I just have to share these videos with the class. They've long been favorites of mine because they work as both a chilling picture of how one media figure polices her own body/image in the name of beauty and an unintentionally hilarious comic masterpiece (as made explicit by the vulgar, brilliant parodies I'll throw in at the end). This is called "Welcome to my home" - it's a lifestyle video released in 1987 by Young and the Restless star Brenda Dickson.
The first part is mostly cosmetic/beauty tips and fashion related musings. "Isn't it dramatic?"
And then we move on to exercise and diet tips. I think the conflation of "health" and "beauty" with slimness is particularly interesting, and some of the "tips" are as wildly incorrect as they are situated in a particular time and space, though Dickson implies a universal standard for all women. Note also the repeated emphasis on how effortless it is for her to maintain the "look" she has achieved - the enjoyment she derives from the process (which may or may not be truly felt, but is certainly linked with many of the articles we read in the first few weeks) and the neverending conversion of fascistic body practices (with regard to eating, perhaps less so with physical exercise) into something that she does to "feel good."
I think the humor in the videos is at least partially derived from Dickson's deeply earnest belief that her way is the way for women to achieve a "beautiful" appearance, but I wonder how much of the humor is dependent on the clearly dated looks put forth as "fashion." I want to say that this has always been hilarious, but I don't know that it's true. Certainly, the 20+ year gulf in time since the release date is significant in some way, but I'm not sure it's something I can articulate right now. And, of course, there is always this dilemma in the discussions we've had: at whose expense do we find this funny? Is it simply another case of "in the know" feminists opposing ourselves to "unsophisticated" fandoms? Does that argument even apply here, given that this is not itself a soap opera but rather aimed toward fans of Dickson herself? And if we turn the critique to Dickson, is the only way out to label her as a "victim" of beauty culture?
Anyway... here are some parody videos done by Deven Green (it's mostly the videos you've already watched with different voice over narration - and I have to say that if you found the first two videos enjoyable at all, you simply MUST watch these - they're endlessly quotable)
A meta acknowledgement: I guess the academic part of my brain always knew that there were some fruitful moments to think about in these videos, but I've always watched them for pleasure, so if there are any moments that you find particularly interesting, I'd love for you to share them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think that you are definitely right to ask at whose expense are these embellished videos making their own points about fashion and beauty. In what would appear to be a fairly extemporaneous commentary, the video artist communicates a rather blithe and even derisive dismissal of Brenda Dickson as a person rather than a construct. Instead of critiquing the systemic influences on Dickson that encourage her to reinforce particular body images as appropriately fashionable, or even the overly manufactured quality of production technique of this infomercial/lifestyle video and the way in which I am sure the director instructed her to present herself (now that is the funny part), the video artist prefers to call into question Dickson’s intelligence, judgment, and even sanity at some points. By equating stupidity with fashion, there appears to be a rather condemnatory tone, one that may more often than not leave you with an uncomfortable feeling. This can’t just be chocked up to false-consciousness or limited intellect…at least I would like to believe.
This doesn’t mean that I don’t have some serious doubts about some of Dickson’s “facts” and the monolithic solution to “fat”, but there might be other ways we can go about interrogating Dickson’s image and what she’s selling. Much like cooking shows, exercise equipment infomercials, even Martha Stewart, there is a fantasy element structuring the presentation and consumption of this text. I myself even look at it as a fabulous cultural archive of late 1980’s clothing and hairstyle, the more fashionable one was the more dated they appear now. In what ways can we ask questions about pleasure, consumption, fantasy, the fashionable, and fandom in reference to not only Dickson, but also her fans and us consuming her decades later.
First, I am interested in this “dated” style (although Brenda Dickson is often referring to everything as a “classic look”), and how it relates to the soap opera style. As a child part of my endless fascination with soap operas was that everybody is always dressed to the nines (Seattle is a casual city, so soap opera clothing was completely foreign to me). My inclination is that even though this is aimed at fans of Dickson, the style that she is teaching is similar to what I have seen on soap operas, so it might be feeding into her persona. As Kelly pointed out, we are certainly aware of Dickinson as construct. In this sense I am wondering how we might be able to match-up the fantasy of these videos with some of the more specific material fantasies from soap operas? Is there some relationship between this video and gossip girl fashion websites (minus the explicit product placement)?
Additionally, I think some of the humor (certainly not all of it) that is often derived from clothing and dated fashion might relate to the way in which we often refer to beauty as “timeless” or fashion as “classic.” It is the same reason we laugh when we see “revolutionary and cutting-edge” technology from 20 years ago that has since become obsolete. I think in both cases there is a naïve sincerity in these claims that we find charming (yet we continue to make these same proclamations). I am often interested and perplexed by the way in which certain words circulate within makeover shows and fashion conversations. It frequently seems like a different language (I am frequently translating the Project Runway speak to my boyfriend), and while I am not suggesting this as an exercise, I have often wondered how one would approach a Keywords project in relation to some of the keywords for our class (e.g. femininity, beauty, etc).
“Fashion is something that can be acquired”
I had never heard fashion referred to as an object until I saw this clip, and immediately after watching I heard Tim Gunn make a distinction between silhouette and fashion. Dickson is talking about all of these outfits as great examples of “fashion,” and this seems to conflate fashion and taste here. Fashion is something that can be acquired or purchased, taste is something that is dictated by other forces (class, race, etc.). Initially I assumed that this was trying to teach taste (as makeover shows often present taste as a set of codes and rules), but I’m not clear that this isn’t just a brilliant spin on the words…we will teach “fashion” (i.e. how to purchase), but not “good taste”?
Post a Comment