Lesbian Communities
Class Discussion Outline The L Word, Entertaining Lesbians, and Constructions of Lesbian Communities/Identities
I. Visibility and Fictive “Meta-Identity”: Manufacturing Lesbian Communities/Celebrity
a. Fictional Lesbian Community
We’ve been discussing Gever’s analysis of celebrity in general and lesbian celebrity in particular. How can her analysis be applied to the construction of fictional lesbian communities?
i. How are the characters on The L Word constructed? Who are they trying to reach, and why? Are there limitations that are glaring in this particular construction of a lesbian community and what do those limitations mean?
Gever writes, “If the problem that prevents the legitimation of lesbians is our perceived threat to social order, what could be a better corrective than lesbians who are available only as idealized figures and are not likely to muddy the waters of projected fantasies by exhibiting their less-than-fabulous selves? The problem with this outcome is tat the visibility of “ordinary” lesbians, which is supposed to increase as the result of growing numbers of “out” stars, becomes even more elusive. Visibility politics centered on the entertainment industry recedes as a viable strategy.” (43)
It seems that a fictional show about a lesbian community might be the best vehicle for the entertainment industry to present idealized figures rather than “ordinary” lesbians. This fictional culture is malleable in a way that greatly benefits advertisers and those who market the show.
But Gever doesn’t stop there, she explains that although there is a split between celebrity representations/constructions of lesbian identity and more “ordinary” lesbian identities, there is a benefit to this split. In observing the ways in which visible celebrity lesbians and visible fictional lesbians are incorporated into the existing Hollywood culture, one can gauge the extent to which a lesbian must (often reluctantly) comply with particular gender and sexual norms to achieve inclusion. This is, Gever argues, the visibility of compromise (43). This can be seen in images of celebrity construction as well as the constructed realities of lesbian identity in fictional storylines on television. American celebrity culture is so deeply immersed in the fiction of television that it becomes difficult to discern the celebrity from the character.
ii. MEF clip: Further Off the Straight & Narrow: New Gay Visibility on TV:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q-kDkJN72-QThere is little discussion or allusion to homophobia on The L Word—is this a kind of a “performance of acceptance”?
Can we see a “conditional visibility” on The L word where only stories of “good gays who conform to middle class norms of respectability” are told even though it is shown on a subscription channel? How is this idea similar to that of Gever’s analysis of a visibility of compromise?
iii. So, how are “ordinary” lesbians responding to The L Word? How does the fan culture shape itself after The L Word and how does The L Word respond?
b. Fictional Constructed Celebrity
Let’s complicate this some: the construction of a construction of celebrity—that is, fictional lesbian celebrity. Consider the role of Shane as reluctant celebrity or Dana as closeted tennis professional/celebrity. (Shane:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=o-RC6y8Oq_k -- Dana clip on DVD)
Is this Hollywood attempting to control the conversation regarding negotiated compromise in lesbian representation? How does this become the co-optation of the dialogue in lesbian communities regarding visibility? What are we to make of Shane’s reluctance?
i. We’ve even got other fictional television shows citing The L Word as a cultural phenomenon. For instance, in The Office, when character Michael Scott is accused of homophobia he responds: “I watch The L Word… I watch Queer as [beep], okay?” Do these inter-fictional conversations between shows further complicate the relationship between actual lesbian communities and fictional lesbian communities? Or does a scene like this actually underscore the absurdity of looking to fictional lesbian communities to gain understandings of lesbian culture?
ii. Additionally, how’s this for complicated? The L Word has a website that includes a link to Second Life- a virtual world that has been created and inhabited by online players in real time. In Second Life there is a virtual version of the café (The Planet) where much of the socializing on The L Word takes place. Viewers are invited to have a cup of coffee at The Planet and “have a dance party with friends, play L Word games, watch clips and full episodes of the show….” (
http://www.sho.com/site/lword/second_life.do)
Similarly, Showtime hosts a site called
ourchart.com premised upon the fictional relationship chart that connects many of the lesbians on The L Word. An article in the New York Times said of the site:
The site, a joint venture with Showtime Networks, which is owned by CBS, is a way of acknowledging that “audiences own TV shows these days and they want interaction,” Ms. Chaiken said.
Eventually, the portion of the new site devoted to “The L Word” will become less important “as the community takes it over” with user-generated content, said Hilary Rosen, a founding partner and the site’s president. “Every lesbian has their own L world. We thought it would be really interesting to let go of the show in this environment and bring other people’s L worlds into the mix and let them share with each other.
Matthew Blank, chairman and chief executive of Showtime Networks, said the audience for the show “has a tremendous sense of community,” which he equated to “analog social networking.
Everyone I know who watches that show and is gay watches it with their friends,” he said. “It makes for a natural extension.” But he acknowledged that trying to build such a site from a show has not been done before. “We’re not sure what to expect.
(
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/18/technology/18chart.html?ex=1324098000&en=8a25959dfd589e4a&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss)
If the audience for the show “has a tremendous sense of community,” what is the purpose of creating this particular online space? What do you think Showtime is trying to do?
c. Beyond Fiction:
There’s also a very real lesbian celebrity happening here that is beyond the fiction of the show- whereas Martina was a lesbian first and a tennis pro second… the women in this show are known for their portrayal of lesbians first- questions of their “real life” sexuality come next.
i. Gever ends her book with this passage:
“[S]elf-fashioning projects nowadays have become the norm. The injunction to take charge of, discipline, organize, and plot a destiny for oneself has become compulsory. Which prompts a final question: will lesbians trade in imaginative assaults on normalcy for these well-made, well-managed, reasonable selves?”
Given that there have been significant changes in the representation of lesbians since Gever’s research, especially with the birth of The L Word, it is of some import to apply her analysis of celebrity culture to the fictive lesbian celebrity/community culture of The L Word. How does The L Word participate in the fashioning and construction of lesbian selves?
Has the blurry line between lesbian celebrity, fictional lesbian character, and “ordinary” lesbians led to a compulsory self-fashioning in “ordinary” lesbian communities?
Have “ordinary” lesbians become implicated in the strictly controlled representations of identity that celebrities have come to embody?
