Hottie of the Month Wednesday, Feb 21 2007 

Restoration and 18thC Sex thisgaudygildedstage 7:00 am

February’s Hottie of the Month is … William Congreve, pictured here. Congreve is one of the most famous of the late seventeenth-century dramatists (others include Aphra Behn, William Wycherley, Sir George Etherege, Thomas Otway, and Sir John Vanbrugh).

Congreve lived from 1670 to 1729 and is most famous for writing The Way of the World, perhaps the most anthologized play of the late seventeenth century — I refuse to call him a Restoration playwright, since “the Restoration” as a period really should end in 1689 with the ascent of William and Mary. (Maybe I should post about that sometime — titillating, don’t ya think?!)

Actually, I don’t particularly like William Congreve all that much. This is at least partly a response to his play being so anthologized. If students are going to read only one Restoration comedy, I think it should be The Man of Mode, The Country Wife, or The Rover. These are actual Restoration comedies. Congreve really represents something else — the beginning of the eighteenth century and it’s rejection of what it perceived to be Restoration (im)morality.

But Willy’s kind of cute in this portrait — I love his wig and his chubby cheeks. If he had been born about a decade earlier, I could imagine him as Rochester’s catamite.

And The Way of the World is a great play — except for the characters’ names: Mirabell and Millamant as our leading man and lady? Whatever. (In case it isn’t obvious, the “hottie of the month” feature is very tongue-in-cheek!) Check back in a month to see who’s March’s hottie!

 

Off to Chicago Tuesday, Feb 20 2007 

travel thisgaudygildedstage 2:37 pm

I leave tomorrow to attend the conference of the Group for Early Modern Cultural Studies in Chicago. Hopefully, the weather will be fine and I’ll get a chance to see some sights (as well as hear some good papers!). I’m meeting friends at the conference, so I know that I’ll have fun!

In the mean time, if I get a chance before I leave, I plan on pre-posting some blogs. I’m excited to play with this feature of wordpress. Hopefully, I get some time to do it — I’d really like to catch up on blogging before I start teaching again next month.

If nothing appears on the blog between now and Sunday, you’ll know that I either ran out of time or didn’t pre-post correctly. (Do I hear any bets on which is most likely?!)

Au revoir!

 

I’m so far behind Sunday, Feb 18 2007 

academia and movies thisgaudygildedstage 8:05 pm

I haven’t been able to blog all week, despite the fact that I’ve had several posts I’d like to have written. I spent the first part of the week participating in another seven-year review, this time for the School of Telecommunications. Like the Math review, it’s really interesting to meet people from other departments and see how they do some parts of our jobs differently than my department does. All of the people in T-Comm seem really cool.

Richard CumberlandAfter that, I had to start writing my paper for a conference I’m attending this coming week. I’ll be going to the Group for Early Modern Cultural Studies in Chicago. It really sucks that my panel isn’t until Sunday. I’m leaving on Wednesday, though, so I can do a little research at the Newberry Library and see some of the sights while I’m in Chicago. I’m now almost finished writing my paper, which is on Richard Cumberland’s The Jew, a 1794 sentimental comedy. (This is Cumberland’s portrait on the left.) I’ve really enjoyed working on it. This is one of two texts that got me interested in my current book project in the first place, so it’s fun to return to the play and write about it finally.

On Friday, I attended a friend’s colloquium, and several of us went out afterwards. Unfortunately, I was also getting sick, so I didn’t really feel like taking part in too much of the conversation at either event. But the colloquium went well and having drinks and dinner afterwards was a lot of fun. The best part was when, in response to my bringing up John Cameron Mitchell’s Shortbus, two of our friends started talking about the words “fellatio” and “cunnilingus.” This past weekend was parents’ weekend here at OU, and two parents were having dinner with their son at a table nearby. Let’s just say that they didn’t appreciate hearing about fellatio over dinner, but no one at our table besides PJ and I seemed to notice. As one friend kept saying “fellatio” over and over again, the mother behind us kept trying to get our attention by loudly saying, “We’re eating … we’re eating dinner here … Some of us are trying to eat dinner …..” It was hilarious! We rteally thought that our tallest friend was about to get accosted by an angry mother.

But all that “fun” has kept me from blogging. Last weekend, PJ and I saw Pan’s Labyrinth, which was really good — not great, in my opinion, but really good. It’s about a little girl who “escapes into an eerie but captivating fantasy world” in 1944 fascist Spain. It’s not one of my favorite films of the year, but it’s definitely worth seeing. Here’s the trailer:

Hopefully, I’ll get the chance to catch up on a couple of other posts before I leave on Wednesday.

 

Quinceañera: A Review Friday, Feb 9 2007 

movies thisgaudygildedstage 5:10 pm

Tonight PJ and I watched Quinceanera on DVD. It’s a great film written and directed by Richard Glatzer and Wash Westmorland. It’s definitely one of the best independent gay films we’ve seen recently.

The movie is about two cousins, Magdalena and Carlos. Magdalena, played by Emily Rios, is nearly her 15th birthday, on which she is supposed to have a sweet-fifteen party. A few months before the big celebration, Magdalena finds out that she is pregnant, despite her protestations that she and her boyfriend have never gone all the way. Her preacher father kicks her out of the house, and she moves in with her uncle. Already living with the uncle is Carlos, who was also thrown out of his family’s home when they discovered his homosexuality (they found one of the websites he frequented on the family’s computer).

The uncle, played by Chalo González, lives in a small house,  on a property that has recently been purchased by a gay couple. His new landlords immediately take an interest in Carlos, played by Jesse Garcia, and Carlos immediately takes an interest in them. Unfortunately, Carlos’s initiation into the world of middle-class gaydom is far from smooth. Indeed, both Carlos and Magdalena are in for several disappointments over the course of the movie, but the realities of their lives ends up being honest and beautiful rather than simply or merely sad.

One of the things I like about the movie is its hard look at social conditions for these poor hispanic families. Set in Echo Park in Los Angeles, the film looks at the downside to gentrification: in order for the gays to move into the neighborhood, the previous residents have to be displaced. Many of these residents, like the uncle, quickly find that they can no longer afford to rent in the area, and others, seeing the rising worth of their homes, find that they cannot pass up the opportunity to sell to the relatively wealthy (and usually white) gays. While the movie explores these tensions, I also like that it doesn’t become a gay-bashing movie, which I could easily imagine it being.

I also like the movie’s complex depiction of gay people. Carlos is initially shown as a thief and troublemaker, but we quickly see that this is in part due to his situation as a poorly educated and nearly homeless young adult with few prospects. His style is very much that of his neighborhood rather than of the middle-class gays who move in next door. And he navigates a gay masculinity that is part street tough machismo and part sensitive lover. Furthermore, the middle class gays are somewhat predatory and even villainous. The two men initiate Carlos into their lives via a threesome, but their interest in him is almost solely sex.

(more…)

 

Romeo & Juliet Thursday, Feb 8 2007 

theater thisgaudygildedstage 4:13 pm

Tonight we saw The Aquila Theatre Company‘s production of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. Overall, I liked it. It was generally well staged and acted — a little gimmicky, but a good production overall.

Let’s start with the gimmick: the production begins with the actors’ asking audience members to draw the parts out of little bags and thus assigning each actor his or her part. This process, says the program, creates “newfound excitement and drama” each night, since one of the guys could be assigned the part of Juliet and one of the women could be Romeo. That didn’t happen tonight, much to the dismay of the students sitting behind us. We has a 50-year-old Romeo and a female Juliet.

PJ is extremely skeptical that this “game of chance” is on the up and up. He thinks it’s rigged, and I have to admit that I agree, especially since each actor has his or her own bag that s/he carries out to the audience — why not just have one bag if all of the parts are equally assignable? It just feels too much like a magician’s trick. And it’s gimmicky.

The leading actors in this production were the ones playing Juliet (Basienka Blake on our night) and the actor playing Mercutio, the nurse, and Paris (Andrew Schwartz), both of whom were excellent. The actor playing Romeo was also good. The other three actors played lesser roles, though one of them was particularly bad in parts.

The production was obviously staged to be performed in a smalled theater-in-the-round. The set design consisted largely of a stage on the stage. Costumes were minimal. When actors weren’t “onstage,” they usually sat to the side of the onstage stage and were thus visible to the audience. This had the effect of foregrounding the theatricality of the performance, which is something I almost always like. I just about always delight in this kind of thing, when productions force the audience to remember that this is theater, not reality.

On the whole, this was a good production. I enjoyed most of it — the three exceptions being one particular actor’s amateurish performance, the production’s attempt to breeze through the play too rapidly, and its efforts to make the play more comic. This latter attempt usually worked, but when it didn’t (like when the “bad” actor laughed in an overly evil way that sounded cartoonish) it really didn’t.

 

What I’m Watching: Rome Monday, Feb 5 2007 

television thisgaudygildedstage 11:05 pm

In the past year or so, I’ve cut back on the number of TV shows I watch. I seem to only have a few that I keep up with regularly: American Idol, The Office, and whatever Bravo reality show is on Wednesday nights (though none are as good as Project Runway). But my favorite show right now is HBO’s Rome.

I love its use of history and politics as a set for its drama, intrigue, and occasional humor. And it doesn’t hurt that it’s not afraid of a little male nudity from time to time! Last season ended with the death of Caesar. (I’m a little disappointed that the scene didn’t steal Shakespeare’s famous line, “Et tu Brute.”) I love how self-centered and cruel Atia can be (this week’s scene of her supervising the torture of a servant is typically delicious).

The friendship between Pullo and Vorenus is the heart of the show. I’ve liked Kevin McKidd since I saw him in Topsy Turvy, one of my favorite movies. McKidd is also great in Bedrooms and Hallways, in which he plays a gay man who joins a men’s group and falls in love with the seemingly straight Brendan, played by James Purefoy, who happens to play Marc Antony in Rome — clearly the English acting pool is a small one.

My favorite character has been Brutus, played by Tobias Menzies. He’s the conscience of Rome’s conniving elite. I think he’s cute and I love his accent, but he’s also a very good actor. A lesser performer would quickly make Brutus seem morose and weak. Menzies embodies his conflicted sense of honor and the welfare of the republic, which are often mutually exclusive in this series. I hope to see him in other productions.

I’ve also enjoyed Octavius, who until this week was played by Max Pirkis. Pirkis has been great in this role; he has the perfect blend of patrician arrogance and childish lack of experience. Starting this past week, Octavius is now an adult and is played by Simon Woods, who played Mr. Bingley in Pride and Prejudice last year. Here he is in Rome:

Not only is Woods in this series now, but so is Alex Wyndham from The Line of Beauty. Again, the British pool is a small one. Hopefully, Octavius gets a little action soon — Woods is adorably cute, though I prefer him with his faux-hawk from Pride and Prejudice rather than with his Caesar cut here!

Unfortunately, this season is the last one of Rome, or so I’ve read. Apparently, it’s too expensive to produce. I really wish it would go on and on. I really enjoy the show. I don’t know what I’ll start watching once it goes off — where else can I see handsome British actors, historical intrigue, and frequent male nudity all at once? And when is someone going to produce a series that traces the politics, sexual hijinks, and social activities of the Restoration/late seventeenth century? Wouldn’t we all like to see Behn, Rochester, Charles II, etc. on our TV screens? Maybe Alex Wyndham could play Rochester and Simon Woods could be Etherege. It could be Rochester getting it on with his servants (instead of Atia’s bald servant buggering the other slaves).

Until someone creates that show, I’ll enjoy my new favorite Atia quote:

“It would serve you right to be gelded. And I would, you know, if eunuchs weren’t so unfashionable. Next time, if you want a boy, pick one up at the market! Everyone knows boys you pick up on the street aren’t to be trusted.”

 

Discourse Communities & Department Strife Sunday, Feb 4 2007 

academia thisgaudygildedstage 2:07 pm

According to Wikipedia, the term discourse community

was first used by sociolinguist Martin Nystrand in 1982, and further developed by American linguist John Swales. Writing about the acquisition of academic writing styles of those who are learning English as an additional language, Swales presents six defining characteristics:

A discourse community:
  1. has a broadly agreed set of common public goals.
  2. has mechanisms of intercommunication among its members.
  3. uses its participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback.
  4. utilizes and hence possesses one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims.
  5. in addition to owning genres, it has acquired some specific lexis.
  6. has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise.

James Porter defined the discourse community as: “a local and temporary constraining system, defined by a body of texts (or more generally, practices) that are unified by a common focus. A discourse community is a textual system with stated and unstated conventions, a vital history, mechanisms for wielding power, institutional hierarchies, vested interests, and so on.”

In effect, a discourse community is a group of people who not only share a particular form of communication but are also shaped as a group by that particular form of communication. The students in a class form a discourse community, as do the members of a group on facebook.

Consequently, discourse communities are everywhere. One such community that I’m a part of is my department, hereafter referred to as the “departmental community.” For many of us, our belonging to the departmental community is the primary structuring force in our relationship — I don’t see them or communicate with them outside of this community. But there are also smaller discourse communities within larger ones. There is, for example, a network of “younger” faculty within my department (subsequently referred to as the “new community,” one that includes many (most?) of the people hired within the past decade or so, that also forms a discourse community.

(more…)

 

C.R.A.Z.Y.: A Review Friday, Feb 2 2007 

movies thisgaudygildedstage 11:09 am

C.R.A.Z.Y. is a French-Canadian film that follows Zac from his birth on December 25, 1960 to the early 1980s, tracing his evolution toward acceptance of his sexual identity. Born in a family of devout Catholics, he learns from an early age to hide and reject his difference. His life takes many unexpected turns, the sum of which ultimately allows him to accept and love himself. Eventually, this self-acceptance leads his conservative, homophobic father to love him for who he really is rather for who he–the father–wants him to be.

Here’s a clip of the film’s star, Marc-Andre Grondin, who plays Zac for most of the film, talking about the movie. It also features a few brief scenes from the film that give a sense of its plot, look, and feel.

This is an interesting, slightly bizarre, and worthwhile film. Marc-Andre Grondin is especially good in the leading role. He brings an everyman quality to the part of Zac without losing touch with what makes Zac an individual character. His portrayal of Zac as a teenager and young adult is sensitive and very well done. And he’s gorgeous! Several websites I glanced at describe Grondin as the Canadian Gael Garcia Bernal. I can see why. He immerses himself in this role. And, like Bernal, has an innate sexiness that adds complexity and realism to his character.

I also really like the film’s emphasis on historical detail. The wardrobe, set design, hairstyling, etc. all work together to create a realistic portrayal of the 1960s and 1970s. The makeup in the film is also amazing — Marc-Andre Grondin plays Zac from the age of 15 to 21; the use of makeup to make him younger and then older is very well done.

I should also say that his film is a little bizarre in at least one way: it includes a few fantasy sequences that are meant to show Zac’s internal yearnings but ultimately serve to disrupt the film’s flow. Most of these sequences also involve religious imagery, which makes sense since the film is very much interested in the ways in which religion in general and Catholicism in particular affects people’s (in)ability to accept themselves and their loved ones for who they are.

Overall, this is a very good film about one kid’s coming of age and struggle to come out. In contrast to other coming out films, this one feels more realistic and emotionally true, even when it departs from reality or takes a somewhat surprising excursion to Israel. I enjoyed it and would definitely recommend it.

 

Working Hard for the Money Wednesday, Jan 31 2007 

academia thisgaudygildedstage 3:20 pm

I think this will set the right tone for this post:

About a year ago, another eighteenth-centuryist and I talked about the “fact” that eighteenth-centuryists have a history of becoming department administrators–chairs, graduate directors, undergraduate directors, etc. In her department, both the chair and the graduate chair are eighteenth-centuryists; my senior colleague is our department’s undergraduate director. This conversation was, in part, about my likelihood of someday becoming an administrator–do I want to; if so, when; what kind of administrator, etc.?

For as long as I remember, I’ve liked to be in charge of things and, if I can’t be in charge, I at least want to know what’s going on, why it’s going on, and how it’s happening. This has led me to accumulate a sizable record of department, college, and university service in my first 7 years as a faculty member at OU. Take this month, for example. I just finished up the site visit for a department’s 7-year review, which took two days. I’ll help with another department’s review in two weeks. Both of these will result in 5-page reports that I’ll have to help write. I’m also participating in near weekly meetings of a faculty senate committee and the monthly meeting of the faculty senate. I’m coordinating the annual review of my department chair, and I’m coordinating the review of my department’s current policies and procedures. I present a colleague’s tenure case to the department on Friday and will probably serve on at least one college promotion and tenure committee in late February. I’m also writing an article and a conference paper for a conference in late February. I am exhausted, yet I’m only at the beginning of most of this work!

But I’m not complaining. One of the things that I learned in conducting the 7-year review earlier this week is that I enjoy this kind of stuff. I enjoy participating in administration, and I love knowing what’s what. It’s fascinating to see how another department, which is fairly comparable to mine in size, scope, and programs manages itself in ways that are sometimes similar to my department and sometimes quite different. It also fascinating to see how members of other departments either do or do not get along with one another. I definitely learned this week that my department has it really good in some ways and that we’re much worse off than this other department in other ways. It’s a whole new level of information and involvement. It was exhausting, but I really enjoyed being able to do it.

I don’t know when or even if I’ll become an administrator in my department. I think I have a lot of the requisite skills, knowledge, and experience to be a good administrator, but I’m not sure I’ll seem old enough when the next round of administrative turnover happens.

But either way, I’m not going to sweat it too much right now. I’m enjoying my current level of participation, and that’s all that really matters. In the meantime, I’ll keep singing along to Donna Summer and (metaphorically) dancing the streets!

 

Last King of Scotland: A Review Saturday, Jan 27 2007 

movies thisgaudygildedstage 4:46 pm

We just got back from seeing The Last King of Scotland, Kevin MacDonald’s film about a Scotsman, played by James McAvoy, who becomes the personal doctor of Idi Amin, the president of Uganda, played by Forest Whitaker, in 1971. Here’s the trailer, which does a great job of giving a sense of the film’s suspenseful action and political themes:

The film is based on a novel by Giles Foden. Many of the political events depicted in the film are true, but the main character, McAvoy’s Nicholas Garrigan, is fictional. Garrigan is based, in part, on a British soldier who became a key advisor to Amin.

I really liked this film. Recent articles have compared this movie to The Queen and Forest Whitaker’s performance to Helen Mirren‘s — both purport to show us the private lives of public rulers during historically accurate events in their lives. In fact, though, I found this movie to be much better than The Queen. I still hope Mirren wins the Oscar, but The Last King of Scotland doesn’t feel like a made-for-t.v. movie like The Queen does. This film is both sweeping in its depiction of Amin’s brutality and the violence of his dictatorship and an intimate portrayal of one man’s interactions with him.

Whitaker certainly deserves all of the accolades that he is receiving for this role. He manages first to humanize Amin and then slowly to show us this man’s inhumanity and mental instability. It’s a towering performance, which explains why Whitaker is up for Best Actor when in fact his role is a supporting one. He will certainly be robbed if he doesn’t win.

James McAvoyThe lead actor in this film is actually McAvoy, pictured here in a promotion shot for the Toronto Film Festival. He is the heart and soul of this story, and McAvoy does an excellent job showing us how and why his character can become involved with Amin and then slowly realize all of his mistakes in doing so. He manages to embody his character with an idealism that seems genuine, especially as we come to see it as based, at least in part, on a fundamental racism. He wants to “make a difference” in Africa, but he knows nothing about the continent or the nation of Uganda. His idealism is ultimately exposed as naivete.

(more…)

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »