Week 12: Queer Theory
The world's a stage, and everyone is thespian. The actors are tasked with the deciphering of words that are on the script and giving those words life, giving them a reason to exist. However, the stage will always require a director to control the aspects of what is happening on the stage. The same can be said about a culture and society that dictates the aspect of gender identity. It is culture that has manufactured the gender role and punish those who dare step out of the boundaries. Culture is the director, the visionary for the play, and individuals are the actors who are under the wings of the vision. That is at least how Judith Butler sees the fluctuation that gender can be, but ultimately cultures have made gender concert.
In, “Performance Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay on Phenomenology and Feminist Theory” written by Judith Butler, she explains that gender should be a person removed from their body. For they are substantial enough without having any physical form. “The body is not a self-identity or merely factic materiality; it is a materiality that bears mean, if nothing else, the manner of this bearing is fundamentally dramatic.” The body is what is needed to perform on the stage to act out the design of the play. Gender roles are placed by the culture one lives in, but it’s main producer for setting the standards are in a smaller collective as in a household where those gender normalities are placed. Each person in that domestic sense are taught or manipulated into their roles with rewards and punishments system. The actions of a person are what create gender identity by those actions are informed by someone else. It is through the practices and rehearsal were, “gender is a project which has cultural survival as its end” the cycle will continue.
An example, in the art world where one was not in control of the idea of an action but was responsible for taking the time and completing the action by her own wellness. Marina Abramovic performance piece Rhythm 0 can be used as an allegory to the dangers of being an actor. Especially when the script was written well and prepared for the actor. In Abramovic performance she placed 72 objects on a table ranging from harmless to deadly. It was with other’s action where she was humiliated because of the consequences of others direction.
Butler, Judith. "Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory." Theatre Journal 40, no. 4 (1988): 519-31. Accessed November 12, 2020. doi:10.2307/3207893.
Wasn't that piece stopped because someone pulled a gun on her even though it was part of the props? That seems like something I'd never trust in the hands of others.
ReplyDeleteThe last sentence is a bit unclear, I'd change it to something like "It was with others' actions that she was humiliated because of the consequences of their directions."
Marina Abramovic's performance was not stopped when someone took the loaded gun from the prop table. She stood there for the full six hours and endured whatever was done to her. Marina Abramovic was completely committed to her act that she was ready to die if that was where Rhythm 0 lead to. I agree that the last sentence is as bit confused and could be more clear and concise.
DeleteHi Rachel, you did a great job on this week's blog post. I really liked how you compared society to being the director and we as people to the actors playing these parts we call gender. You also did a good job on addressing the ideas Judith Butler makes in her essay. A question I have for you is do you think that we will ever live in a society where gender doesn’t matter? Overall, great job!
ReplyDeleteHi, Allison thank you for liking my blog. To answer your question, I think society is so entwined with gender that it will not be able to shake the gender roles it has created. I also think people have placed too much energy in their gender and believe in gender way too much to give it up. It so fundamental in our society that living without will be impossible.
Delete