
|
|
Judy Garland
Gay Icons: Judy Who?Queer, Isn't It?[16 November 2006] Our choice for icons is about more than just high camp and melodrama; it's about who we are in a fundamental way. by Michael AbernethyImagine for a moment—you’ve gone over to meet the new neighbor and introduce yourself. He’s a handsome, masculine sort of guy, but something about him tells you that he’s not what would be considered a “ladies’ man”. Left alone for a moment in his living room while he takes a phone call, you do a quick scan of his CD collection for clues as to which “team” he plays for. Nestled between the Shawn Colvin, U2, and Greenday CDs, you find the damning evidence: copies of Judy at Carnegie Hall, the soundtrack of Funny Girl, and the extended play version of Madonna’s Vogue. Yep, he’s a queer. It’s possible you’ve reached an inaccurate conclusion, but not probable. Ask most straight men if they’ve heard Judy at Carnegie Hall and they’ll respond, “Judy who?”. Many gay men, however, know that Judy is Judy Garland, and Judy at Carnegie Hall, Garland’s 1961 Grammy-winning Album of the Year, is the concert album that put the diva back on top. And rightfully so. Today’s performers could learn from Garland’s comeback concert, a brilliant performance from a legendary entertainer. Here she is, alone on stage with her band—no pyrotechnics, back-up dancers, costume changes, dazzling lights, or mammoth sets—throwing herself without abandon into song after song after song. “I don’t ever want to go home,” she shouts to the frenzied audience. “I’ll sing ‘em all, and we’ll stay all night!” For many gay men and women, the appeal of the album is not just the artistry of a true superstar, but the fact that Garland had to overcome numerous demons just to walk out on to the stage that night. Battling her drug addictions, washed-up status, and an almost paralyzing anxiety that led her to believe she would fail miserably, Garland considered cancelling the concert until seconds before she flew onto the stage, smiling and gesturing wildly. She rose above all the obstacles, and as they say in show business, “knocked ‘em dead”. It is her perseverance in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds that has earned Garland her status as a Gay Icon. A chubby kid who was forced to take diet pills by her studio, a failure in marriage, a star whose popularity rose and fell repeatedly, an addict (thanks to the diet pills), a financial disaster who often had to sneak out of towns without paying hotel and restaurant bills—there was no reason why Garland should have enjoyed the kind of success she did, except for an adoring fan base and the sheer will to survive in the only business she knew. Garland is hardly the only diva upon whom society has stuck the label “gay icon”. Who exactly is classified as a gay icon will vary depending on whom you ask, but the one trait that most all who are listed have in common is an ability to overcome the odds or fly in the face of conventional wisdom. Bette Davis, Liza Minnelli, Bette Midler, Barbra Streisand—too unattractive to be stars, at least by Hollywood standards. Cher, Dolly Parton, Carmen Miranda, and yes, Tammy Faye Baker—too over the top. Madonna, Mae West, Marilyn Monroe, Joan Crawford—too trashy for their respective times. Yet, all have succeeded, and in their success, they have earned the admiration of homosexuals worldwide. And it doesn’t hurt that, for the most part, they have embraced their gay fans, in turn. Why is it that older gay men are attracted to such tortured souls? Why don’t gay women share the same list of icons? And why don’t young gay men share the same attractions for these legends? The stereotypical answer would be that these women make great subjects for female impersonators to emulate, but such an answer is superficial. For older gay men, the women they idolize represent their own personal struggles. Gay men who are in their 40s or older grew up in a time when they were judged on the basis of one thing: their homosexuality. It didn’t matter if you were a great teacher, dentist, accountant, neighbor, citizen. What mattered, and what people talked about, was that you were “that way”. Understandably, there emerged a desire to be judged for the whole package, not just for sexual inclinations—a longing to be recognized for your skills on the job and whether or not you were a good person who played by the rules, paid your taxes, and treated your neighbors with kindness and respect. Those were all a part of what made these men individuals, but they were rarely acknowledged. (While gays are still judged on their sexual preference today, it is not a factor that limits one’s ability to succeed in society as it once was.)
![]()
![]() It is easy to understand why gay men of this era idolized these women: they had been able to accomplish what gay men could not by breaking the stereotype assigned to them and being recognized for all their assets. Lesbians of the same era, unless they chose to live and dress like men, didn’t face the same level of stereotyping as gay men, so the need to find a role model was not as strong. This is not to imply that lesbians do not have icons, but typically such icons tend to come from their own ranks or have been rumored to have dabbled in same-sex relationships. However, that is not the only characteristic that qualifies one to be a lesbian icon. You also have to be powerful. Eleanor Roosevelt certainly fills that bill; a woman trapped in a marriage to a philandering husband, she became one of the nation’s greatest First Ladies and an honored diplomat. Martina Navratilova is a force to be reckoned with both on the tennis court and off. And while one may not think of Ellen DeGeneres as a power-broker, she is a trailblazer in the fight for gay rights and one of the most influential women in show business.
![]()
![]() Martina possesses another quality, one that endears her to a new generation of gay women and men: her tendency to speak her mind. While older homosexuals clung to images of women who overcame the odds, today’s homosexuals opt to idolize those who are controversial and confrontational. Kylie Minogue, for example, was an international pop star in the ‘80s, scoring most notably with 1988’s remake of “Locomotion”. Back then, she was the cute and squeaky-clean girl-next-door. After a career slump, she blasted her way back onto the scene with 2001’s “Can’t Get You out of My Head”. But this was not the same Kylie; gone were the frilly, lacy dresses and crimped, fluffed hair. This Kylie was a slutty, gyrating sexpot. And gay men loved her, vaulting her to the same exalted status as Madonna and Cher. Younger gay men turn to women who have no problems being “in your face” for their gay icons. The attitude of rejecting social conventions comes in many forms for these gay icons. Most notable is Madonna, who even in her proper English motherhood, manages to illicit controversy; her entire career has been built around the premise that what ever society expected of her, she would defy, particularly in terms of sex. Cher, Christina Aguilera, and Fergie are seen as being open about the sexuality, as well as being talented women. Yet, for many gay men, sex isn’t all that sells. What is equally appealing is the tendency to speak one’s mind, no matter how inappropriate the comments. Two perfect examples are actually fictional characters: Suzanne Sugarbaker of Designing Women and Sophia Petrillo of Golden Girls. Although the series these two characters appeared on have been off the air for years, they have both enjoyed resurgence in reruns, in large part because of gay men’s adulation of the self-centered and politically incorrect Suzanne and the painfully blunt Sophia. A real-life example of such a woman comes courtesy of Tammy Faye, who has turned her back on evangelical homophobia and openly embraced gay men as “God’s children”. This shift in the nature of what makes one a gay icon is representative of the shift in the outlook of gay men and women. No longer do homosexuals feel the need to prove themselves as worthwhile men and women with admirable qualities, as gay men and women often find their talents being recognized without reference to sexual orientation. Consequently, the tables have turned. Homosexuals want to be respected for their sexual decisions and to have the opportunity to speak openly about it without condemnation, so it is natural that their idols would be those who are open, honest, and sexual without regard to social expectations.
![]() In essence, gay men and women are attracted to those individuals that most exhibit the qualities they would like to possess, regardless of the time period. As social mores change, the roles gay men and lesbians assume shift as well, bringing in new qualities for admiration. Still, the LGBT segment of the population is no different from the straight segment in its selection of heroes, idols, and icons. We look to those who exhibit the characteristics which we would like to have. Just as a pacifist would idolize Gandhi and King and a businessperson may seek to emulate Trump or Gates, gay men and lesbians put on a pedestal those individuals who represent their personalities and personal societal concerns. Discovering Garland, Streisand, and Madonna in your new neighbor’s CD collection tells you more than whether or not he is gay. It tells you a little bit about who he is as a human being and how he feels the world views him. Our choice for icons is about more than just high camp and melodrama; it’s about who we are in a fundamental way. Queer, Isn't It?
The Changing Face of DragMichael Abernethy15.Sep.08 In large part, the social acceptance of drag has turned female impersonation into a corporate commodity.
Queer, Isn't It?: Dragging the Old Nag to the Racetrack, AgainMichael Abernethy12.Aug.08 Once again, gay rights have been thrust into the center of a political campaign. Will it be a winning strategy again?
A Clan, a Network, a Tribe, a FamilyMichael Abernethy23.Jul.08 Not only does the GLBT community view itself as one movement, society has mandated that the groups are linked -- if not intentionally, then through selective exclusion.
|
|