Archive for the ‘Arts’ Category

L-Word launches lesbian linking site

Wednesday, April 11th, 2007

Judy Jarvis ’07

Inspired by the fictional flow chart of hook-ups on Showtime’s The L-Word, an underground Vassar lesbian hook-up chart was sketched out this fall. The Vassar Chart spread quickly via sight, word-of-mouth, and a couple of e-mail forwards, with each recipient adding on her own knowledge to the many criss-crossing lines. Seeing the College’s lesbian networks displayed this way offered a subversive thrill, allowing viewers to visually chart the overlaps, the patterns and the obvious individual preferences.

It makes perfect sense, then, that an L-Word affiliated website, OurChart.com, has just launched a virtual version of the show’s brainchild to try to capitalize on this kind of information sharing. Though the television show’s version is exclusively about hook-ups, OurChart.com postures itself as more of a Facebook-like friend-and-maybe-more type of networking site. Visually the Chart itself looks like a spider web, with member photos linked to each other by thin gray lines, and photos that bob when you scroll your mouse across them. Clicking on another member’s snapshot opens a small window, which allows you to view their chart, add them as a friend, send them a message, or go to their profile.

Dedicated L-Word viewer Liza ’07 joined OurChart.com because “I thought it would be a fun way to connect with other women. I was interested to see how a lesbian-only online community would play itself out.” But her boifriend, Kaeden Field ’05, standing in the kitchen beside her, countered, “I’m friends with gay people already, I don’t need to know dykes all over the country.” But, s/he also concedes Liza’s point that OurChart “would be good for [advertising] events” to the lesbian community, possibly even inspiring the expansion of real-life lesbian-to-lesbian connections, especially in places with a high lesbian concentration. Liza also added that the OurChart format is not as limiting as Facebook, since you can see the profiles of all members, even before adding them as one of your vectors.

As for the site’s flaws, the total network is still under 1,000 people, and relies perhaps a little too much on the show. L-Word actresses Katherine Moennig and Leisha Hailey have profiles, but there’s a falsity to their presence, especially because they are founding partners of the site and thus have a vested interest in using their celebrity status to expand the site.

Liza points out that because the Chart is only about hookups on the L-Word, OurChart’s friend-ness “does make for this weird dynamic—it was about hook-ups, now it’s just about friends?” Kaeden jumps in coyly, “I think it’s be better if it was hook-ups, it’d be funny.” And perhaps that will be OurChart’s next step.

Pro-gay, anti-gay marriage?
Homotopia offers radical queer critique of gay nuptials

Thursday, March 29th, 2007

Sarah E. Brown ‘09

When: Today, Thur 3.29 (7-9pm)

Where: Students’ Building, Second and Third Floor (UpCDC)

Price: FREE

Shot in the unabashedly gritty style of radical feminist guerilla films of the 1970s, Homotopia challenges traditional discourse surrounding gay marriage, laying bare the myth that all who oppose gay nuptials are necessarily homophobic. The film screening is sponsored by QCVC, ACT OUT and the Vassar Democrats in an effort to spark campus dialogue about the myriad issues surrounding same-sex marriage. Presenting radical feminist and anti-racist challenges to the institution of marriage, the film weaves a love story into a queer utopian narrative that gives voice to a silenced, alternative take on the debate. Only 35-minutes long, this film still packs a punch that raises more questions than it answers—which is exactly what San Francisco, Calif. filmmakers Chris Vargas and Eric Stanley intended. Post-screening, stay for the panel discussion which will include the filmmakers; Evan Casper-Futterman ’07, the first child in New York state to be legally adopted by his mother’s partner; and Vassar professors Bethany Dunn and Ken Robinson, whose respective Philosophy and Film department backgrounds should make for a discussion that’s not to be missed.

Riot Grrls, homocore and beyond: a gay music primer

Thursday, March 29th, 2007

Mike Newmark ’08

No one can be blamed for believing that “gay music” doesn’t really exist, or that it ever really existed at all. Modern music is commonly divided along the lines of musical aesthetics, or sonic signifiers that slot bands under a given genre umbrella. Besides the fact that this makes it easy for a consumer to find CDs similar to the ones that he or she likes (“If you like X, try Y!”), it’s also mainly just the most instinctive way to do things: Bush sounds like Local H sounds like Everclear sounds like Live, but instead of separating them based on lyrics or intention, the powers that be went ahead and called it all grunge. Whatever.

Yet gay music was a viable—if not prominent—force within the underground community in the not-so-distant past, united not by a shared sound, per se, but by a shared ideal. In 1985, gay multimedia artists G. B. Jones and Bruce LaBruce laid the groundwork for this ideal with the completion of the indie zine J.D.s (short for Juvenile Delinquents), a scrappy-looking publication that was more well known for what it helped to mobilize than what was actually in it. The J.D.s editors viciously attacked both mainstream straight and gay cultures, especially the latter, which they believed was isolating itself and shunning diversity. In the next few years, other magazines dedicated to the cause would crop up and bands would begin to crystallize, culminating in the J.D.s’ first musical offering in 1990, J.D.s Top Ten Homocore Hit Parade Tape.

The word in that title that knocks people over is “homocore,” of course. Unbelievably, that word was abandoned early after its inception for being too emblematic of M.O.R. homosexuality. The more inclusive “queercore” replaced it, although some of those who are still involved with the movement use the term “homocore” with a sort of nostalgia. Queercore was born during the waning days of the fed-heavy Reagan administration and at the tail end of punk rock’s prime (when the genre began to welcome a number of left-field punk variants), which made the new movement a near-perfect fit for its surrounding milieu.

Queercore bands were fiercely independent and usually experimentally punkish, deviating from the “hard, fast, and short” rule of 1980s hardcore. The sounds of these bands might have been disparate within punk rock (The Apostles flirted with metal and industrial while Bomb was decidedly neo-psychedelic) but all were unified by the goal of expressing themselves—if not to be accepted by the mainstream, then at least to be heard and understood. However, queercore bands still had trouble making inroads into the wider independent music scene (their shows were limited mainly to cities in Canada and along the Pacific Coast), but the punk community and indie record labels such as K Records and Kill Rock Stars were willing to embrace them.

A slightly more successful relative of queercore was “riot grrrl,” a post-punk subtype consisting mostly of females from the Pacific Northwest nearly always dealing with issues of feminism and women’s rights. Led by the uber-charismatic Kathleen Hanna of Bikini Kill, the movement began similarly to queercore—with an influential zine (also called Riot Grrrl, that Hanna helped to create), and a crop of charged, punky bands that followed in its wake.

Some riot grrrl acts were short-lived but incredibly influential (Bikini Kill), while others had careers that stretched well into the 1990s (Scrawl, Sleater-Kinney). The grrrls’ success relative to queercore seemed to have less to do with their sound and more to do with their feminist ideals, which were easier for most people to swallow than out-and-out homosexuality. After all, feminism gained sufficient traction in the 1960s, decades before the gay community had even begun to become visible.

A handful of queercore bands finally broke the ice in the early-to-mid ‘90s, bringing straight listeners face-to-face with the cantankerous movement. The farthest-reaching band in terms of pure popularity was Pansy Division, a pop-punk band whose sound would be instantly familiar to anyone who grew up on Weezer, but whose songs unfalteringly dealt with homosexuality in all its forms, from wishing their old boyfriends well in other relationships to extolling the joys of jizz.

Pansy Division took a slightly different approach than most queercore bands, trading in blunt force for wry humor, but their insistence on revealing their gay lifestyle without trying to proselytize anyone perfectly encapsulated the original queercore manifesto by the J.D.s editors. Ironically, it was Pansy Division’s fluke entry into the mainstream that finally brought the queercore movement the amount of attention it sought when they opened for Green Day on their 1994 tour. As a band, Pansy Division was short of remarkable, but the exponential exposure they precipitated explains why present queercore bands and fans speak of the Bay Area pop-punkers with the reverence usually reserved for rock and roll legends.

Another important gay band was God Is My Co-Pilot, who weren’t the most successful of the queercore lot but doubtlessly the most ambitious. Openly bisexual couple Sharon Topper and Craig Flanagin pulled out all the stops across their 33 (!) records, incorporating noise-rock, free jazz and cowpunk (among other wacky genres) into their fractured pop pastiche, and singing a number of their songs in foreign languages, including (but not limited to) Finnish and Yiddish. God Is My Co-Pilot catapulted queercore into previously unimaginable realms by scaling artistic heights while staying true to the issues of sexuality that the movement sought to address. In retrospect, God Is My Co-Pilot may have been too experimental to be leaders of a movement that wished to exhort an ideal above all else, but they were still a galvanizing force, injecting the genre with a kind of erudition it had previously never seen.

By the late ‘90s, queercore had sunk back to the most underground levels. Queercore shows happen sporadically across the country, publicized—as it was two decades ago—by zines and cassette tapes even in the technological age. Fans lament the passing of their 1990s heroes that brought queercore its too-brief 15 minutes of fame, and continue to fight for the genre even as they know it is doomed to remain below the radar. However, gay music still finds a home in the work of some singer-songwriters (most notably Ani DiFranco), and some listeners are now drawn to the music of queercore notables, hearing it less as a form of social protest and more as a document of a zeitgeist that wasn’t actually so far away. The way most of us admire gay music of the ‘80s and ‘90s is peculiar: we may not put it on our iPods, but it surely deserves praise for its adherence to its ideals of justice, liberation and acceptance. That’s something we can all appreciate.

Voguing brings black gay sensuality to the dance floor

Wednesday, February 21st, 2007

Naquan Earp ’09

You may have never heard of it. Or maybe you’re knee-deep in it. Whatever the case may be, there is always something to learn about the Ballroom scene. The Ball culture is a world that is so complex, that to describe such a thing to someone who is unfamiliar with it is somewhat daunting. It is a subculture, with standards and values—an underground community that celebrates the individual talents possessed by black gay men that go unnoticed to mainstream society.

Imagine that you are in a dance hall, at night. The large room is filled with black and latino gay men—some dressed as women, mostly everyone in extravagant or fashionable attire. Chairs are set for an audience, chatter and music are amidst and then, the program begins. An emcee introduces the judges, the Ball hosts, and other noteworthy attendees. The hosts of each Ball are from a particular “House,” a group of black gay men ranging in age. The House groups resemble a large fraternity of sorts, with the leaders referred to as the “Mother” and “Father” of the House.

The Ball-Hosting House is hardly the only House at the event. The entire Ball consists of people from different Houses who represent their organization in the night’s venue. The Ball itself is marked with night’s theme, which is the premise for the costumes attendants are decked out in. In the middle of the room, there is a “runaway” where contestants from the Houses will compete or “walk.” The competitions are divided into categories and each House submits its best contestant(s) for that category. As the program progresses, winners of each category are presented with trophies, and the evening finishes with a Grand Prize category, usually offering cash and a trophy to the overall winner.

Essential to this culture is the dance form known as “vogue”. A combination of martial arts, modern dance, and gymnastics, vogue encompasses flamboyant body movements that stay in tune with the beat of the music. Each move accentuates the baselines, rhythms, sound effects, and vocals of the music playing in the background. These men have taken the act of posing for the fashion lens and merged it with the art of dance, creating a new type of expression called “Voguing”. The style enacts each pose rapidly in conjunction with the beat, meant to mimic the fast clicking camera of a fashion photographer.

The high energy of the Ball seems to engage into the vogue dancers in a battle. Each one attempts to perform a movement that is flashier than the other, and the dancer himself gains confidence from the audience’s approval. Dancing has always been a part of African-American culture; in black gay culture’s context, this is what a “Ball” is. The Ball culture, although close-knit and almost insulated–at least from the larger white community—is very accepting to interested black gay youth.