03/03/15 Reading Core Response #2

In Harris's essay on SID, one can still find some similarities in today's image-making of stars. Although nowadays, the trend is that stars show their candid sides more, the stars' images stay with the stars for a long time. Grace Kelly is still considered as an elegant actress who has become a queen of a monarchy, compared to her private life of several affairs. It is interesting to see the comparison between Monroe and Kelly in Harris's essay since they might be considered as women in opposite ends of the spectrum of what is "feminine." While Kelly can be seen as more conservative in showing her femininity, Monroe can be considered as a woman who is liberating her own body. If considering Mulvey's text though, Monroe's image can be seen problematic since she is actively objectifying her own body. In Dyer's discussion on Monroe and her sexuality,  Monroe is an example of Hollywood and the society's interest in sex (note that it is still a heteronormal society where woman's sexuality was designed for male viewers, whereas man's sexuality like Valentino--although he is an actor prominent from the 20s--was designed for female viewers). I personally think Monroe has certainly made an impact in American culture, especially in creating her image as a "blonde bombshell". Compared to other blonde characters from the past, such as Hitchcock's infamous female characters, her image is powerful. As a fine arts student, I could not help but think of Warhol's Monroe paintings while reading both texts. Actually, Warhol's Monroe paintings can be interpreted as a comment on image. By laying out the famous image of Monroe's portrait repetitiously, he purposefully dulls down her image as the blonde bombshell since repetition of a visual are considered as redundant. Finally, on the Hepburn essay by Brown, it was interesting to see how her rise to stardom became successful since usually, I would just admire her rather than think of the cultural and societal background of Hepburn's time. I love how the essay mentions Givenchy and Hepburn's relationship. One can see this play between stars as muse for fashion designers still existing today. Her ambiguous but unique image has benefited her to gain various roles in movies.

Audrey Hepburn Core Post 3

While watching “Funny Face” I couldn’t help but draw comparisons to “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes” specifically between Audrey Hepburn and Marilyn Monroe. Both considered icons of their generations, these two women could not be more different. Marilyn is blonde, thick, curvy and oozing sexuality while Audrey is brunette, thin, flat and cute. But somehow they both became beauty and fashion icons. In William A. Brown’s piece Audrey Hepburn The Film Star as Event, he describes how stardom and fashion tie in with cinema. He explains “Marjorie Rosen might see the 1950s as dominated by the ‘Mammary Woman,’ as typified by Marylyn Monroe and Jane Russell, but in opposition to the mammarians, Rosen also sees the rise of the waif” (Page 33). The waif includes women like Audrey Hepburn and Grace Kelly.  According to the dictionary, a waif is “a homeless and helpless person, esp. a neglected or abandoned child: she is foster-mother to various waifs and strays” (Websters dictionary). Rosen defines this waif type of star as ‘continental’, but going by the dictionary definition of the term, this seems odd. She puts a positive spin on the term. After further reading, Brown further explains Rosen’s stance by stating that “in these films, Hepburn emerges as having and ambiguous nationality. White various audiences (American, Dutch, British) laid claim to her as “theirs”, other commentators have seen Hepburn as being neither American nor European” (Page 34). This idea that she belongs to everyone is what attributed to her star power and separated her from the rest of the girls. While Monroe pulled people in because of her dominant, sexual presence, Hepburn was appealing because everyone felt like they could see some of themselves in her and that she was approachable and relatable. 

Even though Hepburn was hailed as more relatable, he was still a fashion icon. She was most known for wearing Givenchy, but her “fans like to mimic the Audrey style in order to assert their own individuality, a paradoxical individuality, since it is inspired by Hepburn—together with Givenchy and, perhaps, Paramount costume designer Edith Head, and an individuality that can been seen as a response to social pressure but which also offers a rapprochement between the individual and her social role” (Brown). Audrey was a star in her own right and a fashion icon. Her ability to maintain her status in the film and fashion world and maintain her relatable nature is what kept her relevant and a huge star. She displays a different form of femininity than Marilyn Monroe, but she’s the ‘every-girl’. Beautiful and genuine.

Supplemental Post #1: #AskHerMore: Blazer Girls vs. USC Trojan Dance Force

The recent #AskHerMore campaign at the Oscarshas sparked debate on whether or not women in media face a double standard in terms of professional representation. Academy-nominated actresses such as Reese Witherspoon and Patricia Arquette maligned the fact that pop journalists report more on what actresses are wearing rather than on feelings and musings about their work in film. While male actors are able to express themselves more openly, it seems that women are relegated to red carpet mannequins -- even on Hollywood's most prestigious night.

#AskHerMore advocates for journalists to ask questions with more integrity:

#AskHerMore actually reminds me of a personal experience I had in developing a "Meet the Team" series for USC Trojan Dance Force, our school's all-girls dance team. I worked closely with the women on the team to find an aesthetic that properly represents them as their official videographer. Scouring the internet proved astonishingly disappointing. Behold, the "best" example we could find from the NBA Blazer Girls' YouTube Channel:

 

Navigating the world of dance media is tricky. Even professional video interviews like Lindsay's seem to lack any integrity. Notice that it's a 4-minute video and the first shot of Lindsay dancing appears 2 minutes in. Notice that the opening shot of her interview is a shot of her in a bathrobe. As viewers we are invited to be curious about what her body looks like underneath, and we are instantly rewarded with a prolonged photo shoot montage of Lindsay in skimpy outfits while cradling basketballs (If that isn't suggestive, I don't know what is).  Notice that Lindsay says that the "theme" of the photo shoot is fitness, but she is never shown lifting a single dumbbell or working out. Instead, she stands still as photographers pose her in suggestive positions. This is not at all what I imagined a professional dancer to be. I imagine Lindsay to have precise control over her body (that's what dancing is), but instead she is punitively put on display. 

What exactly is happening here? The filmmakers behind Linday's video did not seem to care about her dancing profession, and focused much more on her body. I discussed the video with USC Trojan Dance Force, and we came across a list of contradictions that NBA dancers need to balance, not unlike celebrities we analyze in class. On one hand, a great dancer exhibits technique, control, power, and athleticism. These are generally considered to be male attributes. On the other hand, being female requires a dancer to also be graceful, beautiful, feminine, and on display (or "to-be-looked-at" as Mulvey would put it). In Lindsay's case, extraneous shots of her in a bikini overshadow shots of her rigorous training. Even when she is shown dancing, the footage is in slow-motion, allowing us to further admire her figure. Dancing is about movement, and slowing Lindsay to a crawl further diminishes any semblance of technique and power. Most interviews, like Blazer Girl Lindsay's, give women a spotlight, but make sure to put them in their place as objects for men to consume. They tend to focus on aspects of her beauty rather than her profession in a similar fashion to journalists at the Oscars. 

The questions are just as hollow as the ones criticized by the #AskHerMore campaign. The real shame here is that these questions leave very little wiggle room for Lindsay to elaborate. She's forced to sound air-headed because the questions are, quite frankly, dumb. They ask her:

• What is your favorite type of music?
• What is the cheesiest pickup line you've heard?
• What is dance training camp like?
• What is your job outside of dance?
• What do you like about photo shoots?
• What is a fun fact about you?

Only one of these questions is actually about dancing. The one about her job is actually quite interesting but not really elaborated upon. It's important to note that NBA dancers do not get paid very much. Girls get paid a very small hourly for showing up to practice and promotions, but it is certainly nothing to make a living off of. Dancers must have a professional career outside of the NBA in order to support themselves. It's actually a compelling narrative if you think about it. These girls certainly are not on the team for money, but because they are passionate about dance. So why doesn't the video reflect that? Wouldn't it make the video more compelling if they took on a more serious angle such as that one? 

For our first video featuring Dance Force captain Sunny Lee, we tried to take a different approach than that of the Blazers Dancers:

What USC Trojan Dance Force and I could take away from Lindsay's video was the production style, but that's about it. We knew we wanted it to be interview-style intercut with smooth dolly shots of the routines. For everything else, we tried to do the opposite. As far as content, we of course cut bikini shots and extraneous shots of the body (their warm-up stretching routines rarely make the cut because of the suggestive positions that can be considered superfluous to show). The only B-Roll consists of the girls dancing (not slowed down so you can see the speed, power, balance, and technique) and working out.

In captain Sunny Lee's video (above) we asked questions that were more on-topic and had room for her to elaborate:

• Why do you dance?
• How would you describe Trojan Dance Force?
• What would you say to those who think dancing is not a sport?
• What does it take to be on Dance Force?
• How would you describe your team dynamic?

I personally feel that we achieved our goal in properly representing the girls in this video series. The dancers are shown with more respect, and focus is on the athleticism required to be on the team. At the same time, the girls are not depicted as overly masculine. Close-ups of their expressions as they have fun dancing and the team laughing together as a "family" eschew themes of domination and competition found in most male athlete depictions. 

#AskHerMore is quite an interesting campaign. After my experience with USC Trojan Dance Force, I feel that anyone conducting an interview can make their piece more compelling if they truly want to understand their subject. If interview questions stop at the surface, then subjects are forced to give shallow answers. 

But I'll let you decide! What do you think of our approach? What traits does the USC Trojan Dance Force embody versus that of the Blazer Dancers based on their interviews?

Supplementary Post #1 - Michael Francisco

Neil Patrick Harris & The Oscars (Sheridan Pierce - Supplemental Post #4)

I was not impressed with Neil Patrick Harris’ hosting, which is surprising since I really love when he’s hosted the Tony’s.  The jokes seemed forced and too “punny,” and I didn’t like how he w

It must be difficult to host an award show because there’s an awareness that you will not be able to please everyone.  However, the jokes were very lame (in my opinion, as well as the opinions of many on the twittersphere).  Even other comedians took to twitter to convey their disappointment with Harris' hosting, criticizing him for the briefcase/Octavia Spencer/locked box bit that just kept going on (and on, and on, and on...).

His hosting made me consider his persona in general.  He juggles many different jobs in the entertainment industry, including actor, magician, and host.  We as an audience are comfortable seeing Harris in a hosting position because he has already presented himself as a “personality” as well as a celebrity.  This is why it was especially disappointing for audiences to see him fail at something he usually does with ease.  Because let’s face it, it wasn’t all that surprising that Anne Hathaway and James Franco were not well equipped to host in 2011.

Another notable moment happened before the show, on the red carpet.  Dakota Johnson, star of 50 Shades of Grey and her star mom, Melanie Griffith, were interviewed, and Griffith revealed that she had not seen her daughter's film.  The awkward fight that ensued is something that must be seen to be believed.

It was interesting to see this exchange, since it seemed that Dakota didn’t really care if her mom did see 50 Shades of Grey, but her mother was the one opposed to viewing the movie.  The odd tension was definitely uncomfortable to see on live television, and I’m not surprised that the clip went viral.

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes as the Birth of the Complete Monroe Persona (supplemental)

We've talked a lot in class about Marilyn Monroe's star persona mitigating sexiness with childish innocence, and I think one can argue that Gentlemen Prefer Blondes marks the moment when that persona gelled for Monroe, for the studio, and for audiences. Dyer cites Monroe's Lorelei Lee as a moment when persona undermined the character as written, but I think it's a moment when the stars aligned to show what this Monroe girl COULD potentially be, and everything else too a back seat.

Prior to Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, Monroe did several roles that were sexy but more mercenary, such as All About Eve, Don't Bother to Knock, and Niagra, but Gentlemen Prefer Blondes is the first time we see the innocent sexy girl that would charm America for generations.

All About Eve shows Marilyn as an ambitious, manipulative aspiring actress ready to use her sex to get ahead. One could argue she's on the Eve Harrington track but without the brains. Here Monroe has elements of her signature "dumb blonde" image, but not the iconic sexy/innocent paradigm.

Miss Casswell in All About Eve (1950) has an agenda for her sexiness...

In Don't Bother to Knock, Monroe is actually a villain. She lies, seduces, abuses a child, and finally gets arrested. Monroe has the sexiness, but not the innocence...

Nell in Don't Bother to Knock (1952) is sexy but unhinged...

Finally in Niagra--immediately before Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, Monroe appears at her most villainous. She's a cruel wife, she's an adulterous, and she's planning to be be a murderer. Important to note in this, her villainy is directly related to her sexiness and how she uses it as a weapon.

 

Rose in Niagra (1953) is a sexy monster...

It seems that the powers that be were setting Monroe up to be a beautiful, tempting bad girl up to this point. But then Gentlemen Prefer Blondes happened, and audiences finally see the epitome of the classic Marilyn Monroe persona. This film definitely shows her sexy innocence incarnate, and it kicked off a trend of more films designed to vehicle Monroe in this kind of character. I think it's safe to say that Gentlemen Prefer Blondes launched the Marilyn we know and remember.

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953)

How to Marry a Millionaire (1953)

There's No Business like Show Business (1954)

Seven Year Itch (1955)

The Prince and the Showgirl (1957)

Some Like It Hot (1959)

Jennica Wragg Supplemental Post #2 -#AskHerMore Do Females Stars Hold a Double Standard?

Perhaps what is most unique about this year in Hollywood are the various attempts throughout the year and the Awards Season that have been dedicated to the initiatives we have seen many celebrities take to battle gender sexism. Research blatantly illustrating the gender wage gaps, expectations, and stereotypes brought rise to numerous initiatives by powerful stars such as Emma Watson’s #heforshecampaign.  However, she was not the only one, the hashtag #AskHerMore supported by many celebrities in particular Reese Witherspoon aimed to challenge Hollywood tradition of asking females who they are wearing at the Oscars and instead pose questions focused on their work, and achievements as opposed to their clothing.

As we have spent time discussing the notion of contradiction I see an interesting example of this in this #AskHerMore Movement. In many ways these female stars promoting this message are contradicting a prominent tradition that is blatantly sexist challenging an even greater ideology of women being judged and given value solely by their beauty (clothes etc.). In this case these female stars contradict this larger theme by forcing reporters and ultimately society at large to see women for their intellect and what actually makes them who they are which can hardly be summed up by a dress.

However, nonetheless this movement is interesting because while on one hand the stars confront dominant ideology and stereotypes refusing to answer questions about what they’re wearing, they still continue to wear these exorbitantly expensive outfits to expose their beauty and enhance it due to the elegant way these designer outfits are made.  So, in some ways the stars have a bit of a double standard, they don’t want to be asked questions about their outfits to stand out and illustrate a political message, yet in order to conform to their star persona they continue to wear this type of wardrobe to fit with tradition and societal expectations. If the stars message they really want to get across is seeing women as unique individuals who represent more than what the designers name of their clothes is, then would their movement be more powerful if they simply decided to neglect the elite attire all together and instead bought a nice dress from Macy’s or Nordstrom that was not attached to any specific designer?

Kimberlee Kuhle Supplemental Post #1

While watching the Oscars last night, it became extremely clear that a majority of the excitement for the night revolves around what the stars- mainly the women- are wearing. These talented and hard-working women are bombarded with the same questions by reporters and journalists about who they are wearing, what their nails look like, etc., instead of being asked more creative and meaningful questions. I can't lie- one of my favorite parts of the Oscars is seeing all of the beautiful gowns everyone wears. On the other hand, although I love seeing the dresses, during the interviews with the actresses, it would be nice to hear a question other than, "So who are you wearing tonight?" and "How long did it take you to get ready?" The Representation Project thought the same thing, and created a social media campaign for awards season called #AskHerMore, which insists that questions on the red carpet are overtly sexist, with women almost only being asked about what she is wearing, and urges reporters to start asking more meaningful questions.

The Representation Project is a non-profit organization run by Jennifer Siebel Newsom, and its goal is to change the way women are represented in the media. The campaign was launched in February 2014, and was sparked by E! News' infamous mani-cam. The mani-cam was a small camera set up and angled on a mini red carpet that had stars show off their manicure and jewelry. 

Many celebrities were not thrilled with the mani cam at all, and at the Sag Awards this past year, stars like Jennifer Aniston and Julianne Moore refused to participate, and Elisabeth Moss even flipped off the mani cam. After these incidents, the mani cam has seemingly been removed from the red carpet.

Elisabeth Moss Flips Off the Mani Cam

Reese Witherspoon, Amy Poehler, Lena Dunham and many more celebrities have shown support for the #AskHerMore initiative for reporters to ask women in entertainment about their careers, rather than only about what they are wearing. On the carpet at the Oscars, Reese Witherspoon told Robin Roberts: "This is a movement to say we're more than just our dresses. There are forty-four nominees this year that are women and we are so happy to be here and talk about the work that we've done. It's hard being a woman in Hollywood, or any industry." 

I think that this campaign is very meaningful and important, and is happening at a great time because even though gender equality has always been a problem, it is a hot topic right now, with more female stars than ever before taking a stand and speaking out about this issue. Additionally, I really like the campaign because it is not asking for much and is very easy for reporters to do, but the outcome will be extremely effective and positive for women. The women who are being celebrated at these events have worked so hard to get where they are, and although people want to know about what they are wearing (and still can), it is important for these women to have the opportunity to show their intelligence, speak about charitable organizations, speak about the several aspects of their career, etc. 

Lady Gaga's Transformation (supplemental post #2)

Nowadays, it has become much more challenging and demanding to be famous and important. Before, having talent was enough – might that be in singing, acting or both. But today, actors and singers are required to have a differential in order to be recognized in long term. For that, many people go to the extremes to make a statement, either through their style or actions. Miley Cyrus and Lady Gaga are prime examples of that. Miley Cyrus’ edginess and questionable attire on her shows made her famous and prominent in the media. Lady Gaga’s different sense of style is what made her popular and notable in the media as well.

Miley Cyrus wearing a transparent dress

 The video below describes the extremes that Miley has gone to make sure her shows are unforgettable for her fans:

Lagy Gaga

Lady Gaga became renowned and notorious in the media because of her extremely intense wardrobe, sometimes lack of (such as that one time she left her house wearing a bra). Her perishable dresses in classy events like the Grammys made her news for days and days. She did not gain such importance in the entertainment industry because of her singing skills. This makes me question; is this what is needed for someone to become famous in our society nowadays?

Lady Gaga at the Grammys in 2010

 Lady Gaga knew she had to play this game in order to stand out. Her different dresses, pale skin and almost white hair have always been style statements. Her sense of fashion and questionable choices has shown that she wants to be louder-than-life, provocative and extravagant. She clearly has no limits. The meat dresses, eggshell casings and shows with extravagant sets and pods have always been weird but yet very impactful.

Lady Gaga trying to be an octopus (or Christmas ornament?)

Lady Gaga in an eggshell casing for Grammys

Lady Gaga in a meat dress

Here's a video of her weird but yet powerful performance in the 2013 MTV VMAs:

I believe that Gaga did this on purpose. She purposefully uses her style as a vehicle to fame and stardom. And not that she’s got it, she is going to change her image to become what she has always wanted to be; a singer that is appreciated for her voice. And the Oscars last night proved that. Her performance did not need any of the extravagant sets and accessories to be touching and amazing. People were confused and surprised with her performance. I know that I got the chills and certainly will remember her performance for a long time; this time because of her voice and simple presentation. Since the release of her newest jazz album, Cheek to Cheek, in collaboration with Tony Bennett, she has substituted her overstated closet to a more everlasting, Hollywood glamour style. Gaga is finally reaching the pinnacle of her career and getting where she has always wanted to be. Here's a video of her performance:

So what's next in the Gaga transformation?