely that one can never been seen beyond the deviance that the lifestyle represents. The more one is “normal” (read: hetero), the more stage success. And the more stage success, the more financially stable. It’s ironic that, even in subversive cultures, the dollars and cents of economic standing still define the structure of the hierarchy. It’s a bit disheartening to see that, even when these performers are pushing the social boundaries of gender and sexuality, they’re still confined within the operations of a greater economic sphere, and still required to conform in order to escape the street lifestyle.
Works Cited
Newton, Ester. Mother Camp: Female Impersonators In America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1972. Print.
It's funny how so much of the material we read can be thought of within the framework of circularity, and it really has illuminated some of the more illogical "fundamental truths" our society holds dear really have no origin or basis other than the fact that they are taken for granted. I love the way you applied this idea of circularity to Newton's thoughts. Thinking about the drag culture in this way is interesting, because if heterosexism is "the norm" that is valorized within the queer community, does the simultaneous valorization of economic success assert that this is also considered a norm, or perhaps a norm associated with heterosexual society by this community? As income inequity has increased dramatically since this article was written, I wonder if this dynamic has changed at all as social mobility has all but disappeared in our nation. Has the increased inability to attain higher economic standing simply made the dynamic Newton portrays more tragic or could it possibly have been liberating for this community in some way? It would be interesting to read a more modern piece on this community.
ReplyDelete