Choose Your Own Adventure: Aphra Behn Sunday, Mar 18 2007 

academia and research thisgaudygildedstage 7:46 pm

I haven’t had time to post in a week, because I’ve been working on my paper for the American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies, which meets in Atlanta later this next week. My paper is on Thursday morning, and I’ve been working all week to finish it. I finally finished a complete draft of it, so I can sit back and let it (and my brain) rest for a day before giving it one last once over.

Aphra BehnThe paper is on Aphra Behn’s 1681 comedy The False Count. My interest in the play lies in its depiction of a group of men who disguise themselves as Turks and “capture” an Englishman, his wife, and his daughter. I’m trying to figure out how this play’s representation of “Turks” reflects Behn’s participation in partisan debates on the exclusion crisis.

This is a portrait of Behn. I’ve never really worked on her before, but I have taught two classes on her. During my first year at OU I taught a senior seminar on Behn. It was a fun class, even if some of Behn’s works weren’t all that great. It always amazes me how some works are anthologized while others — better ones — aren’t. In general, the scholars who were the first to champion Behn were also most interested in her plays that feature prostitutes and women who disguise themselves as prostitutes. They analyzed these characters as early, proto-feminist figures. So, some of the plays that are available in print aren’t, in my opinion, her best ones. The False Count is a good example. It’s not anthologized, but it’s a great play. (I also taught a junior composition course on her and her work.)

The Restoration period was once taught as the ‘Age of Dryden;’ we could easily rename it the ‘Age of Behn.’ It’s been fun researching her play and rediscovering some of the historical context that informs her depiction of “Turks.” It reminds me that one of the things I really enjoy about writing is the discovery process. As you read one scholar, s/he introduces you to a new concept or quote or fact; you then follow up on that, which often leads to another new concept or quote or fact. It’s like a game or a choose-your-own-adventure book.

Being on leave for the past two quarters has been extremely helpful to my research. I haven’t completed anything yet, but I’ve gotten some really good reading and thinking done. And it’s put me in a position to finish an article or two (or maybe three) by the end of the year.

I’m looking forward to the ASECS conference. I’m excited to learn some new things and make some new discoveries. If research is a choose-your-own-adventure, I’m ready to start reading a new one!

 

Daytripping to Columbus Sunday, Mar 11 2007 

museums and travel thisgaudygildedstage 6:50 pm

Yesterday, PJ, Matthew, Liz, Ayesha, and I drove over to Columbus to visit the Wexner Center for the Arts on the Ohio State University Campus.

Glenn LigonOur main reason for going was to see the Glenn Ligon exhibit, entitled “Glenn Ligon–Some Changes.”Glenn Ligon is a queer artist who “creates resonant, multilayered works that filter other people’s texts, images, jokes, and voices,” as the exhibit’s brochure relates. Or, as book of the exhibit explains, “Glenn Ligon is at the forefront of a generation of artists who came to prominence in the late 1980s on the strength of conceptually based paintings and phototext work whose subjects investigate the social, linguistic, and political constructions of race, gender, and sexuality” (7). This is a picture of Ligon.

The exhibit is small but fascinating. One of the works that stood out to me was End of Year Reports, a series of “thoughtful and brutally honest critiques of Ligon at age 12 and 13,” to quote the brochure. Here’s a picture that shows how the work looks hanging in the museum. It’s a collection of report cards in which his teachers comment about such issues as his refusal “to talk about his own recognition of his own sexual urges.” This refusal is interpreted as a kind of immaturity, and the teacher concludes that he will become more comfortable with his body and sexual desires within the next year, at which point he’ll interact with the other students — especially the girls — on a more social level. (We, of course, know that he in fact turns out gay instead, making the reports even more interesting.) What kind of teachers are these that they comment on his sexuality so directly? At first, PJ thought that these must be Ligon’s imagined recreations of his teachers’ thoughts, but the brochure indicates that they are his genuine report cards. They’re really crazy to read. It really makes me wonder what I’d say about my students’ sexual development (and so glad that I don’t ever have to)!

One work, Annotations, is online. If you launch it, you get an online version of a family-style photo album. If you click on the individual images, you get Ligon’s annotations, some of which are definitely adult-oriented. I find his insertion of his own desires into the family album to be a fascinating project. It’s a great idea; maybe more of us gay people should do projects like this one. His Runaways series is also great: he uses the historically accurate format of escaped slave notices to describe himself, using his friends’ descriptions of him. (As I said above, a lot of his work is about reprocessing other people’s words about him.)

The Wexner is also housing an exhibit of works by Sadie Benning, called Suspended Animation, right now. Benning is another queer artist. I first heard of her a couple of years ago when a colleague recommended that we watch her videos. As a teenager, Benning made a series of videos using a Fisher Price camera. These short movies detail, in part, her coming to terms with her sexuality. I highly recommend them, especially her short film about Rubyfruit Jungle.

This exhibit is mostly of her recent paintings but also includes Benning’s 29-minute animated film, titled Play Pause. I didn’t watch it all, but the part I saw was fascinating. I wish I had stayed to see it all. It’s kind of simplistically drawn (or so it seems at first) and combines music, dual screens, and a non-narrative form to follow a group of characters around in bars, at home, at the airport, etc. We see various aspects of these characters’ lives, including their sex lives. As I’ve subsequently read online, this movie is a response to 911 and the loneliness she feels is intrinsic to her sexuality. Like I said, I really wish I had stayed and watched the whole thing. I did buy the book that accompanied the exhibit, so at least I’ll get to learn more about it.

(more…)

 

The Field Museum Wednesday, Mar 7 2007 

museums thisgaudygildedstage 7:46 pm

While I was in Chicago two weeks ago, I had hoped to make it over to the Art Institute, which is only about two blocks from the hotel I stayed at while I was at the conference. The first morning I was there, I walked over to the Institute, but I got there about a half hour before it opened. So, I thought that I would walk around a bit and then come back.

I walked down Michigan Avenue and ended up at the Field Museum. I didn’t know what it was, but it had the word “museum” in the title, so I figured I go in for a little while and then walk back to the Art Institute. Three hours later, I left the museum and went in search of lunch. A friend of mine was supposed to arrive a little while after that, so I went back to the hotel and waited for him. I never made it to the Art Institute, but I loved the Field Museum.

The Field Museum, it turns out, is a natural history museum. PJ and I don’t often go to natural history museums — if we’re only in a particular city for a few days, we tend to try to fit in as much art as possible instead. The Field Museum is well worth a visit.

Sue at the Field MuseumThe museum’s main draw is Sue, the world’s largest, most complete, and most famous Tyrannosaurus Rex. She’s practically right inside the door. Her skull is too heavy for the exhibit, so it’s displayed separately; the skull attached to the skeleton is a replica. There’s also a special Sue gift shop where you can buy Sue souvenirs.

A large portion of the museum is dedicated to taxidermied birds, mammals, and reptiles. The birds section, in particular, was both fascinating and totally macabre. On the one hand, I can see how useful it is to have the specimens in the museum. While I was there, for example, a woman was painstakingly drawing one of the birds. On the other hand, it feels like a weird kind of funeral home for dead birds — rows upon rows of carcasses. Some of the birds are now extinct; the bodies of these birds especially evoked the dual sense of benefit and grotesqueness.

(more…)

 

A Seahorse Year: A Review Tuesday, Mar 6 2007 

books thisgaudygildedstage 10:04 pm

This past weekend I led our GLBT book club in a discussion of Stacey D’Erasmo’s A Seahorse Year. I hadn’t read the book before; after reading it, I looked forward to hearing what the undergraduates had to say about it.

A Seahorse Yearis about what happens to a non-traditional family when their 16-year-old son is diagnosed with schizophrenia. The son, Christopher, disappears one day. He turns up later, but unfortunately the family’s nightmare is just beginning.

The narrative is told from individual characters’ points of view. As a result, we get inside their heads, but only for brief moments. Otherwise, the narrative is relatively fractured. Our understanding of what’s happening, why it’s happening, and what the consequences are is only partial. In many ways, it’s a fairly realist, because it’s a (mildly) postmodern narrative.

What I really like about this book is its overall point of view. I’m not quite the same age as the parents, but I could really identify with their basic existence. In a sense, they each — the two lesbian moms, Nan and Marina, and the biological father, Hal, who inseminated Nan using a syringe — wake up one day and wonder how they got where they are: How did they end up in the relationships they’re in? Do they want to stay in them? What do they want in life?

I think there are days when one wakes up — either literally or figuratively — and is suddenly confronted by one’s life choices. It doesn’t mean that you don’t love your partner (or whoever) but it does mean that you suddenly see yourself in a different way. You see that you’re no longer the person you were when you were 22 and that so much of your life is over. You begin to ask whether this is the life you had intended, if this is really what you want. A Seahorse Year really captures that sense of being middle aged, for lack of any better descriptor.

So, in sum, I really liked the book’s realistic portrayal of how these people react to their lives and the difficulties of suddenly discovering that your son is seriously disturbed. (more…)

 

The Libertine: A Review Friday, Mar 2 2007 

earl of Rochester and movies thisgaudygildedstage 10:49 pm

The film version of Stephen Jeffreys’s The Libertine was, for me, perhaps the most anticipated movie ever. (The last Star Wars movie might also be in competition for that title.) I saw it as soon as it came to Athens. I watched it again on DVD tonight — I’ve actually been postponing watching it again for as long as I could. My memory of the film wasn’t very good, and I wanted to wait until I could come at it fresh again.

Here’s the trailer:

First let me say that I love Stephen Jeffreys’s original play. It captures a lot of the spirit of the Restoration even if it plays around with the historical facts a bit. Even though Jeffreys adapts his own play for the screen, the script really goes awry in the translation. On the whole, I think the movie’s direction, cinematography, set design, makeup, acting, etc. all work, but the script just simply sucks. It sucks bad. Really, really bad.

Johnny Depp plays John Wilmot, earl of Rochester. In many ways, this is inspired casting. Or at least it would have been a decade ago. By 2004, Depp is a little long in the tooth to play Rochester, who died at the age of 33. But Depp nevertheless does an excellent job in the part.

My main criticism of the movie’s depiction of Rochester is that its Rochester just isn’t sexy. We never get a sense of why people like him. When Sir George Etherege (played by Tom Hollander), who has written a play (The Man of Mode) whose central character is based on Rochester, tells the earl early in the film, “You’re an endearing sort of chap,” we should see that this is true. Unfortunately, we never do.

The movie begins with a monologue spoken by Rochester:

Allow me to be frank at the commencement: you will not like me. No, I say you will not. The gentlemen will be envious and the ladies will be repelled. You will not like me now and you will like me a good deal less as we go on. Oh yes, I shall do things you will like. You will say “That was a noble impulse in him” or “He played a brave part there,” but DO NOT WARM TO ME, it will not serve. When I become a BIT OF A CHARMER that is your danger sign for it prefaces the change into THE FULL REPTILE a few seconds later. What I require is not your affection but your attention. I must not be ignored or you will find me as troublesome a package of humanity as ever pissed into the Thames. Now. Ladies. An announcement. (He looks around.) I am up for it. All the time. That’s not a boast. Or an opinion. It is bone hard medical fact. I put it around, d’y know? And you will watch me putting it around and sigh for it. Don’t. It is a deal of trouble for you and you are better off watching and drawing your own conclusions from a distance than you would be if I got my tarse pointing up your petticoats. Gentlemen. (He looks around.) Do not despair, I am up for that as well. When the mood is on me. And the same warning applies. Now, gents: if there be vizards in the house, jades, harlots (as how could there not be) leave them be for a moment. Still your cheesy erections till I have had my say. But later when you shag–and later you will shag, I shall expect it of you and I will know if you have let me down–I wish you to shag with my homuncular image rattling in your gonads. Feel how it was for me, how it is for me and ponder. “Was that shudder the same shudder he sensed? Did he know something more profound? Or is there some wall of wretchedness that we all batter with our heads at that shining, livelong moment.” That is it. That is my prologue, nothing in rhyme, certainly no protestations of modesty, you were not expecting that I trust. … I am John Wilmot, Second Earl of Rochester and I do not want you to like me.

The film presents this prologue as a serious speech, which I think is a real mistake. It should be light and fluffy, like the prologues of Restoration comedies. We should be in danger of liking Rochester from this first moment we see him. We should laugh when he tells us about “putting it around.” We shouldn’t be creeped out. There has to be some possibility that we will have his homuncular image rattling in our gonads, but this film never gives us that possibility.

(more…)

 

GEMCS: A Review Wednesday, Feb 28 2007 

academia and travel thisgaudygildedstage 9:18 am

I arrived home from Chicago late Sunday night. My flight had been canceled and I had to fly standby in order to get a flight. I really don’t deal well with travel disruptions, so it was a very stressful and tiring day. I still feel fairly exhausted!

I was in Chicago for the conference of the Group for Early Modern Cultural Studies. One of the good things about GEMCS has always been its friendliness to beginning scholars and to scholarship on a wide range of issues — it’s a conference at which graduate students can rub elbows with major scholars and at which papers on gender and queer issues are relatively common. But it also has some inherent weaknesses, the primary one being that papers are short — no more than 15 minutes long. Once you’re an established scholar and want to give a 20- to 30-minute paper on your topic, 15 minutes is extremely difficult to pull off.

The conference went well. I actually attended about 5 sessions — which I think might be a record for me. Usually, I end up being a tourist, hanging out with friends, and spending as much time as possible drunk. So, this past weekend was definitely an improvement in that regard.

I can’t say that I heard very many papers that really excited me (in the sense of wanting to rush out and find out more about the topic). The most interesting paper I heard was from a friend and mentor of mine, Misty. She read a paper on the Methodist evangelist George Whitefield. Her paper was part of a panel on “Queer Cultural Encodings,” and she talked mostly about a confessional autobiography Whitefield wrote. This autobiography certainly made him sound rather queer. After hearing it, I do want to read more about Whitefield and this confessional text.

I also really enjoyed attending my friend Nicole’s panel, a round table discussion on “Literary History, Cultural Studies, and Multidisciplinarity.” The five panelists were interested in discussing questions of interdisciplinary work, New historicism and its alternatives, and the task of doing literary history. They all raised very interesting questions and issues. Later that evening, my friend James and I went to dinner with Nicole and three of the other panelists from her session. I really like them! We had a great time eating, drinking, and chatting. I hope I get the chance to hang out with them again.

My panel had the unfortunate situation of being scheduled on Sunday morning. Not surprisingly, we had only three audience members (two of which were my friends). Nevertheless, I was glad to give my paper. I really think I’m on to something with it — even though the process of writing the paper convinced me that I had previously been reading the play incorrectly. I’m hoping to keep working on it and maybe turn it into an article. I also thought the three papers in my session worked well together thematically.

And finally, while attending a session I looked over and saw one of my former students in the audience. I was surprised to say the least. Sara had been one of our honors students here at OU when I first got here. She’s definitely one of the smartest students I’ve ever taught. I was glad to see her and get a chance to chat a bit. She’s now a Renaissance PhD student at the University of Illinois.

Sometime in the next couple of days, I’ll write more about my visit to Chicago and the socializing I did there. On the whole, I’d say the conference went well. I was disappointed in when my paper was scheduled. But I had fun and just writing the paper was helpful for my larger project. So, on the whole, a good (but not great) conference.

 

Favorite Movies of 2006 Sunday, Feb 25 2007 

movies thisgaudygildedstage 11:42 am

This is the last of my “favorite of” posts. In honor of the Oscars, I’ve saved my favorite movies of 2006 for today.

I want to start by noting that it’s relatively difficult to see the best movies of the year in Athens. We often get movies well after they’ve shown everywhere else. Many “art films” only play here for a week. And sometimes we don’t get them at all. We still haven’t gotten Letters from Iwo Jima, for example. That’s one of two movies I have yet to see — the other being The Departed — that might make it onto my favorites list once I see them. So, my current list is subject to change. I have a top film of the year and then 4 other favorites in no particular order.

My favorite movie of the year was John Cameron Mitchell’s Shortbus. My original post about the movie is here. I really loved this film. It’s innovative, socially relevant, and totally engrossing. Mitchell definitely lives up to the promise of Hedwig and the Angry Inch.

I also loved Infamous, the second movie in as many years about Truman Capote and the writing of In Cold Blood. I posted about it here. I really liked Capote and thought that it should have won best picture in 2005, but Infamous is an even better film. Toby Jones is wonderful!

The next film in my top 5 was The History Boys. I posted about it here. It’s an excellent look at the English school system in the 1980s, and all of the actors are great. I wish I had seen them in the original London production.

Quinceanera is also on my list. I wrote about it here. I really like its exploration of class and its stylistic realism. It’s probably the simplest of the films on my list — simple in terms of plot — but it makes an important statement about class, ethnicity, and sexuality in L.A.

And finally, I loved The Last King of Scotland. I originally reviewed it here. I wish James McAvoy had gotten more credit for his performance in this film. He and Forrest Whitaker are both excellent.

So, what do I think these movies say about my tastes? I like political films — political in the sense of being about relationships of power in social relationships. Most of the films I like are also gay-themed. And almost all of them feature attractive men! Maybe I’ll get a chance to see Letters from Iwo Jima while I’m in Chicago.

 

Favorite Music of 2006 Saturday, Feb 24 2007 

music thisgaudygildedstage 7:06 pm

I should admit up front that I often have rather cheesy tastes when it comes to music. I also tend to like very mainstream music. I will forever believe, for example, that Tina Turner is a goddess. So, I’m a little hesitant to make public what songs I most liked in 2006. But I’ve started this little series, so I guess I might as well finish it!

The songs I most liked from 2006 are (in no particular order after the first one):

“The River Is Wild” by The Killers (the “big sound,” for lack of a better phrase, of The Killers at their best)

Crazy” by Gnarls Barkley (I first heard this song when GB performed on the MTV Movie awards in Star Wars costumes — what more could you want in a group!? Plus, it’s got such a great, smooth base line)

“Save Me from Myself” by Christina Aguilera (I like this track’s quite sincerity — not a lot of the vocal tricks CA can indulge in. And I like its sentiment. It sums up how I feel about PJ in some ways, though I understand that I’m not, in fact, a woman!)

“On the Radio” by Regina Specktor (I have no idea what this song means, but it seems true and I love it anyway. This is how it works …)

“Love You I Do” from the Dreamgirls soundtrack (A simple love song that’s catchy and has Jennifer Hudson — I love her, I do)

“When You Were Young” by The Killers (I love the video for this song. The song is also really good, and the pounding guitars and strings near the ending crescendo is great)

“Everybody Knows” by The Dixie Chicks (I think this song best sums up the DC’s experiences in the past few years while remaining universal, more or less, and, as I told PJ the other day, I’ve yet to hear a song entitled “Everybody Knows” that I didn’t like!)

“When Doves Cry” by The Be Good Tanyas (great, great cover of Prince’s iconic song — they really “make it their own,” to quote from American Idol)

My favorite album from the year was The Killers‘ Sam’s Town. I like Brandon Flowers in his scruffy western wear. Plus he’s a talented singer/musician/writer. It’s a top notch pop album, in my opinion.

Just for the record: my favorite album of all time — indeed the only album that I think it completely, 100% perfect is Tracy Chapman‘s debut album, Tracy Chapman. I’ve been listening to it for almost 20 years now and I still think it’s perfect — great to hear, socially aware, and politically radical. I love it. I remember the day I bought it (on cassette tape, lol!). When I heard Sharon Olds read a couple of years ago, the first thing I thought was, “I didn’t know poetry could do that.” When I first listened to Tracy Chapman on my walkman while sitting on my parent’s front porch, I had much the same reaction: “I didn’t know music could do that.” It sums up — or maybe it shaped — my worldview. I just wish the world would have changed more in the past twenty years than it has.

I’ve just started listening to two new albums: Norah Jones‘ Not Too Late and Lucinda Williams‘ West — maybe I’ll post about them when I get back from Chicago.

 

Favorite Books of 2006 Friday, Feb 23 2007 

books thisgaudygildedstage 5:03 pm

Although PJ insists that I didn’t read much last year, I did in fact read quite a few books, certainly enough to have a top 5 list. (But I’m only including books that were actually published in 2006 on the list.)

  1. Fun Home: By far, the best book I read last year was Alison Bechdel’s memoir about her relationship with her father. I’ve already blogged about it, so I’ll just refer here to my previous post. But again, it’s a great, great book.
  2. Hard: The best gay novel I read last year was Wayne Hoffman’s Hard. My previous post about it is here.
  3. The Last Time I Saw You: Rebecca Brown’s collection of short stories is amazing. I’ve decided that I won’t be teaching it next quarter in my Lesbian & Gay Lit course because I don’t think it fits with the other texts we’ll be reading, but I might teach it in my Women & Writing class over the summer. I’ve written about this book here.
  4. History Matters: Patriarchy and the Challenge of Feminism: This book by historian Judith Bennett is the best academic book I read in 2006. (Actually, I’m still reading it, but it came out last year so I’m counting it here.) It’s a study of feminism, women’s history, and the discipline of historical studies. It’s very well written (not “academic” at all — in a good way) and I really like her perspective on the issues of patriarchy, feminism, and history. I’m also thinking about this book for my Women & Writing class this summer. Her chapter on patriarchy is simply foundational for any class that deals with “the patriarchy” as a topic. I highly recommend it.
  5. I Am Not Myself These Days: A Memoir: The best traditional-form memoir that I read last year is John Kilmer-Purcell’s book about his days as a boozing drag queen with a hooker drug addicted boyfriend. It’s a real page turner, to say the least. In the post-James Frey world, I guess we’re all sceptical of outlandish memoirs, but even if this book were all a fiction it would still be a great read. It reminds me quite a bit of Augusten Burroughs’ memoirs — maybe gay men are getting into a rut when it comes to memoir as a genre, or maybe this means that there’s a market for these kinds of books and that’s why they’re getting published. Regardless, I Am Not Myself These Days is an entertaining read.

I guess the most disappointing book I read last year was Leslie Feinberg’s Drag King Dreams. Well, I haven’t actually finished it yet. And I really don’t think it’s Feinberg’s fault that I’m not enjoying it — how many people write two masterpieces in one lifetime? Stone Butch Blues is one of the most amazing books ever written; it’s undoubtedly impossible to live up to that standard every time Feinberg writes a book.

I guess I need to get to a book store soon to start on 2007’s books! Any recommendations?

 

Favorite Plays of 2006 Thursday, Feb 22 2007 

theater thisgaudygildedstage 2:37 pm

Since Sunday is Oscar night, I thought I would include a series of posts this week about my favorite movies, music, books, and plays of 2006.

I’ll start with plays. Considering that I live in the middle of a national forest, I saw a surprising number of plays in 2006, including ones in here in Athens and in London, Oxford, and New York. Here are my top five plays of the year:

  1. Billy Elliott the Musical: PJ, my sister, and I saw it in London in July. As the title suggests, it is a musical version of the film Billy Elliott. I love the movie, so I was a bit wary of seeing the play. It was great. Elton John’s music was excellent — I especially like the number “Merry Christmas, Maggie Thatcher.” The acting was also wonderful — the actor playing Billy Elliott was fantastic! And the writer did a great job of adapting the film’s plot to the stage; I thought they did an especially good job with the grandmother. She has a great song in the first act that helps inspire Billy to dance. It’s definitely worth seeing when it comes to America.
  2. The Little Dog Laughed: Since I’ve already blogged about this play, I’ll just refer to my earlier comments. Unfortunately, this play is closing soon (if not already), but it’s really great. Apparently, it had trouble finding an audience, which is too bad. Julie White is amazing!
  3. The Seagull: We saw this in London this summer too. It starred Juliet Stephenson. She was great and the production was excellent. I was especially impressed by the set design. It was amazing, but it was also obviously difficult to arrange between scenes — the audience often had to wait a few minutes for them to rearrange everything, which wasn’t always good for the theatrical flow. But overall the production was very good.
  4. A Midsummer Night’s Dream: I hate this play, but the production we saw in the park in London this summer really made me forget that fact. I think that warrants a shout out! I especially liked that this production imagined the fairies as goth-punk kids. It really worked.
  5. Man of La Mancha: I’ve also written about this already, so I’ll refer to my previous comments again. Even though it’s a traveling company, I liked what they did. Besides, if you live in a national forest, you can’t be too picky about the theater that comes to town!

Hopefully, 2007 will be as theatrically successful as 2006 was. Whether it is or not, I’m sure I’ll write about it eventually! (P.S. The worst production I saw this year was an outdoor production of The Merchant of Venice in Oxford. It was laughably terrible!)

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »