Razzle-dazzle 'em...

[saxikath]

Went to see Chicago last night with ex-roommate. Enjoyed it very much. All three leads surprised me with the quality of their singing and dancing, though Renee Zellweger seemed a little ... I'm not sure what, overly angular? Not quite confident? in her dancing. (And her costumes didn't help; they tended to make her shoulders look very bony and square.) But Catherine Zeta-Jones... wowza. That woman has some serious pipes, and danced like she meant it.



Having the song and dance numbers all (well, almost all) take place in a sort of alternate reality was a bit strange. Part of the way musicals work is that, in their reality, people just burst into song and dance, and nobody thinks it's weird. However, this did give them the chance to do some visually stunning things -- the marionette number, for instance, and the circus for "Razzle-Dazzle."


Afterwards, ex-roomie and I were talking about it, and I made the comment that it was great to see a larger woman (Queen Latifah as Mama; great performance!) being body-confident enough to wear a tight, sexy dress that left little to the imagination in the cleavage department. Ex-roomie made the comment, "Of course, it had to be a black woman."

Which got me thinking. And I'm not sure she's wrong. Is it more acceptable for a woman of color to be large? Or is it more acceptable, or more expected, for a large woman of color to have strength and confidence and attitude than it is for a large white woman? And if it is more acceptable, why? Is it racism? Is it a leftover from the days when it was widely believed that African Americans had less restraint over their libidos than whites? Or is it more positive, in that African American culture is more accepting of larger women? Setting aside issues of vocal styles and whatnot, could a larger white woman have done the same and be accepted?

I have no answer to any of the above. Just ruminating.

Comments

[zenala.livejournal.com]

I've definitely noticed something along the lines of that on TV--there seem to be a lot of sitcoms with large black women as "nice" characters, but it's a lot harder to think of the same for white women.

(Now, what I personally hate is when I'm watching a show and I realize that if I were in the same room as the actors, I'd be towering over them, even the men. But that's just me. At least I'm over my phase in high school of thinking that just because girls who are 5'2 or 5'3 weigh 120 lbs that I should, too...) (I'd just like to add I was never even close to being underweight)

Anyways, glad to hear Chicago's a good movie. It's finally playing in Ithaca, so I think I'll see it sometime this week--I was a bit hesitant about driving 2 hours to Syracuse to see it (though eventually I might have to drive up to Syracuse anyway to have my bass looked at... sigh... the downside of a small town)

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

I think it's true that there's a cultural phenomenon at play: that is, there really is more appreciation for large-figured women *within* black American culture. (grit your teeth and cue up "Baby Got Back"...)

Whether and why *white* Americans are more tolerant of large black women than large white women is a point to analyze separately. But I'm going to assert that, by extension, it has a lot to do with self-acceptance. Large black women aren't seen as constantly, subliminally *apologizing* for being fat the way large white women are, because they don't have to be. Fat on black women can read as "powerful" where on white women it's more likely to read "powerless". Queen Latifah rocks the house in that scene because she's in touch with her inner sex goddess :-) and willing (instead of too scared) to take that powerful side of herself seriously; and therefore so do we, as audience. it's awesome. I wish more women would take lessons in that.

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah, and I forgot to add... I really, really like the song in Utopia about strapping English maidenhood:

A wonderful joy our eyes to bless,
In her magnificent comeliness,
Is an English girl of eleven stone two,
And five foot ten in her dancing shoe!

Eleven stone two is 156 pounds, which is possibly even on the slender side for a woman of 5'10"; me, I'm thirteen stone three or four. But it made me really happy listening to this whole song in praise of sturdy athletic women. Was Gilbert being sincere, or satirical? I'd hate to think badly of him, so I will take it as the former :-)

[sanpaku.livejournal.com]

I don't have a grand answer to the questions, but I think it's interesting that the racist, Jim Crow stereotype of large black women was not originally meant to imply that they "had less restraint over their libidos than whites" -- in fact, the reverse. The Mammy stereotype was meant to de-sexualize the black servant in the household, so that she could not be seen as a threat or rival to the lady of the house, or a subject of white male desire. (There's an excellent -- albeit highly disturbing -- site discussing this aspect of racist caricature, a section of the Jim Crow Museum at Ferris State University.)

So while racism probably has something to do with it, I think our expectations on this particular issue have been formed more recently -- pop music obviously has a lot to do with it. Just my 2c.

[saxikath]

Yeah, that and the one that follows about "Whatever you are, be that; whatever you say, be true; Straightforwardly act, be honest, in fact, be nobody else but you" are some of the most purely positive messages I've seen in Gilbert. I don't know if he was being satirical, but like you, I prefer to think not. :)