Rocky Horror Picture Show Assignment PDF

Preview

Summary

Final assignment

COMM 3P18 (FILM 3P18, PCUL 3P18): Audience Studies
Fall 2014
Lectures: Tuesday: 8:00 pm – 10:00 pm, AS 202
Instructor: Dr. Brian Fauteux / [email protected]
Office hours: Tuesday 6pm – 7pm, SBH 337
Seminars:
Kait Kribs: Sem. 2 (Mon. ...

Description

How Patriarchal Discourses Influence The Rocky Horror Picture Show Audience and Shapes how Males and Females Perceive Queer Space: The Audience Reception through Queer and Feminist Perspectives

Martin Mirek 4712741 Comm 3P18

How Patriarchal Discourses Influence The Rocky Horror Picture Show Audience and Shapes how Males and Females Perceive Queer Space: The Audience Reception through Queer and Feminist Perspectives In Rocky Horror Picture Show musicals (RHPS), various audience members interact with and celebrates queer culture through several aesthetic activities. From its initial London production in June 1973, the RHPS earned a cult status as it deviated from traditional sexual norms (Macor, 2000). What makes the RHPS’s audience intriguing is that anyone can submerge in the queer culture and complete a queer readings, despite sexual orientation (Doty, 1993). In 1976, audience participation began in the New York’s theatrical versions through activities like counterpoint dialogue, props, dance, among others (Macor, 2000). To understand why certain activities are popular, an audience demographic analysis can grant insight into how dominant group’s discourses are constructed around RHPS’s queer and patriarchy discourses. When exploring queer theory, onlookers discover how straight-identifying audience can experience moments of queerness (Doty, 1993). Queer studies does not only look at queer positions but other possible factor. Brad Majors and Janet Weiss represent the educational and religious influence on marriage, in contrast to Frank-N-Furter, the transvestite scientist, who lifts this veil and portrays its ambiguity (Wienstock, 2008). This results in experimentation, where Brad and Janet are seduced by Frank, and subsequently Janet is seduce by Rocky. Consequently, Frank loses grip over the sadistic masculine environment he formed. Radical feminists would argue that woman do not play a dominant role in the media, but rather as an object (Robbin, 2000). Female spectators may feel uncomfortable about the underlying patriarchal values found within RHPS’s main star, Frank (Robbin, 2000). The analysis will determine what the cult’s demographic

is, how viewers’ perform queer reading to interact with gender and sexuality concepts, and lastly how the underlying patriarchal order of Frank may deter certain viewers. Queer and feminist readings from Wordpress will be analyzed to validate that real world accounts do exist. The RHPS’s audience produced the first known instances of cult culture. A cult is a social group performing a set of rituals at productions catering to a repeated audience (Austin, 1981). Cult productions are typically shown on Fridays and Saturdays at midnight across U.S. college town (Austin, 1981). The audience’s demographic is describe as “privileged children of the middle class” (Austin, 1981., p. 1). Generally, cult members share an interest in trash esthetic in cult as well as dominant masculine presence (Austin, 1981). This may very well reflect in vastly unconventional characters like Frank-N-Furter. Filmmaker’s original discourse are irrelevant, as agents’ gives strength to certain discourses (Austin, 1981) . Discourses are a specific way of logic and language that revolves around a particular topic (Storey 2012). Before understanding audience queer and feminist reception of RHPS, the demographic of the audience is reviewed. In 1979, Austin interviewed 45% of the 562 consumers available at a theatre in Rochester, New York (1981). He classified spectators into separate categories: First timers, veterans, and regulars. Veterans are identified as those who have seen the RHPS at least one to twelve times, while regulars have seen it thirteen or more time (Austin, 1981). Within the survey, at least two-thirds of those interviewed had seen the RHPS at least once (Austin, 1981). Furthermore, the average number of attendances was 7.03, the median, 1.22 (Austin, 1981). If one were to exclude first timers, the mean number would had been 11.39, the median, 2.98 (Austin, 1981). In table 1, not only was there a significant repeated audience, there is a small group of devoted regulars.

Table 1: RHPS ‘s Veterans and Regulars Visits in Four Weeks Veterans (n=283) None 43.5% Once 23.3% Twice 17% Three times 8.8% Four times 3.6% Five times 2.5% Six times 0.7% Seven times 0.3% Eight times 0.3% Table 1: demographic participation

Regulars (n=58) 8.6% 8.6% 17.2% 12.1% 12.1% 8.6% 5.2% 3.5% 24.1%

Researcher’s notices individuals hardly traveled alone. The most common attendance is ranked as follows: mixed sex groups, all-male group, and then all-female group (Austin, 1981). Table 2: RHPS’s Social Group Demographic Analysis First-timers Veterans

Regulars

Total (n=554)

Alone Opposite-sex

(n=213) 0.6% 9.9%

(n=285) 1.4% 11.2

(n=56) 7.1% 19.6

1.6% 11.6

friend Same-sex friend Spouse Male group Female group Mixed-sex

7.0% 2.3% 17.8% 10.3% 52.1%

6.7% 0.0 21.0% 11.6% 48.1%

8.9% 5.4% 16.1% 1.8% 41.1%

7.0% 1.5% 19.3% 10.1% 48.9%

group Table 2: Social Group Analysis Males’ age ranging between 17 and 22 made up a larger percentage of the RHPS’s cult than did females (Austin, 1981). Cult shows generally have poor distribution channels, hence word of mouth among young males plays a pivotal role in fluctuating the cult’s viewing habits.

Table 3: RHPS’s Gender Demographic First-timers % Veterans

Sex Male Female

(n=214) 48.6% 51.4%

Age (n=213)m 13-16 20.3% 17-22 63.4% Over 22 16.3% Table 3: Gender Demographic

Regulars

Total

% (n=285) 56.1% 43.9%

% (n=58) 65.5% 34.5%

% (n=557) 54.2% 45.8%

(n=283) 17.3% 73.6% 9.1%

(n=57) 7.2% 65% 27.8%

(n=553) 17.4% 68.4% 13.9%

The primary characteristics that differentiates this audience is that they interact using counterpoint dialogue, dance, prop, and camp. Counterpoint dialogue is where the audience can verbally engage the play’s characters to improve awkward scenes (Macor, 2000). Regulars not only prepare counterpoint scripts, but distribute dance steps handouts before shows (Macor, 2000). Addressees are taught the steps to enthral in the fantastical effects the “Time Warp” dance has to offer. It shifts viewers away from linearity; in other words, heteronormativity. To enrich the dialogue and dance, props are used as a visual counterpoint among viewers. Props like rice is thrown during Brad and Janet’s wedding to allow audience members to be fully submerge in the scene. Male audience members who dress up as Frank-NFurter, utilize the concept of “camp”. Camp is an exaggerate fashion style that contrasts commonplace fashion, similar to drag fashion (Austin, 1981). Conversely, camp is not restricted to homosexual subcultures as musical style share this same trait. Madonna’s camp persona, for instance, has heighten her image, thereby creating a powerful discourse (Doty, 1993).

The cult’s interaction with such media texts is meaningful because audience’s reception of RHPS are ingrained in queer and feminist teachings. Queer studies include any type of sexual activity or identity within both normative and deviant categories (Doty, 1993). The music production portrays how heterosexual texts can be read as queer, connoting that straightidentifying audience members can experience moments of queerness too (Doty, 1993). Accordingly, Frank challenges the validity and reliability of heteronormative discourse. He acknowledges that one’s gender may be fixed, but he persists one’s sexuality is fluid in nature. When males imitate Frank and camp, queer “lens” are positioned and a queer reading can be performed covertly (Weinstock, 2008). In such cults, camp becomes a private code, even an identity among some small circles (Austin, 1981). Queer reading consists of revealing the underlying fantasy elements in addition to understanding how queer reception functions (Doty, 1993). Audience members get to express a less-censored range of queer desires through dancing, dressing up, and interacting. As agents, each spectator bring their own interpretive spin to the texts presented and makes their own fantasy (Webster, 1998). The majority of members are young heterosexual males, thus they have leverage to implement their own masculine discourse. Even so, sexuality is a site of constant struggle (Doty, 1993). The word “queer” is ambiguous as it implies agents can obtain a vast assortment of pleasures. In comparison, traditional sexual politics are concerned with exclusivity and reproduction (Weinstock, 2008). Queer or non-queer positions are not the only angle viewers can read into. Other factors, such as religious and educational allegiances, can influence an individual’s identity. During the Wedding, Brad and Janet signified the American gothic portrait or the tradition American perspective (Weinstock, 2008). Additionally, Brad and Janet fell in love

in school, where civil marriage often regulate sexual behaviour (Weinstock, 2008). The conservative knowledge are juxtaposed with the alien’s expansive scientific discoveries. This idea of expanding one’s way of being to new sites, it can serves to destabilize the fearfulness those with strong heterosexual values may endure (Weinstock, 2008). State authorities, like Dr. Scott, are confined to their wheelchair, or “straight” ideologies, in an attempt to hide their queerness. It questions whether the authority figure was occupying the queer space all along. Through queer studies, two main thoughts are derived. First, queerness has always been within the sphere of conventionality, however it has been obscure by the status quo. Secondly, that queerness is desirable among participants when not discourage by the status quo. The show’s theme song, “Don’t dream it, be it” addresses the spectators to engage in their own sexual fantasies. Conventional knowledge has led to the hindrance of the audience’s pleasures. Weinstock contends that fantasy are a different version of the real (2008). It does not harm the conventional world, but rather satisfies the on-screen participants and viewers through the incredible experience as the audience chants the mantras “Don’t dream it, be it!” At the same time, when the audience is initially exposed to Frank, he governs the construct of the reality. It is his dualistic nature that grants him power to seduce both sexes. When Frank sings “I’m not much of a man by the light of day, but by night I’m one hell of lover” he acknowledges his manhood is masked by the female-gendered clothing and makeup he wears (Weinstock, 2008., p. 198). In so doing, he acknowledges how he bases gender assumption on one’s image. Furthermore, the use of night and day shows contrasts in the visibility of one’s sexuality. Frank is able to be a lover for both Brad and Janet as sexuality is not fixed. He is able to be a “mother” to Rocky, while being a sexual outlaw with Brad and Janet.

Frank’s sexual disobedience becomes a platform for creativity, while refusing to be categorized by them. Rocky is an image of Frank’s unrealistic sexual fantasies. In the “Charles Atlas” song for instance, Frank breaks the male anatomy down into parts and concentrates on the parts he lust (Weinstock, 2008). Thus, it reflects on how some viewer’s presumption about masculinity are not realistic.

RHPS has so far shown interest in literature tools, political uses of drag, sexual ambiguity, and the institution of marriage. These all ties into the feminist reading, arguing that Frank’s sadistic masculinity appeals to the dominant male fantasy (Robbins, 2000). Sadistic masculinity is the act of inflicting physical or emotion pain in an effort to maintain power in a social struggle, drawing on societal discourses (Robbins, 2000). Generally, media’s ability to subvert gender norms has been limited to masculine ideals. Women do not often play a dominant role, but rather function as a sign or object, not as the speaking subject (Brown, 1997). Difficulty to be the subject is experienced because the “male gaze “guides the discursive narrative. Through the male gaze, a man emerges as the dominant power within the sexual fantasy (Robbins, 2000). Janet was passive and objectified by the active gaze of men like Frank as witnessed in some statements like “I’ve laid the seed, it should be all you need. You’re as sensual as a pencil.” (Robbin, 2000. p. 3). The male gaze creates of unequal power structure by objectifying the gazed (Robbin, 2000). Hegemony is where genders are dominant in two ways: gathering allies and dominating enemies (Brown, 2000). The leading ideology, masculinity, hails allies to help maintain their interpretation of the reality or the patriarchal order. On the other hand, Janet’s sexuality threaten Frank’s version when she sleeps with Rocky. The

denaturalization of gender permits males to adapt their own version of the feminine while maintaining a visible male or state authority. The fantasy revolves around how male or patriarchal submissiveness to the female image is paired with a need to conquer it (Robbin, 2000). This male gaze in RHPS is made up of two identification components: Transvestism and masquerade. The male drag is able to take control of a woman’s image through their drag performance (Robbin, 2000). Queens masquerade by use of camp (Robbin, 2000). Frank’s overbearing nature in addition to this excessiveness could deflect female spectators due to the underlying patriarchal order presented. By imitating the feminine, Frank attempts to overthrow Janet, or the feminine (Robbin, 2000). Frank dualistic nature eroticize his audience through his heavy heels, the torn leggings, and the leather boustier. Nevertheless, when a women is presence, she creates a anxiety of masculine submissiveness. Frank’s fetish is constructed around fulfilling his own desires. The play shifts from camp celebration to a tragic spectacle when the RKO broadcasting tower falls; as the film’s erotic energy dies with it (Robbin, 2010). It destabilizes the regime of hostility by the dominant masculine force. To escape the sadistic voyeurism, women need to become both subjects and objects to de-stabilize gender binaries and creates additional possibilities for women (Robbin, 2010).

Numerous examples of queer and feminist critiques are available online which support my argument. One Veteran girl, Pinky Madison, has seen the show performed live six times. She explains how she takes young first timers as her primary social group (Madison, 2010). The shows marketing tactic, word of mouth, seems to better attract young audiences than any other

demographics. She mention how when entering the new environment she had to brace herself for “people in…gender non-conforming clothing” (Madison, 2010). When she felt comfortable entering the queer space, she demonstrated a great understanding in how queer readings function. Madison understood that one’s sexual orientation is irrelevant to queer readings (2010). For instance, cross-dressing men can experience moments of queerness. In so doing, (Weinstock, 2008). Like Frank, she realises that sexuality is a site of deep exploration and that audience members can experience less-censored range of queer desires through dancing, dressing up , and interacting. She observed that cross-dressing were able to change their sexual personality by applying camp styles. As agents, she note that participants can make their own inappropriate counterpoint dialogue, jokes, and so forth that they could never have the pleasure of doing elsewhere (Madison, 2010). On the other hand, a radical feminist discourse may not find some of these sexist counterpoint dialogue or jokes appropriate in creating an environment for gender equality. Nyux, a transgender veteran, felt that the dominant audience share traits of misogyny, homophobia, and so forth (Nyux, 2010). In a particular instance, the counterpoint dialogue revolved around individuals calling Janet, the rape victim, a “stupid slut” for not saving herself for Brad (Nyux, 2010). The blogger’s friends assured her that Janet looked like she enjoyed or it opened her up to new experiences (Nyux, 2010). She refused to accept this version of reality, noticing how the male gaze of the dominant audience could contributes to the sadistic masculine themes (Robbins, 2000). She did not want to see herself within that perspective as an object of pleasure for men. She made a valid point that cult’s forcefulness to be overtly sexual may exclude rape victims, asexual, demisexual and more. The leading discourse, masculinity, seeks to find

comrades and define their enemies as sluts to empower the social group (Robbins, 2000). At one point, Nyux and her friend wanted to ally with the exclusive cult by making out, but decided not to present themselves “sex fodder” to the aggressive pleasure-seeking audience (Nyux, 2012). She felt such provocative acts can encourage rape and be used as a weapon of domination. In this case, Frank and his followers may be seen overstepping their boundaries by pushing his own sadistic masculine pleasures. This can be seen in statements like “I’ve laid the seed, it should all you need.” (Robbin, 2000., p. 3). She acknowledges that the dominant narrative ensnares Janet, as she continues to fall into the pitfalls of being objectified and acted upon (Nyux, 2012). This permits the dominant audience to denounce Janet as a slut and overlook Brad’s homosexual experience. Robbin debates that there exists a struggle for the male to submit to the female image, all the while wanting to control it (2000). She proclaims that “I want to feel at home with everyone, but I also can’t do that with so many parts of my identity being attacked….as a biracial transsexual girl, a victim of abuse, and an intersectional feminist” (Nyux, 2012). Positive commentators like Tom presented a constructive oppositional reading about shock value benefits, but was mindful of the rape victims, he even include rape trigger alerts, similar to spoiler alert, before critiquing the point. Others like The Real Pope 420’s oppositional reading represented the dominant male discourse, but the approach was very disrespectful to the audience. His overall message was “No. Fuck you. Janet is a dumb slut. Frank is a sex god” (Nyux, 2012). He further states that “we should be able to feel normal” and impose sexual encounter on whoever without reflection. 420 felt that the original poster was “taking herself too seriously” (Nyux, 2012). At the same time, hegemonic position encourages the commentators to be rude and dictate the subordinate group. Nyux counteract, making

points like “calling a rape victim a slut isn’t transgressive” or the “legitimate rape” where men argue “she asking for it” (Nyux, 2012). She does admit that there are a lot of valuable components of RHPS, like gender experimentation and challenging a dominant force, which could be focused on. Overall, the prevailing discourse turns away sexual abuse victims and others who may develop an oppositional reading concerning forceful sexual activities. By understanding the audience’s demographic and two distinct types of readings, queer theory and feminism, the research demonstrated a positive correlation between the disproportionate amounts of males in the space and how they can manipulate masculine ideals into the queer space. This dominant masculine discourse, as seen in Frank and audience’s queer persona, submits to the female image while attempting to conquer femininity in the process. The film does present moments of profound queer moments individuals can capitalize on, like “Don’t Dream it, be it,” but some RHPS’s enthusiasts may not treat the queer space with equal care; substituting their own selfish fantasy. Activities like counterpoint dialogue, drag, and so forth are as just as important as the play’s text, if not more, for long-term success. Perhaps those agents who mistaken Frank’s dominating nature for the source of all male sexual fantasies could be re-educated i...