What does camp have to do with capitalism? How have queer men created a philosophy of commodity culture? Why is cinema central to camp? With chapters on the films of Vincente Minnelli, Andy Warhol, Kenneth Anger, and John Waters, Working Like a Homosexual responds to these questions by arguing that post-World War II gay male subcultures have fostered their own ways not only of consuming mass culture but of producing it as well.With a special emphasis on the tensions between high and low forms of culture and between good and bad taste, Matthew Tinkcom offers a new vision of queer politics and aesthetics that is critically engaged with Marxist theories of capitalist production. He argues that camp-while embracing the cheap, the scorned, the gaudy, the tasteless, and what Warhol called "the leftovers" of artistic production-is a mode of intellectual production and a critical philosophy of modernity as much as it is an expression of a dissident sex/gender difference. From Minnelli's musicals and the "everyday glamour" of Warhol's films to Anger's experimental films and Waters's "trash aesthetic," Tinkcom demonstrates how camp allowed these gay men to design their own relationship to labor and to history in a way that protected them from censure even as they struggled to forge a role for themselves within a system of "value" that failed to recognize them.
Informations légales : prix de location à la page 0,1348€. Cette information est donnée uniquement à titre indicatif conformément à la législation en vigueur.
Extrait
Edited by Michèle Aina Barale,
Jonathan Goldberg, Michael Moon, and
Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick
WORKING LIKE A HOMOSEXUAL H , , H
Working like a Homosexual: Vincente Minnelli in the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Freed Unit,
Andy Warhol and the Crises of Value’s Appearances,
‘‘A Physical Relation between Physical Things’’: The World of the Commodity according to Kenneth Anger,
‘‘Beyond the Critics’ Reach’’: John Waters and the Trash Aesthetic,
Afterword,
Notes,
Bibliography,
Index,
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Despite our best intentions, we claim the name of author when we know how much work and affection such a nomination covers over. This book is no exception. So many people were involved in the research and thought in this volume that another might be written to honor their support and companionship, and chances are that I might omit the name of someone whose goodwill made this book possible. The thought pains me, and I hope no kindness is forgotten. I am indebted to several friends for their love and companionship. Amy Villarejo, Barbara White, Sally Meckling, Madhava Prasad, Joy Van Fuqua, and Elayne Tobin were among the best teachers I had in graduate school, and my teachers in graduate school were more than that; they were intellectual models who made this work a pleasure: Jane Feuer, Janet Staiger, Eric Clarke, Lucy Fischer, and, finally, a scholar who offers new forms of exciting intellectual work and makes them a joy that I carry with me, Marcia Landy. Many people were kind to me at moments when it wasn’t clear whether this project was viable and I needed some guidance and cheer: Steven Cohan, Ina Hark, Douglas Crimp, Colin MacCabe, Eric Smoodin, Caren Kaplan, Jonathan Arac, Carol Kay, Paul Bové, Eve Sedgwick, Paul Smith, Carol Stabile, John Groch, and Allen Larson. Timothy Credle, Stewart Waller, Alison Hoff, Patrick Clark, Jamie Poster, Anna McCarthy, and Tara McPherson are the best of friends. Diana Reed and Barbara Fine bought me dinners and told me I could finish this work. My colleagues at Georgetown, Pamela Fox, Kim Hall, Ed Ingebretsen, Colleen Cotter, Christine So, and Anne Cubilie made my entry to faculty life an immense pleasure; Michael Ragussis showed me how to write a book. Ken Wissoker not only is the editor who asked me to keep working on this project and waited patiently for it but also extended love and friendship. Cathy Davidson