Supplemental Post #7: Elvis, not a star?? How and for how long we remember icons

When asked in class whether Elvis was still a star or not, I was absolutely shocked that so few people raised their hands. I mean, what's next? Marilyn Monroe's name drawing blank faces? The Beatles being considered a relic?
Unfortunately, there might be some truth to that. When Kanye West collaborated with Paul McCartney on his songs "Only One" and "One, Two Three" (feat. Rihanna), teens across social media were wondering who this Paul McCartney person was, and mentioning that it was so nice that Kanye West would collaborate with an unknown and launch his career: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2896408/This-Paul-McCartney-guy-gonna-huge-Kanye-West-fans-funny-joke-One-collaboration.html. The entire thing was, in a word, abhorrent.
But I guess even when someone of our generation knows an icon from the past, it might only be in passing and not of the full extent. I myself am guilty of this. Before I came to USC, I had never seen and therefore never known the extent of the true talents of Marilyn Monroe or Audrey Hepburn, nor done my research and known that Monroe even took some classes at UCLA and wrote poetry and Hepburn raised money for war efforts through her ballet even though her father was a Nazi sympathizer. I never knew before that these women were endlessly talented and savvy beyond the way they're portrayed today as just a sexpot or cute and whimsical. It's a bit sad that the majority of my generation and forward might never fully know them, either, regardless of splashing posters and supposed quotes of these stars on their walls. It's such a pleasure to be able to watch a film like Viva Las Vegas, as fun and cheesy as it is, and still be shocked and captivated by the talents of Elvis, both with music and even surprisingly with acting. One can see just why these people were so big in their days. And, even when I didn't know their work very well, I would've never considered these stars not as icons.
With the realization that most of my classmates wouldn't consider Elvis a star today, I began to wonder how our present talents would be perceived in the future. Today, it seems like most 'talents' only capture the world for their bare 15 minutes, and we lack icons like those that once used to exist. Where are our Valentinos or Clara Bows? Our pretty faces, like George Clooney, don't conjure up a long list of accomplishments right alongside them, and our best talent like Meryl Streep never captivated the world with their dashing good looks and paparazzi scandals. Those that can possibly claim a better equilibrium of talent and popularity, like Taylor Swift, remain in such a niche of the market that their work is never taken quite as seriously beyond that of say, "teen girl pop stardom". Are we doomed to remember little beyond those who do manage to hog our social media feeds, celebrity magazines and talk show slots, like the Kardashians? Will the legacies that remain be just of the 'stars' that played the popularity game well, regardless of actually possessing any talent? Or are icons just becoming rarer because of music and film genres forever diversifying, making artists less likely to capture the whole world instead of a dedicated segment of fans?
Can any of you think of stars as talented and enrapturing like the icons of the 20th century? Because I, for one, am drawing a blank.

Core Post #4: Androgyny and Male Stardom

A Hard Day’s Night and Viva Las Vegas were both released in 1964 and featured stars of unbelievable fame who made fans literally hysterical. However, these films took very different approaches to capitalizing on the fame of The Beatles and Elvis. The stardom of both have some obvious differences, but as Doss discusses in his excerpt from Elvis Culture, they also have some key similarities that may be responsible for their massive fan followings.

Some scholars argue that The Beatles were such an extreme obsession for young girls because of their non-threatening sexuality, which was particularly symbolized through their long, floppy hair. Their physicality suggested a certain level of androgyny, which made young fans more comfortable with admiring them, especially at a time in the development of fans when their relationship with their sexuality was confusing and complex. On the other hand, Elvis displayed his sexuality in a much more aggressive manner with his gyrating hips and clear sex appeal. However, Doss addresses the presence of an androgynous aspect to the image of Elvis Presley as well.

We have also discussed the androgyny of Rudolph Valentino, another huge star amongst the female population. While we have witnessed Marlon Brando’s extreme masculinity as a desirable type of male persona, there seem to be many instances of androgyny going hand-in-hand with huge fame. Harry Styles of One Direction is a contemporary example of this type of mixture of masculinity and femininity, as seen in examples on social media (see below). There seems to be something inherently non-threatening and attractive about an androgynous male star, although traditional masculinity is still consistently reflected in the stars of today.

However, it is interesting to consider the concept of “traditional” masculinity, particularly in consideration of the persistence of the androgyny of a few extremely famous male stars of the past hundred years. Perhaps people require less tradition in their stars than we might think. The fame of Elvis Presley and The Beatles certainly weren’t traditional and we still analyze their fame today.

Supplemental Post 4: Piecing Together an Image of Elvis

 When I realized we were watching an Elvis movie, I was intrigued because I had never actually seen too much actual footage of Elvis. I have struggled to understand not only what he means and meant as an icon, but simply what he looked like physically. I knew there was “Skinny Young Elvis” with all the moves but I couldn’t quite put together that this was the same man who people called “Fat Elvis” and found pathetic. I also knew there was something about bananas and peanut butter and bacon that he was somehow connected to, so I guess I kind of thought that may have had something to do with his transformation.

After watching Viva Las Vegas, it made a lot more sense why he was and is considered a sex icon. He’s pretty captivating with his appearance, dancing, and charisma. I still couldn’t really see the connection to his later identity so I ventured over to Buzzfeed and searched his name, imagining that some interesting listicals would pop up. The one that was definitely most helpful to me was the “Official Elvis Presley Aging Timeline” which has a series of pictures illustrating his physical appearance throughout his life. It does make more sense to me now, especially after our reading for this week. You can sort of see how it all began to take a toll on him. We demand even more from our favorite celebrities these days, so I hope the same doesn’t happen to any contemporary superstars. It's a great deal of pressure to be admired as much as Elvis was and continues to be even long after his demise. 

Core Post 2: A KKK Flag Still Flies in my Neighborhood

Although the conversation of White trash culture may feel somewhat surface level or even amusing to some, these readings were almost profound to me, as someone who grew up in a small town in the south. White trash culture to me was the weird racist neighbor no one talked about, the kid in class who rarely showered and bore a confederate flag on his behemoth of a truck, or the random Honey Boo Boo sighting we all had at least once in the local Kroger.  Studying scholarly literature on the culture of white trash in terms of its roots and its relationship with race and class legitimized this ever-present culture I grew up around, and has caused me to consider the white trash relationship with racism and African Americans, which is something I would typically ignore due to embarrassment of my upbringing. 

​A KKK flag still flies high in my neighborhood to this day. Although it deeply offends and outrages most of us to the core, there are still laws that protect the southernerswho choose to support such deep hatred of another race. This is where Sweeney’s writings on White culture and the origins of white trash confused me in the beginning. “Spills tackiness out into the open”, and “white trash grows out of undesirable places” fits the exact script of the white trash folk I grew up around. But this contradictory relationship with race that these white trash people had was a completely new side of the coin I had never considered, and I’m sure my white trash neighbor who flies the KKK flag had certainly never considered it either.  Sweeney describes white trash as being a culture of marginalized minorities, and most importantly, not quite white. I am imagining the faces of my confederate flag loving, black hating, white trash neighbor’s faces reading this article and I cannot help but laugh. Although they would be outraged, I believe this is correct. Even though a lot of these people’s time is spent hating blacks, they spend an equal amount of time appropriating black culture. Elvis helped bridge the gap in terms of similarities in these two cultures that I previously would have never considered to be alike in any way.

​Elvis is the pillar of tacky, and the definition of white trash, but black and white Americans alike think of him as the King. Sweeney compared his mama’s boy and soft-spoken ways to those of a typical southern African American, and to me these characterizations also apply to the kind of white trash I grew up around.  These kids prided themselves on manners and hard physical labor both of which Sweeney describes as being forever linked with Black culture. A lot of the traits of black culture and white trash culture connect, and although it was not the point of this article, I feel a little bit less bitter about growing up in the South by knowing these racist southerners I came to know so well are deeply linked with the culture they actively dislike. I have certainly gained a new appreciation for Elvis and the cultural confusion he represents.

Supplemental Post #4: If [a celebrity] were your [bf/gf]

The Toast is one of my favorite websites for interesting commentary and parody of popular culture. Their topics range from a reworking of Shakespeare (Dirtbag Macbeth is a must-read) to paralleling quotes from the Bible and campy films. However, my favorite series is If [a famous person] was your [bf/gf], in which a writer theorizes the details of the reader's relationship with a celebrity if they were to date long term, everything from lazy Sunday afternoons to your first meeting. The writer does this by amalgamating the aspects of the stars public persona and reworking them into a personal narrative. What's left is a fascinating and indulgent work of fiction. This series fascinates me because it takes our relationships to the famous to a literal level and speaks to both the intimacy we feel with them as well as the distance that reality places between us and them. My favorite piece is 'If Nigella Lawson Were Your Girlfriend'. Additionally, this piece somewhat single handedly jettisoned me into a brief obsession with Nigella Lawson. Hence the fact, I plan to write my midterm on her persona through a postfeminist lense.

Supplemental post #3 Miranda July on Rihanna

Often times in journalism, journalists are encouraged to remove themselves from their work. In interviews of the famous and influential, this is reflected as the journalist removing themselves entirely from the dialogue they have had with said person detaching their line of questioning from their curiosity from its verbal embodiment and refocusing the discussion to the answers they are given.
 The celebrity is far more important and interesting than the interviewer. Miranda July's profile of Rihanna decimates this notion. Miranda July is a star in her own right in certain communities, as a feminist filmmaker and author, but in this interview she embodies the reader by detailing her own rapturous love for Rihanna. By subverting this notion of how writers should approach profiles, she amplifies Rihanna's fame by detailing her personal experiences as an interviewer. 

Core Post #2: Performance

  This week's Dyer reading focused on various types of performance, as well as signs that we read and help us to understand a performance. Performance is defined as,"what the performer does in addition to the actions/functions s/he performs in the plot and the lines s/he is given to say." In analyzing a performance, we are basically trying to make sense of the underlying tones, gestures, facial expressions and various other signs that an actor deploys to make their portrayal of character believable. It is sometimes hard to make sense of some of these signs, and often a matter of opinion when trying to describe how they affect an actor's performance. However, it is interesting to note how different types of actors go about performing different roles, and how their style affects their portrayal of a character.
  Essentially we find that there are two approaches to acting that can be coined acting from the outside in vs acting from the inside out. The first involves observation of outside people and using their reactions to inform an actor's performance-there should be no trace of the own actor's personal feelings. The latter is the opposite; actors are encouraged to "live the character" by basing the performance on what s/he feels inside. The two methods provide very intriguing philosophies on the art of performance, but I still think that all actors ultimately end up showcasing a piece of themselves, as with any type of art. It is hard to imagine a performer with the ability to completely separate themselves from a performance and base their actions solely on the observations of others. I think that most characters that are portrayed contain some trace of the performer's personality, or at least a similar on screen acting character which makes the actor a unique artist.