If it hasn't been apparent thus far based on my blog posts, I'm a bit obsessed with TV. Well, last night I watched Will Ferrell's (semi) one man show, You're Welcome, America. The notorious funny guy impersonated George W. Bush for 90 minutes with a "plot" woven loosely together by episodic moments from the former president's life and career. I, like many people (regardless of political leanings), enjoy a good Bush joke/impersonation. And, overall, Ferrell did an excellent job mimicking and perfecting the Bush faux pas he once impersonated weekly on SNL. He also relied heavily on repetition of phrases and images in ways that kept the audience in front of him (and me at home) chuckling--particularly when a graphic image of what were supposed to be the former president's genitals kept cropping up in each picture montage.
However, one aspect--especially in light of all of the gender-based discussions we've been having in class--was exceptionally troubling: the show's treatment of Condoleeza Rice. Within one of the picture montages, Ferrell as Bush reflected "lovingly" on every member of the Bush administration. Alongside Cheney's photo, Ferrell discussed how he walked into the White House basement and saw Cheney signing a Faustian "deal with the devil." Colin Powell was only lightly heckled. Rumsfeld and Rove got some harsher attention. After the slide show, "Bush" mentioned that only one person really knew how to keep him working late at night. Then, an actress resembling Rice (but adorned in a SUPER short skirt) sauntered on the stage, accompanied by what can only be referred to as "stripper music." The Rice character danced around Ferrell, positioned herself on the desk, opened her legs widely, and the two actors simulated sexual activity.
My problems with this scene are twofold, with the first being less germane to this class in that females in office/positions of power are ultimately put in imagined scenes of [sexual] subordination--Rice's character was dancing on display for "Bush" and for the audience before positioning herself under Ferrell for the simulation scene. The other issue I take with this scene has more to do with comediennes/actresses in general.
I looked this actress up on IMDB.com (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1386011/), and her name is Pia Glenn. Based on the lack of credits, I'd guess she's early in her film career. However, some user comments indicate her acting/stage career is a bit more developed; she was in Spamalot!. Nonetheless, aside from her striking resemblance to Rice, it seems to me that an assertion could be made regarding females on the stage: to be funny, for the most part, they often have to rely on their bodies and/or sexuality. No one cares what Will Ferrell's body looks like; in fact, it's almost funnier if he's a bit out of shape. (I recall an old episode of Conan where Ferrell arrived nearly nude on set, dressed in an elf hat and green thong.) Sure, some have fought against this (Cho, Garofalo, Roseanne). But, thinking about all the Funny Ladies, most were discussing issues of sexuality/dating, and many used their bodies to do so...
So, to be noticed, or, more specifically, to be noticed as funny, perhaps some women feel they must begin their careers on stage/film by mildly exploiting the female on a holistic level (even the female like Rice who was in a position of power). I mean, I probably would never have noticed Pia Glenn if she had made less of an "entrance."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is also true of women outside of comedy. I'm thinking about business attire. A man can pretty simply choose a solid-colored suit and be safe. He might have to choose a tie carefully, but that has little to do with how he presents his body. Women, on the other hand, are expected to be attractive and professional at the same time. They must walk the line between sexy and conservative, and inevitably will be pegged into one of the categories. Think about the scrutiny that Hillary Clinton got for the way she dressed during the primary race. She was criticized for her pant suits making her too masculine. When she wore an outfit that showed some cleavage, she was criticized for that. Michelle Obama gets similar scrutiny. Her dresses are sometimes considered too sexy for her role, but if she didn't display that personality, she would be chastized for that, too.
ReplyDeleteHi, Lauren,
ReplyDeleteI've been dying to see this Ferrell show, but I don't have HBO. I hear ya on the women and body thing, and I definitely think that the "sexy female body" is taken advantage of in comedy. What I found really interesting, though, was that Joan Rivers, in an interview with Vanity Fair pointed out that the first female standups were not pretty: Phyllis Diller, Joan herself, someone named Totie Fields. Rivers even called these first female standups "grotesque." I've been wondering where the shift to "sexy bodies" happened.
The shifts may have occurred from audience demand, and if we look closely at our culture, the need to remain young (and virile for men) may have had something to do with that. You haven't mentioned Minnie Pearl, who in the fifties and sixties was a regular on Hee-Haw--also before most of y'all's time--who fit the category Rivers mentions. Rosie O'Donnell and Roseanne are the newer generation of women who don't play on sexual stereotypes, tho much of their humor relies on their "outsider" status in this style of humor, which seems to uphold the stereotype rather than dispel it.
ReplyDeleteWhere does SNL's parody of Sarah Palin fit into your analysis? Seems that she may have gotten the same treatment as Condeleeza Rice, but with less objections? Any thoughts on why?
How sad that Totie Fields has fallen by the wayside of comedy--she was a heavy, short, dark haired woman who appeared on talk shows and sometimes in film if I'm not mistaken. Even Irma Bombeck, whom we read, is not nearly as well known today as she was in the sixties and seventies. Her books are all pretty much out of print.
On the flip side, Doris Day made a career out of the romantic comedy, and was decidedly "sexy" if in a more wholesome, traditional way.
I'm glad you posted on Ferrel's "You're Welcome America", and more specifically that you talked about the depiction of Condoleeza Rice.
ReplyDeleteWhen watching the special, I was extremely pissed off at the depiction of Rice as some stripper-moron. She is an incredibly smart woman. Not only was she secretary of state, she has been a professor at Stanford and is an accomplished Piano player.
It is ONLY because she is a Republican that she can be mistreated this way. In think anyone, Republicam or Democrat, can laugh at George Bush. Certainly the guy was not the best speaker. But with Rice, there are no distinguishing characterisitics to make fun of. So what do the writers of the show do? Reduce her to a floozy. If Rice was a Democrat, and the same joke had been done, the show would have received immediate backlash from the media. The same media that would depict her in political cartoons as an "uncle tom". Once again, only because she is a black republican. Humor, no matter how exaggerated, has to be based on some truth. And there is NO truth to the depiction of Rice. It was absolutely disgusting and rude and completely disrespectful. Of course if she was a good ole' democrat like all democrats expect blacks to be, and to be otherwise in their minds is treason to their race, this depiction of her as some lacivious moron would never have happened.
shame on the writers and the people that laughed at that depicition of a very classy, motivated, and intelligent woman.