Introduction

Corey K. Creekmur and Alexander Doty

ut in Culture charts some of the ways in which lesbians, gays, and queers O have understood and negotiated the pleasures and affirmations, as well as the disappointments and denials, of mass culture. As readings that challenge the hegemonic structure of mainstream opinion and representation-what has been called compulsory heterosexuality (Adrienne Rich), the heterosexual matrix Gudith Buder), or the straight mind (Monique Wittig)l-the essays collected here de­ velop antihomophobic and antiheterocentrist critical approaches to some of the major forms of contemporary mass culture: film, television, popular music, and fashion. Homosexual men and women have always had a close and complex relation to mass culture. Historians such as David Halperin, John D'Emilio, and Lillian Faderman have argued, in fact, that the identity that we designate homosexual arose in tandem with capitalist consumer culture.2 But, like all marginalized minorities or (sub)cultures, gays and lesbians often found their cultural experi­ ence and participation constrained and proscribed by a dominant culture in which they are a generally ignored or oppressed, if logically integral, part.3 Certainly, gays and lesbians can experience and make meaning of mass culture in ways the culture industries encourage: consuming it "straight" as "just mere" entertainment. Historically, however, gays and lesbians have also related to mass culture differently, through an alternative or negotiated, if not always fully subversive, reception of the products and messages of popular culture-and, of course, by producing popular literature, film, music, television, photography, and fashion within mainstream mass culture industries. As a result, many gay and lesbian popular culture producers and consumers have wondered how they might have

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 2 Introduction

access to mainstream culture without denying or losing their oppositional identi­ ties, how they might participate without necessarily assimilating, and how they might take pleasure in, and make affirmative meanings out of, experiences and artifacts that they have been told do not offer queer pleasures and meanings. Surrounding concerns like these are general cultural paradigms that have defined gay and lesbian experience, most often through the metaphor of the closet-a private (or "sub"-cultural) space one comes out of to inhabit public space honestly and with one's identity intact. As Diana Fuss argues, "The philo­ sophical opposition between 'heterosexual' and 'homosexual; like so many other conventional binaries, has always been constructed on the foundations of an­ other related opposition: the couple 'inside' and 'outside.' "4 But the inevitability of the symbolic and social "limits," "margins," "borders," and "boundaries" maintaining these oppositions has been continually challenged by the unconven­ tional participation of gays and lesbians in mainstream culture. For the writers collected in this anthology, a central issue is how to be "out in culture": how to occupy a place in mass culture, yet maintain a perspective on it that does not accept its homophobic and heterocentrist definitions, images, and terms of anal­ ysis. This issue involves the considerable difficulties not only of living as a les­ bian, gay, or queer consumer inside mass culture but also of responding as active producers of intellectual work-as a writer or, in many cases, as a teacher­ within a mainstream culture that seduces as often as it repels, and frequently does both at once. For some time (at least since the model embodied by Oscar Wilde), this queerly "different" experience of mass culture was most evident, if coded, in the ironic, scandalous sensibility known as camp-perhaps gay culture's crucial con­ tribution to modernism. An attitude at once casual and severe, affectionate and ironic, camp served to deflate the pretentions of mainstream culture while ele­ vating what that same culture devalued or repressed, thus providing a strategy tor rewriting and questioning the meanings and values of mainstream represen­ tations. Camp was also, for some time, an "insider's" attitude and knowledge, a means not only of disturbing dominant cultural values but also of disseminating information about who (or what) was in-that is, in the life (homosexual), in the know, au courant, avant-garde, or, to use a later term, hip. From a camp perspective, anyone "out of it" is not only culturally conserva­ tive or reactionary but implicitly also straight, not homosexual. Through this dramatic redefinition of the outsider's status as being "in," camp may have been the first intellectual (although highly aestheticized) approach to indicate the potential for gays, lesbians, or bisexuals to reverse, or at least question, the terms of dominant cultural production and reading. Camp also illuminates the user's "queer" status in relation to dominant culture, for, throughout this century,

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 Corey K. Creekmur and Alexander Doty 3

camp has been one way in which many gays and lesbians have dealt with a mass culture that avoided and repressed the explicit representation, not to mention the affirmation, of homosexuality as a practice and, even more radically, as a per­ spective. In other words, camp has the ability to "queer" straight culture by asserting that there is queerness at the core of mainstream culture even though that culture tirelessly insists that its images, ideologies, and readings were always only about heterosexuality. To take a privileged example from camp's (counter)canon, MGM'S whole­ some children's fantasy The Wizard of Oz and its child star, Judy Garland, could be elaborated in terms of their camp functions: The Wizard of Oz is a story in which everyone lives in two very different worlds, and in which most of its characters live two very different lives, while its emotionally confused and op­ pressed teenage heroine longs for a world in which her inner desires can be expressed freely and fully. 5 Dorothy finds this world in a Technicolor land "over the rainbow" inhabited by a sissy lion, an artificial man who cannot stop crying, and a butch-femme couple of witches. This is a reading of the film that sees the film's fantastic excesses (color, costume, song. performance, etc.) as expressing the hidden lives of many of its most devoted viewers, who identified themselves as "friends of Dorothy." For all camp's potential as a strategy of resistance for certain gays and lesbians (who either learned gay camp or viewed certain aspects of their own culture campily, like butch-femme styles and roles), camp largely remained a private, subcultural form until the early 1960s, when Susan Sontag, among others, rec­ ognized its growing influence on a "hipper" general population, the generation that would soon be called the counterculture.6 Camp's increasing exploitation in broader cultural contexts was perhaps facilitated by its tendency to remain coy about explicitly acknowledging its homosexual cultural connections. For exam­ ple, from the 1950S to the early 1970s, the film critic Parker Tyler wrote in a style that can only be called flamboyant high camp. But his work never says outright what all but its most obtuse readers understood: that this was the work of a man whose gayness directly informed his cultural evaluations and prose style. 7 Rich­ ard Dyer also noted the tendency of the British journal Films and Filming consis­ tently and covertly to appeal to gay readers in the 1960s, particularly through its selection of "beefcake" stills and references to cult stars like Judy Garland, with­ out ever directly identifying itself as a gay magazine.8 So, although camp is, in Philip Core's phrase, "the lie that tells the truth," it was for many decades still a veiled form of "the love that dare not speak its name" in film and popular culture criticism and reception.9 As such, it was a strategy that was criticized as "clos­ eted" and apolitical by many within the "gay liberation" movement of the 1970s. In its "closeted," less overtly political forms, camp has frequently been deni-

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 4 Introduction

grated and maligned as self-oppressive and misogynistic ever since the Stonewall rebellion of 1969 made gay culture more publicly visible on the evening ofJudy Garland's funeral. By the late 1960s, influenced by the civil rights and women's liberation move­ ments, the politics of gay liberation centered around the radical imperative of making the once-hidden visible. Among other things, gay liberation would en­ courage an explicit account of the once "secret" relation between gays and lesbians and mass culture. The groundbreaking work of critics like Robin Wood, Vito Russo, Jack Babuscio, Caroline Sheldon, and Richard Dyer, often writing for the emergent gay and lesbian press in the United States (The Advocate, Chris­ topher Street), England (Gay News), and Canada (The Body Politic), demon­ strated, in Wood's term, the "responsibility" of gay, lesbian, and bisexual writers to acknowledge the ways in which their sexual and political identities influenced their critical perspectives. 10 In other words, these critics' work on film and other media "came out" along with them as they replaced rhetorical strategies depen­ dent on coded insider references with direct assertions of group identity (the marked use of the pronoun we replacing they, e.g.). Along with this, these critics began unapologetically to introduce into their writing autobiographical accounts of their erotic and emotional investments in such things as Hollywood cinema, physique and muscle magazines, Broadway musicals, and drag. Even with this new critical visibility, however, camp was not discarded or lost: it was often brought forward as something explicitly gay, lesbian, bisexual, or, more recently, queer. Not that all post-Stonewall uses of camp are visibly or aurally queer. There remain "sub" -cultural, closeted forms of camp as well as mainstream uses that attempt to deny or repress camp's queerness. But, since the 1970s, "old camp" has existed alongside "new camp." At times, critics and activists will employ "new camping" in order to "out" the texts and pleasures of "old camp(ing)." That is, they will broadcast to anyone who will listen the information that Bette Davis means something special to certain gay men (see Jerry Tartaglia's video Remembrance); or that Uzlley of the Dolls is a queer camp text; or that the wacky play with gender, style, and sexuality in WUyne's Wbrld is (a) campy and (b) not straight (recall, e.g., Garth's "coming out" through his appreciation of Bugs Bunny in drag); or that they get a "queer feeling" (to quote from the film) when they see Katharine Hepburn dressed as a teenaged boy in

Sylvia Scarlett. I I So there really is no critical or political "bottom line" on the uses of camp these days. Like other queer reading practices, sometimes it re­ inscribes queerness on the margins of popular culture, sometimes it questions the notion of a mainstream culture or preferred (read straight, white, middle­ class male) cultural readings, while at other times it places queerness at the heart of the popular.

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 Corey K. Creekmur and Alexander Doty 5

While many gay men were committed to camp and other "sub"-cultural pop­ ular culture pleasures before the 1970s, lesbian audiences/consumers were de­ veloping their own rich cultural relation with film, television, music, fashion, and popular literature. Sometimes this relation was articulated through the strat­ egies of camp, but more often it was through reading strategies involving identi­ fication (sometimes cross-gendered) and erotics. The evidence of these lesbian uses of popular culture before the 1970S remained largely within lesbian com­ munities and was generally confined to letters, diaries, and conversations. With­ in the last decade or so, however, there have been attempts to record this oral and otherwise informal popular cultural history formally: Judy Whitaker's interview article "Hollywood Transformed" reveals a lesbian canon of stars and films; Andrea Weiss's Violets and Ulmpires considers lesbian uses of mass culture per­ sonalities and texts in different periods; Aerlyn Weissman and Lynn Fernie's film Forbidden Luve explores the importance of "pulp novels" to lesbian culture; Lillian Faderman's Odd Girls and Twilight Luvers provides a history of contem­ porary lesbian culture; Jane Cottis and Kaucyila Brooke's video Dry Kisses Only offers an overview of lesbian representation and reading practices; and Cecilia Barriga's video Meeting [of] Two Queens combines clips from Garbo and Dietrich films to create the romance narrative that Hollywood never produced. 12 As with gays, most lesbian involvement in popular culture production before the 1970S was invisible or closeted-Hollywood director Dorothy Arzner and stars like Alia Nazimova and Greta Garbo being among the most notable ex­ amples. But during this time there were a few "out" lesbian popular culture producers, like filmmaker Barbara Hammer, pulp novelist Ann Bannon, and "women's (womyn's) music" performer Chris Williamson. Overall, however, lesbians seemed less invested than gay men in popular culture production and criticism before the 1970S, perhaps because achieving positions of power and control within popular culture industries has always been difficult for women (whether lesbian or not), whereas closeted gay men, such as songwriters Cole Porter and Lorenz Hart or directors James Whale and George Cukor, often achieved prominence and power in the popular culture mainstream. In the area of criticism and theory, Caroline Sheldon's "Lesbians and Film" (1977) was one of the earliest widely read accounts oflesbian politics, representa­ tion, production, and reception in relation to film.13 This was followed in the United States by the work of feminist critics in the radical journal Jump Cut. These critics, already sophisticated in their ideological analysis of media repre­ sentations of women, began writing openly lesbian critical commentaries about film and, later, television and video. The 198 I "Lesbians and Film" issue ofJump Cut was a call for more public work in lesbian popular culture criticism and production. 14 We have reprinted the introductory essay from this issue-along

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 6 Introduction

with Robin Wood's groundbreaking "Responsibilities of a Gay Film Critic" (I978)-in order to set up a critical-historical context for the essays that follow in this anthology. The most recent essays collected here are the products of a complex historical moment: the increased visibility of gays and lesbians in popular culture as well as political life is continually being offset by the ongoing AIDS crisis and those who use it to strengthen homophobia; the success of gay and lesbian (or gender) studies in academe is threatened by a "politically correct" backlash and under­ mined by severe cutbacks in federal funding for queer-positive art and scholar­ ship; the appearance of a new queer cinema (the work of Todd Haynes, Tom Kalin, Marlon Riggs, Issac Julien, Sadie Benning, Derek Jarman, Sheila Mc­ Laughlin, and Monica Treut, among many others) and the success of gay and lesbian film festivals is occurring alongside the misogyny and homophobia of popular Hollywood films like The Silence of the Lambs, Basic Instinct, and JFK.15 For many members of a generation coming to political consciousness haunted by AIDS but collectively strengthened by AIDS activism, the term queer has become an attractive and oppositional self-label that acknowledges a new cultural con­ text for politics, criticism, reception-consumption, and production. Queer writ­ ers not only resist mainstream definitions of sexuality and identity but put them­ selves in positions to question gay and lesbian orthodoxies that, for example, continue to marginalize black gay men or Chicana lesbians, or that isolate gay men from lesbians, or that have strict and narrow political positions on contro­ versial issues like drag, pornography, sadomasochism, fetishism, and bisexuality. This contemporary context for queer criticism has influenced the construc­ tion of this anthology. We originally conceived of this volume rather modestly as bringing together scattered, often difficult-to-find, popular press and "classic" academic essays in gay male film criticism and theory that might be useful as a teaching text. Some of these essays remain here, but we soon recognized that our search for previously published essays (reflected by the bibliography) was un­ covering a surprisingly large body of material that also heralded an unprece­ dented period of new gay, lesbian, and queer media criticism. We also saw film studies opening itself up to include culture studies subjects-allowing the serious analysis of television, popular music, and fashion, for example-even as it was becoming more visibly queer at conferences and in journals. Our response was to reshape the anthology by soliciting exciting original work or reprinting more recent essays that would expand on or challenge the "tradition" of gay and lesbian theory and criticism located in the earlier work of Robin Wood, B. Ruby Rich, Julia Lesage, Richard Dyer, Thomas Waugh, and others. We became especially convinced that continuing our emphasis on gayness alone would not reflect the current state of queer cultural criticism, so approximately half the

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 Corey K. Creekmur and Alexander Doty 7

collection represents the work of a new generation oflesbian critics whose simul­ taneous commitments to feminism, lesbian studies, and queer studies are dem­ onstrated in their work. This anthology therefore collects essays that address a range of general issues and specific texts important to gay, lesbian, and queer cultural criticism. While many of the essays are drawn from recent academic lesbian, gay, and queer cultural studies, with its important inheritances from contemporary critical the­ ory, especially feminism, some essays originate in the active, "alternative" gay and lesbian press, a widely read, if underappreciated, source for queer cultural commentary. While (mis)information about gays, lesbians, and bisexuals has begun to appear more frequently in virtually all media, the alternative press­ represented by The Advocate, Out, 10 Percent, Genre, Christopher Street, Sou­ journer, Deneuve, the New Yt>rk Native, On Our Backs, Fuse, the late Outweek and OUT/LOOK, and hundreds oflocal journals, newspapers, and 'zines-has been discussing and analyzing contemporary mass culture consistently and insight­ fully for decades. This anthology attempts to create a dialogue-even if a conten­ tious one-between the "academic" and the "journalistic," two arenas of critical intervention that are unfortunately isolated simply because of their presumed functions, audiences, and rhetorical styles. So, within and between the essays collected here, there are many theoretical and political conflicts and ideological contradictions (some generational, some gender based, some centered on sexual definition) to keep things interesting. If some of the essays are more informative than analytic, or more polemical than theoretical, this only suggests the range of modes as well as topics in queer cultural commentary. The earlier pieces by Robin Wood and, as a group, Edith Becker, Michelle Citron, B. Ruby Rich, and Julia Lesage represent a "coming out" for gay and lesbian film criticism. Subsequently, this type of criticism would achieve its academic legitimation through the connections with auteur theory, Marxism (and other forms of ideological analysis), and feminism suggested by "Lesbians and Film: An Introduction" and "Responsibilities of a Gay Film Critic." These seminal essays are followed by a group of works by Chris Straayer, Al LaValley, Valerie Traub, and Alexander Doty that offer broad historical and theoretical perspectives on lesbian, gay, and queer culture's relation to mainstream film. Specific "classic" films are then examined by Corey Creekmur (My Darling Clementine) and B. Ruby Rich (Madchen in Uniform) in pieces that consider both these films' historical contexts and the textual means by which they represent femininity, masculinity, and homosexuality. Stars and directors as "authors" of queer cultural meaning and pleasures are considered in Patricia White's essay on Agnes Moorehead and in the collection of essays by John Hepworth, Robin Wood, Sabrina Barton, Rhona J. Berenstein,

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 8 Introduction

and Lucretia Knapp on Alfred Hitchcock films. Why a dossier on Hitchcock and not a Hollywood director who identified as homosexual like George Cukor or Dorothy Arzner? Because Hitchcock's films, more than those of anyone else, have become the "test cases" for each new position in film theory and criticism whether auteurism, semiotics-structuralism, feminism, ideological analysis, or psychoanalysis. The essays in this dossier borrow from earlier theoretical work in order to establish the continuing importance of Hitchcock films as sites for working through issues in gay, lesbian, and queer film and cultural theory and criticism. Areas outside of "mainstream" media making and viewing are the subjects of another set of essays. Michael Moon's work investigates the influences on and of a key figure in the gay avant-garde, Jack Smith. Pornography, a genre often connected to the avant-garde and the experimental in accounts of gay and lesbian film- and videomaking, is examined from queer historical, cultural, and theoret­ ical positions in pieces by Thomas Waugh and Nayland Blake, the latter writing on "gay culture's Norman Rockwell," artist Tom of Finland. Fetishism, fantasy, and the lesbian cultural debates surrounding the dildo are the subjects of Heather Findlay's piece, which considers how advertising, psychoanalysis, erotic fiction and film, and the styles of these sex toys themselves have contributed to these debates. Television and the mainstream press come under queer scrutiny in essays that consider the visual representation of AIDS in the print media Gan Zita Grover), the dynamics of gender and sexuality that surround the figure of Pee-Wee Her­ man (Bruce LaBruce), and the complex politics of black gay representation (Essex Hemphill). A second dossier collects essays emphasizing the often contradictory plea­ sures and purposes of popular music for gays and lesbians. Richard Dyer, gay culture's most wide-ranging critic, argues for the positive functions of a blatantly capitalist form, disco, within gay culture. On the other hand, Arlene Stein con­ siders the ambivalent implications of the recent "crossover" of "women's music" into the commercial pop mainstream. Updating the camp tradition of gay diva worship, Michael Musto's essay justifies the love of Madonna's large queer fan­ dom, while Anthony Thomas provides a historical account of the often "white­ washed" gay black influence on contemporary dance music. As a group, these essays demonstrate how cine form of mass culture-popular music-generates a productive range of responses within an increasingly diverse community of cul­ tural consumers. The final selection of essays is concerned with that broad and important arena of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and queer life and art: style. Taken together, the pieces on drag by Mark Thompson and Jeffrey Hilbert provide historical and ideologi-

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 Corey K. Creekmur and Alexander Doty 9

cal perspectives on cross-dressing in gay communities. Marlon Riggs's essay considers the "feminine" gay black and his position within African-American culture and representation, while the work of Arlene Stein and Danae Clark examines the uses and meanings of a range of lesbian looks within lesbian com­ munities and in mainstream consumer culture. This collection concludes with a general bibliography of gay, lesbian, and queer work on mass culture. While this bibliography is not exhaustive, it does reveal that the short list once envisioned by us and by many who heard about this project turned out to be a very long one indeed. This bibliography is meant to be useful to a range of interested readers and researchers and in itself stands as a demonstration of the already impressive history and scope of gay, lesbian, and queer cultural criticism. Our hope is that this anthology both encapsulates and extends the work that has come before it.

Notes

These terms are elaborated in Adrienne Rich, "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Les­ bian Existence," Signs: Journal of WVmen in Culture and Society 5, no. 4 (1980): 631-60 (reprinted in Powers of Desire: The Politics of Sexuality, ed. Ann Snitow, Christine Stansell, and Sharon Thompson [New York: Monthly Review Press, 1983], 177-205, and in Adri­ enne Rich, Blood, Bread, and Poetry: Selected Prose, 1979-I 985 [New York: Norton, 1986], 23-75); Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (New York: Routledge, 1990); and Monique Wittig, "The Straight Mind," in The Straight Mind and Other Essays (Boston: Beacon, 1992),21-32. 2 John Halperin, One Hundred ~ars oj Homosexuality and Other Essays on Greek lnve (New York: Routledge, 1990);]ohn D'Emilio, "Capitalism and Gay Identity," in Powers of Desire, 100-13 (reprinted in The Gay and Lesbian Studies Reader, ed. Henry Abelove, Michele Aina Barale, and David Halperin [New York and London: Routledge, 1993], 467-76, and in John D'Emilio, Making Trouble: Essays on Gay History, Politics, and the University [New York and London: Routledge, 1992],3-16); Lillian Faderman, Surpass­ ing the lnve of Men: Romantic Friendship and lnve between WVmen from the Renaissance to the Present (New York: Morrow, 1981). 3 It has been frequently noted that the identification of homosexual as a sexual and, especially, as a social category preceded, and thus logically required the designation of, the category heterosexual. 4 Diana Fuss, "Inside/Out," in Inside/Out: Lesbian Theories, Gay Theories, ed. Fuss (New York and London: Routledge, 1991), 1. 5 The Wizard ojOz, directed by Victor Fleming (MGM, 1939). 6 Susan Sontag, "Notes on Camp," in Against Interpretation (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1966),275-92. Other works that discuss camp include Esther Newton, Mother Camp: Female Impersonators in America (1972; Chicago: University of Chicago Press,

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 10 Introduction

1979); Andrew Ross, "The Uses of Camp," in No Respect: Intellectuals and Popular Culture (New York and London: Routledge, 1989), 135-70; Philip Core, Camp: The Lie That Tells the Truth (New York: Delilah, 1984); Oscar Montero, "Lipstick Vogue: The Politics of Drag," Radical America 22, no. I Ganuary-February 1988): 35-42; Carole-Anne Tyler, "Boys Will Be Girls: The Politics of Gay Drag," in Inside/Out: Lesbian Theories, Gay Theories, ed. Diana Fuss (New York and London: Routledge, 1991),32-70; Jack Babus­ cio, "Camp and the Gay Sensibility," in Gays and Film, ed. Richard Dyer (New York: New York Zoetrope, 1984),40-57; Andrew Britton, "For Interpretation: Notes against Camp," Gay Left 7 (1978-79); Sue-Ellen Case, "Toward a Butch-Femme Aesthetic," Discourse 11, no. I (Fall-Winter 1988-89): 55-71 (reprinted in Making a Spectacle: Feminist Essays on Contemporary Wbmen's Theatre, ed. Lynda Hart [Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 19891, 282-299); Sue-Ellen Case, "Tracking the Vampire," differences 3, no. 2 (1991): 1-20; AI LaValley, "The Great Escape," American Film 10, no. 6 (April 1985): 29- 34,70-71 (reprinted in this volume); Seymour Kleinberg, Alienated Affections: Being Gay in America (New York: St. Martin'S, 1980),38-69,118-56; Christine Riddiough, "Cul­ ture and Politics," in Pink Triangles: Radical Perspectives on Gay Liberation, ed. Pam Mitch­ ell (Boston: Alyson, 1980), 14-33; Derek Cohen and Richard Dyer, "The Politics of Gay Culture," Homosexuality: Power and Politics, ed. Gay Left Collective (London and New York: Allison & Busby, 1980); Mark Booth, Camp (New York: Quartet, 1983); Butler, Gender Trouble, 128-49; Vito Russo, "Camp," in Gay Men: The Sociolcgy of Male Homo­ sexuality, ed. Martin P. Levine (New York: Harper & Row, 1979),205-10; Robin Wood, "The Dyer's Hand: Stars and Gays," Film Comment 16, no. 1 Ganuary-February 1980): 70-72; Jeffrey Hilbert, "The Politics of Drag," The Advocate, no. 575 (23 April 1991): 42- 47 (reprinted in this volume); Lisa Duggan, "The Anguished Cry of an 80S Femme: 'I Want to be a Drag Queen,''' OUT/LOOK I, no. 1 (Spring 1988): 62-65; Pamela Robert­ son, " 'The Kinda Comedy That Imitates Me': Mae West's Identification with the Femi­ nist Camp," Cinema Journal 32, no. 2 (Winter 1993): 57-72; Michael Musto, "Old Camp, New Camp," Out, no. 5 (April/May 1993): 32-39; Richard Dyer, "It's Being So Camp as Keeps Us Going," Only Entertainment (London and New York: Routledge, 1992), 135- 47· 7 Parker Tyler's writings about film include Screening the Sexes: Homosexuality in the Movies (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor, 1973), Magic and Myth of the Movies (New York: Holt, 1947), Sex, Psyche, Et cetera in the Film (New York: Horizon, 1969), Underground Film: A Critical History (New York: Grove, 1969), The Hollywood Hallucination (New York: Creative Arts, 1944), and The Three Faces of the Film: The Art, the Dream, and the Cult (1960) (New Brunswick, N.].: Barnes, 1967). 8 Richard Dyer, Heavenly Bodies: Film Stars and Society (New York: St. Martin's, 1986), 148. 9 Core, Camp, 5-17. 10 Robin Wood, "Responsibilities of a Gay Film Critic," Film Comment 14, no. 1 Ganuary-February 1978): 12-17; (reprinted in Movies and Methods, ed. Bill Nichols [Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press 2:649-601 and in this volume). I I Remembrance, directed by Jerry Tartaglia (1990); lillley of the Dolls, directed by Mark

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021 Corey K. Creekmur and Alexander Doty I I

Robson (Twentieth Century-Fox, 1967); I%yne's WVrld, directed by Penelope Spheeris (Paramount, 1992); Sylvia Scarlett, directed by George Cukor (RKO, 1936). 12 Judy (later Claire) Whitaker, "Hollywood Transformed," Jump Cut 24/25 (1981): 33- 35 (reprinted in Jump Cut: Hollywood, Politics and Counter-Cinema, ed. Peter Stevens [New York: Prager, 1985], 106-18); Andrea Weiss, Violets and J.flmpires: Lesbians in Film (New York: Penguin, 1992); Forbidden Love, directed by Aerlyn Weissman and Lynn Fernie, National Film Board of Canada (1992); Lillian Faderman, Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth Century America (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991); Dry Kisses Only, directed by Jane Cottis and Kaucyila Brooke (1990); Meeting [of] Two Queens, directed by Cecilia Barriga (1991). 13 Caroline Sheldon, "Lesbians and Film: Some Thoughts," in Gays and Film, 5-26. 14 "Special Section: Lesbians and Film," Jump Cut 24/25 (1981): 17-51. 15 The Silence of the Lambs, directed by Jonathan Demme (Orion, 1991); Basic Instinct, directed by Paul Verhoeven (Tri-Star, 1992); JFK, directed by Oliver Stone (Warners, 1992).

Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/books/book/chapter-pdf/663666/9780822397441-001.pdf by guest on 27 September 2021