A New Queer Trinity: a Semiotic, Genre Theory, and Auto-Ethnographic Examination of Reeling: the Chicago LGBTQ+ International Film Festival
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A New Queer Trinity: A Semiotic, Genre Theory, and Auto-Ethnographic Examination of Reeling: The Chicago LGBTQ+ International Film Festival DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jessica L. Hey, MA, BA Graduate Program in Arts Administration, Education and Policy The Ohio State University 2017 Dissertation Committee: James H. Sanders III, Advisor Shari M. Savage Deborah L. Smith-Shank Copyright by Jessica L. Hey 2017 ABSTRACT This doctoral study concerns itself with the visual representations of The Chicago LGBTQ+ International Film Festival (a.k.a. Reeling) with specific attention paid to their marketing campaign materials, as exemplified by the annually created festival POSTER. It is my aim to situate these posters alongside the historical contexts of queer identity, socio- political advocacy, and LGBTQ+ cinema. This analysis will navigate the 36-year period of the festival organization’s existence, providing key, in-depth interrogations into the decades, images, and trends both visual and narrative. My unpacking and theoretical discussions of the festival’s visual culture has been informed by the practices of semiotics and film genre theory. These methods were employed to answer the primary research question: How have the POSTER advertisements, as visual signifiers for The Chicago LGBTQ+ International Film Festival, symbolized their organization’s mission, represented queer identities, and engaged with the politically contested history of queer cinematic representation? Through the analytical process, a series of emergent sub-questions materialized: ▪ How have visual representations of The Chicago Lesbian and Gay International Film Festival changed over time? ▪ How does the festival POSTER, as a promise of subsequent programming, reflect and/or resist the historical, generic, trajectory of LGBTQ+ cinema? ii ▪ How has the festival organization and its corresponding representations responded to fluctuating political movements and their gradual commercialization? Each of the preceding questions provided a distinct vantage point, and allowed me to examine the problems of representation from varying perspectives. This result serves to elucidate the value and significance of such images for the greater LGBTQ+ community which the Reeling event presumes to serve. The film festival as a cultural institution (re)produces visual histories which can have a crucial effect upon their audience, the queer film festival’s (re)presentations even more so. As a queer woman and former Reeling intern, I was an invested participant and as a result, this project has been as informed by my subjective engagement with the material as my understanding and incorporation of the ideas and contributions of other voices. Finally, this project calls for future research into the queer festival construct, a historically significant contributor to queer communities that remains relatively unexplored. The significant investment of time, scrutiny, and deconstruction of queer images created by mainstream, heteronormative culture, while necessary, needs to be supplemented by a greater investment into those images created within queer cultural institutions. iii DEDICATION This document is dedicated to August & Willa. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, a thank you to Chicago Filmmakers and Executive Director, Brenda Webb, for opening their doors to me without a moment’s hesitation. Your gracious contribution of archival documents form the basis of this entire study. A big THANK YOU to my committee. To begin with, I would like to thank Dr. Jim Sanders for sticking with me, having patience, and never giving up faith that I would finally complete this behemoth. For offering your insight, reassurance, and vegetables, I will always be grateful. Finally, you were always wonderfully queer and it was appreciated! To Dr. Deborah Smith-Shank, who supplied much needed direction, encouragement, and research materials and to Dr. Shari Savage for agreeing, without pause, to join this project in the 11th hour. And, finally to Dr. Karen Hutzel and Dr. Kevin Tavin for their thought- provoking perspectives and considerate contributions to this study. I need to acknowledge my parents. Thank you, Dad, for instilling in me the life-long benefits of education, being ever-willing to help me achieve my academic goals, and for always answering a question with, “Let’s look it up!” Because of you, my home will always be filled with books. Mom, thank you for sharing your love of movies. Your love became my love, and I can’t imagine life without our shared passion. Also, for your help over the past year, I can’t begin to thank you - you have cared for August & Willa with such love, joy, and patience and because of you I was finally able to string together a few complete sentences. Dr. Courtnie Wolfgang, you are the very best lady-buddy and academic cheerleader anyone could ask for. Though we were clearly separated at birth, I am so glad we found each other (again) in OH-IO. To Erin Hoppe and Summer Hawkins, your continued friendship means more than you know. You ladies are, simply, the best. And, finally, to Kate. You are the reason this is done. Your constant love, support, sense-of- humor, and cooking throughout this process have meant more than I could possibly express. Your hard work makes my life possible and I would not want to navigate this life without you. Thank you, my love. p.s. They won’t remember this in years to come, so please tell August & Willa, “I did my best!” v VITA 2002……………………………… BA Film & Video, Columbia College Chicago 2005 – 2007...…………………….. Graduate Teaching Associate, Ohio University 2006……………………………… Graduate Instructor, Film Studies, Ohio University 2007……………………………… Graduate Instructor, Film Studies, Ohio University 2007………………………………. MA Film Studies, Ohio University 2007 – 2012………………………. Graduate Teaching Associate, The Ohio State University 2010 – Present……………………. Instructor of Film Studies, Columbus College of Art & Design FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Art Education, Administration and Policy Minor Field: Cinema Studies vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................................. ii DEDICATION .......................................................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................... v VITA ............................................................................................................................................................. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................... x LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................................................... xii PROLOGUE ............................................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ 11 1.01 Background to the Study........................................................................................................ 11 1.02 Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................................... 14 1.03 Primary Research Question ................................................................................................... 15 1.04 Supporting Sub-questions ...................................................................................................... 15 1.05 Parameters of the Study (limitations) .................................................................................. 18 1.06 Overview of the Study ............................................................................................................ 19 1.06.01 Overview of Methods................................................................................................ 19 1.06.02 Semiotics ....................................................................................................................... 20 1.06.03 Semiotics & Advertising ........................................................................................... 22 1.06.04 Genre ............................................................................................................................. 23 1.07 Significance of the Study ........................................................................................................ 26 1.08 Chapter Descriptions .............................................................................................................. 33 1.08.01 Chapter Two – The Review of Literature ............................................................ 34 1.08.02 Chapter Three – Methods ........................................................................................ 34 1.08.03 Chapter Four – Presentation of Data .................................................................... 34 vii 1.08.04 Chapter Five – Analysis ...........................................................................................