Let’s talk about drag shows. Not the current hot-button politics of the whole genre today. Just the “art form” itself.
I don’t care for them.
No, not because it involves men cross-dressing. Guys wearing dresses and wigs to play a role? Mitch, please. All the female parts in Shakespeare’s day were played by cross-dressing men. Monty Python and Kids in the Hall were cross-dressing decades ago, and at least on the surface they did it for the same exact reason as drag shows do; Entertainment.
Which is the crux of why I don’t care for drag; it’s entertainment – and it’s just not entertaining.
To me, anyway.
Oh, I’ve tried. I’ve had friends who say “give it a chance!”. And I did. And I just…don’t…care.
Part of the problem is it appropriates [1] “burlesque”. And burlesque, as a genre, bores me stiff – especially the modern version of it. It’s not that I “can’t relate” – one of the points of art is to learn to relate to things that aren’t part of your life, or to get better insights on things that are *or* aren’t parts of your life. Art should challenge you, and I actively seek out art that is different from my personal status quo. I’ve learned a lot, and grown as a person, for the effort.
Just not from burlesque. Or drag, for that matter.
As far as drag shows showing school children a window to that culture? Fair enough. We have a lot of cultures; some involve snake-handling, debutantes, monster truck rallies, soccer, “Real Housewives”, ultimate fighting, eating ghost peppers off the vine, and drag racing. I personally can tolerate, even respect several of those cultures without feeling any need to learn more about them than I do, but this isn’t about me; in the interest of raising well-rounded children, shouldn’t we also let them participate in in-church 24 hour prayer vigils, three-gun shooting competitions and Turning Point USA rallies? Give them a view into lots and lots of cultures? Have your people call my people.
I mean, as far as culture goes, in for a penny, in for a dollar.
Of course, the current fracas isn’t about exposing kids to different cultures; it’s about undercutting the dominant culture.
Of course, drag has existed for well over 100 years; it’s a political subject to day, because none of its current hot-point status is about “exposing children to culture” for its own sake.
Just for purposes of argument, let’s forget for a moment that drag, like the burlesque of which it is a minstrel-show version, is inherently sexual in nature; all of the tropes of burlesque were ways to play peek-a-boo with the sexual mores of the Victorian era, and Drag is an “ironic” homage to that era, around the claim that men with “alternative lifestyles” today have to be as sly and coded about their preferences as the straight world did 150 years ago. Which, given the near supremacy of “alternative lifestyles” in today’s dominant culture is itself just a tad preposterous [2]. Saying it’s not a primarily sexual art form is like saying burlesque is nice and chaste; it’s preposterous, and would get you laughed out of any room not controlled by lunatics manifesting a social agenda.
Don’t be a moron.
But I set out to write about a genre, not a political fracas, and it’s to there I’ll return; you wanna dress up and sing? Go to it! No need to save me a seat.
[1] And no, that’s not an ironic condemnation; if you’re not from a tribe that’s been isolated in the New Guinea highlands or Amazon rain forest for thouands of years, your culture is appropriated.
[2] Indeed, if modern culture continues as it is, I can see the “drag” of tomorrow being guys who dress in jeans and dungaree shirts, singing Hank Williams Senior-derived music about women of the biologically opposite sex. It’d be sooooo transgressive.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.