Madonna, Bell Hooks essay: Weston-Smith Core post #5

It is indeed a little ironic that the week we discuss Madonna and her "white womanhood" Madonna makes headlines after performing and making out with rapper Drake at Coachella Music Festival on stage.

“White women ‘stars’ like Madonna...publicly name their interest in, and appropriation of, black culture as yet another sign of their radical chic. Intimacy with that ‘nasty’ blackness good white girls stay away from is what they seek. To white and other non-black consumers, this gives them a special flavor, an added spice. After all it is a very recent phenomenon for any white girl to be able to get some mileage out of flaunting her fascination and envy of blackness.” (Hooks, 157)

This “phenomenon” that Bell Hooks writes of in her Chapter on Madonna in Black Looks, Race and Representation entitled “Plantation Mistress or Soul Sister” is one that Madonna certainly had a hand in starting, but also one that has gained even more traction with her own continuation in 2015, as well as with new stars. One of such stars that comes to mind is Miley Cyrus. Often compared to Madonna, Cyrus consistently appropriates black culture in her music, style, and appearance. Despite Madonna being publicly trashed for her appropriation of black culture in her music and performance many years ago, Miley Cyrus has experienced the same backlash in the last two years.

While it seems like the shock of a white female star appropriating black culture should have been somewhat dulled over the last decade because of Madonna’s--and a few others’--participation in it, it still makes certain people as angry as ever--as can be seen by the reception of both Cyrus and Madonna in recent years. This is why Madonna’s performance at Coachella is still relevant to the same conversation Bell Hooks discussed in her chapter over 20 years ago.

Like the masses of angry or disgusted white women in America, Hooks also disagrees with Madonna’s appropriation of black culture. But her disagreement stems from a completely different argument. While many white women disagree with Madonna’s behavior with judgmental and racist tones, Hooks’ disagreement stands up for black culture. Hooks sees Madonna’s appropriation and commodification of black culture as threatening. To Hooks, Madonna is so envious of black culture that she threatens to destroy or take over it. She writes: “White folks who do not see black pain never really understand the complexity of black pleasure. And it is no wonder then that when they attempt to imitate the joy in living which they see as the “essence” of soul and blackness, their cultural productions may have an air of sham or falseness that may titillate and even move white audiences yet leave many black folks cold” (158). By this Hooks is saying that if Madonna relied on a black female audience, she would not be famous still. It is her white, female fans who supported Madonna to super stardom because they admired Madonna’s “connection” to black culture--her “radical chic.” Something so interesting, yet so hard to achieve for just anyone.

So, when Madonna took the stage with famous, African-American rapper Drake, it seemed as if she really had made it. There she was, dancing around him and on top of him while he sat on a chair center stage. Kissing him and commanding him, Madonna was in control. “Consuming her desires” or “flaunting her fascination” as Hooks might say if she had seen it. Now, it is not their different races that made the act at Coachella so alarming to so many. Rather, it is Madonna’s way of acting, her performance, her need to impress, that made it disturbing. It is moments like these that show what Hooks means by Madonna’s appropriation being threatening. In her Coachella performance, Madonna fumbles with her envy and desire of black culture. She does not empower, she endangers and embarrasses.

Weston-Smith Core Post #4: Dyer- Stars and Performance

There is often a lot of talk, interest, and criticism surrounding method acting in today's society. I found it very interesting to read Richard Dyer's definitions of different types of acting, including method acting, in Chapter 8: Stars and Performance. I think it is especially interesting to think about the modern day Marlon Brando's. Brando was famous for the way using the method effected him off screen, and despite that, there are still actors experiencing the same effects. What I also find intriguing is that a lot of the actors famous today for using the method are also some of the most critically acclaimed actors. Dyer writes that method acting "involved the performer feeling her/his way into a role from the inside, temporarily identifying with a character or, in a widespread distortion of the approach, actually becoming the character playing him/her" (Stars, p. 141).

One of the reasons there is so much talk surrounding the topic of method acting in society is because of the effect it has on a lot of famous actors who use the method. For instance, Shia Lebouf is constantly in and out of the news for his off screen antics and the trouble he gets into. Shia is confirmed to be a method actor, and many tabloids blame his inability to let go of a character off set as the reason he gets himself into such newsworthy situations. Another method actor is Daniel Day Lewis. When he accepted his Oscar for his lead role in "Lincoln," he thanked his wife for sticking by his side despite how hard it must have been to live with him when he was playing such a dark role. Lewis often talks about how lost he gets in a role.

Perhaps one of the most famous method actors, a part from Marlon Brando of course, was Heath Ledger. Most people, including his family, blame his method acting for his suicide. Soon after  wrapping as The Joker in the Batman trilogy--a particularly dark and messed up character--he killed himself. It was made public that he was on many anti-depressents at the time, and his family said Heath had an incredibly hard time shaking the twisted, self-hating mentality of The Joker. The conversation surrounding the effects of method acting reignited after his suicide.

Arabella Weston-Smith Core Post 3: Brown's article on Audrey Hepburn and Funny Face

I found William Brown's article "Audrey Hepburn: The Film Star as an Event" explained a lot of what we saw in "Funny Face" last week. Brown discussed how the fashion and film industries came together in the 1950s, and celebrated the "refeminization" of fashion through film (131). "Funny Face" focused a lot on celebrating the feminine, fashionable woman--centering on Hepburn's character's transformation into one.
Brown wrote about how the two industries supported each other by exploiting each other. This could not be more evident in "Funny Face." Beyond simply the story line being set around an ordinary girl flying to Paris to become the face of a designer's exclusive new season, the high fashion is supported through the modeling of every single outfit, multiple times. Fashion does not take a backseat role in the film--rather, high fashion is a lead role alongside Audrey Hepburn. The clothes and industry are just as important to the story and the character development as the main characters are.
Brown also writes about transatlantic tourism as a factor in the emergence of Audrey Hepburn as a star. As "Funny Face" is set in Paris, it could not support Brown's assertion more. "Funny Face" supports Hepburn's classification as the "continental" star (133). She is unique, fashionable, and independent--the "gamine" woman. Brown writes: "Furthermore, her independence is reinforced by the sense that none of Hepburn's characters never has to work. In a manner that ties Hepburn's screen persona to the expanding tourism industry of the 1950s...Hepburn is associated both with not working, and more positively, with holidays" (135). Ultimately, it seems that Hepburn's role in "Funny Face" perfectly captures the aspects that Brown believes contributed to Hepburn's emergence as a star. Consumerism, tourism, and the new definition of the ideal woman align perfectly in Hepburn's character in "Funny Face," Jo Stockton.

Weston Smith Core Post #2:“Recurrent images of women Stars as the leaders of fashion:” Richard Dyer

“Recurrent images of women Stars as the leaders of fashion:” Richard Dyer

I once googled “Valley Eyewear Sunglasses” after a friend told me the brand would suit my face. Naturally, the first link that popped up was for the company’s online store. However, the second link caught my eye. Instead of simply providing a link for an alternate retailer (those came later), it said “GIGI HADID: Valley Eyewear sunglasses in Peach.” Gigi Hadid is a young model/current “it girl” in today’s fashion and celebrity culture. I’m particularly fascinated by her rise to fame because she is not just another Kendall Jenner in mine and my friend’s eyes. She literally used to be the girl next door-- a friend and fellow horseback rider at a small show barn in Santa Barbara where we both grew up. Her fame seems to have exploded in the last two years. Certainly, many would accredit this to her mother’s place on The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, but I think that was just the catalyst. I personally think her fame has only continued to grow because as a successful model, she has become a fashion icon or trendsetter-- bridging the gap between the world of models and celebrities with peers like Cara Delevigne and Kendall Jenner.

When I clicked the link, I was taken to a tumblr entitled “Hadid’s Closet.” Originally dedicated solely to following Gigi Hadid’s style, the site now follows both her and her sister, Bella’s, style. This site blew me away. It has hundreds of thousands of hits. The creator herself had become a sort of celebrity amongst her followers--or if not a celebrity, at least someone they latched on to, desperate for her to answer questions on the life of the Hadid sisters. What is particularly relevant about my discovery in relation to Richard Dyer’s writing on “An anatomy of the lifestyle,” is that the girl who runs the tumblr posts pictures of Gigi in certain outfits, and posts links to buy the exact articles of clothing, as well as cheaper alternatives for more frugal fans. She also posts on beauty and workout routines that Gigi is known to follow, with links on where to buy the products and workout gear. This website provides an experience spot on with what Dyer describes: “Fashion and notions of beauty (charm/glamour/sex appeal, etc) were also to be shared by star and fan” (Dyer, 38). The tumblr also reposts Gigi’s photos. While she works as a model, she Instagrams at “work” on a beautiful tropical island. Or, she shares photos with her fans riding horses, working out, or dining lavishly. The existence of this tumblr, in conjunction with the lifestyle Gigi shares through social media, asserts and supports the idea that Gigi Hadid has not only become a fashion leader to fans, but also what Dyer would call an “Idol of Consumption”--an entertainer who's private life is also a life of consumption. Dyer writes: "They may spend more than the average person, but none the less they can be, on a smaller scale, imitated. Their fashions are to be copied, their fads followed, their sports pursued, their hobbies taken up" (39).

http://hadidscloset.tumblr.com/

De Cordova's "Emergence of the Star System" Application Today

I found the reading on how the “star” in film came about very interesting because even though the authors were discussing this transformation in early cinema, it made me think about the way we perceive stars today.

Richard de Cordova wrote that the emergence of the star in America correlated with the type of knowledge the public knew about an actor. De Cordova describes three transformations: the discourse on acting, the picture personality, and the star (17). The relationship between what he describes as the picture personality and the star is intriguing in regards to today’s perception of stars. De Cordova writes that the circulation of the name, intertextuality that restricted knowledge about the actor, and the actor’s previous film experience all create the “picture personality” (24-26). Even though these were steps of knowledge in the early 1900s that led to the emergence of the “star,” the same steps of knowledge can be applied to a budding star today. When an up and coming actor or actress is beginning to book many roles, they might appear in Teen Vogue or Nylon magazines on a “talent to watch” type article. With their many roles, even if only supporting ones, people will start to recognize their face. This, paired with the actors appearing in magazines or on websites leads to name circulation. Then, people may start to associate them with certain roles, and finally, the public will determine the actor’s level of stardom based on their professional experience.

Richard de Cordova writes that the last transformation, into the “star,” occurs when their private life emerges and can be compared to their professional life. Jennifer Lawrence is a good example of de Cordova’s definition of the emergence of the star in America. Lawrence was in a few movies that peaked interest in her and encouraged distant familiarity with her face before her Oscar-nominated performance in Winter’s Bone. After her appearance at the Academy Awards for Winter’s Bone, Jennifer Lawrence’s name was officially in circulation and people were comparing her previous film experience--officially making her a picture personality. When she booked the leading role in the franchise of The Hunger Games, Lawrence emerged as a star. Fans obsess over her private life, especially seen with her leaked nude photos and relationships, and they desperately attempt to understand her as a person separate from the version of her they love on screen. Even though de Cordova was describing the emergence of the star in early cinema, I think it is clear that his stages of emergence still hold true in star culture.