Friday, March 04, 2011

 

You Betta' Make it Werk: The Reciprocity of Drag Race's Intertextuality

by Dana Gravesen

On the surface, the instantly popular RuPaul's Drag Race, now in its third season on Logo (part of MTV networks), is Bravo's Project Runway in drag with a splash of CW's America's Next Top Model thrown in for good pleasure. Hosted, mentored, and judged by supermodel RuPaul, Drag Race features a group of drag queens who compete in challenges, runway competitions, and lip sync sudden death matches toward the crown of America's "next drag superstar." Though the structure of Drag Race relies heavily on recycling aspects of Runway's and (arguably to a lesser degree) Model's successful formulas, the show expands the confines of the oft-repeated tropes of televised reality competition by simultaneously drawing influence from and reflexively challenging its conventions. Most likely, Drag Race wouldn't exist without its successful predecessors, but the show is reciprocal because it both owes its structural makeup to its generic sisters and simultaneously contributes drag culture and imagery to media outlets not ordinarily explicitly concerned with representations of sex and gender variations. Media discourse surrounding and about Drag Race circulates recaps, lingo, and imagery from the show (and by extension drag culture) and, more importantly, in instances where newspapers, magazines, and blogs address the workings of the show without making drag an “issue,” promotes the show as a "legitimate" entry in the reality competition canon.


The segmented structure of Drag Race resembles (or arguably replicates) that of Runway, and in order to strengthen my reading of the show as reciprocal in its intertextuality, it is important to illustrate what exactly that structure is. Each episode, disregarding nominal inconsistencies, is composed of: 1) a recap of the prior week's episode 2) a teaser of what's to come on the present week's episode; this scene includes mentions of celebrity guest judges (a common convention of both Runway and Top Model) 3) a review of the prizes afforded the winner of the series (a lifetime supply of makeup, headlining the Drag Race Tour, and $75,000) 4) the title sequence 5) a segment which re/introduces the participants still in the competition (often including a brief personal review); this segment includes: cuts to confessional/reflective narrative interviews, a reference to the drag queen asked to “sashay away” the week prior (the loser), and “casual” moments between the contestants 6) a segment that contains hints about the new main challenge in the form of “Shemail,” a video in which RuPaul appears in drag (this moment is directly lifted from Top Model's “Tyra Mail” ) 7) a visit from RuPaul (out of drag) in which a mini-challenge is described 8) the mini challenge 9) a segment in which RuPaul appears (out of drag) to announce the winner of the mini challenge 10) a segment in which the week's main challenge and its parameters are described in detail by RuPaul (out of drag) 11) a number of scenes in which the queens begin work on the week's challenge in the workroom and assist (or attack) each other; this lengthy segment usually resumes after the first commercial break 12) RuPaul (out of drag) approaches each queen in the work room to critique and assist in their completion of the main challenge (on occasion, a surprise element of the main challenge is introduced that must be completed by the queens before the main challenge takes place); RuPaul's parting words are a twist on Tim Gunn's famous “make it work” from Runway: “Don't fuck it up” 13) another segment of the queens working; in this iteration, one contestant will usually ask another about their personal life or history 14) the queens finalize their work on the week's challenge and prepare for the runway: outfits, makeup, wigs, etc. 16) a cut to the runway: RuPaul appears live and in drag for the first time; she walks the runway and re/introduces the judges 17) the runway show: the queens model their projects for the week while RuPaul and the other judges make snappy comments, which are dubbed over the visual of the runway walk (a short voiceover from each queen, which describes her interpretation of her week's work, also accompanies her walk) 18) the contestants return to the runway for judgment; each lady faces specific critique from each of the regular and guest judges; each queen also attempts to defend her work before all are asked to leave the stage and retire to the Absolut Interior Illusions lounge while the judges commiserate 19) the judges deliberate (with brief cuts to inaudible shots of the queens in the lounge) 20) a decision is made as to which queens are “safe” and which queens end up in the bottom two; RuPaul asks for the return of “my girls” 21) the queens return and RuPaul announces the “safe” contestants, or those who may return backstage and who have neither won nor lost the competition, and are not up for elimination; though the sequencing depends on the episode, two queens are selected as “up for elimination” and must “lip sync for their life” 22) a winner of the challenge is announced; the winner sometimes acquires immunity for the following week (this benefit is usually a focus earlier in the season) and a prize 23) the two queens up for elimination participate in a contest called “Lip Sync for your Life” in which they must dance, strut, and lip sync as best they can to a drag queen musical staple in order to remain in the competition 24) the results of “Lip Sync for your Life:” the winner hears “Shante you stay” (they are safe and remain the following week) and the the loser hears “sashay away,” which means they've been eliminated; the loser receives words of encouragement from RuPaul 25) the loser returns to the work room to collect her things while an exit interview voiceover (sometimes accompanied by visuals) recounts her experiences, her time on the show, and her aspirations for the future 26) the rest of the queens—still near the runway—are “condragulated” by RuPaul and reminded that “if you can't love yourself, how in the hell are you gonna love somebody else?” 27) RuPaul calls for a song to play, and a runway dance party commences under the end titles.


It's clear from this segmentation of Drag Race that the show benefits from textual references outside of its specific construction. The order of the segments strongly resembles Project Runway and America's Next Top Model, and the workroom scenarios, signature phrases, mini challenges, mentoring, judging, runway competitions, and dramatic interactions between contestants all heavily rely on reinterpretations of the popular mechanics of those programs. But just as drag emphasizes both a reference to and denaturalization of the constructed qualities of gender, Drag Race emphasizes the manipulability and discursive qualities of reality competition television; it is the antithesis to Runway and Model. But Drag Race gains much of its reciprocity from the media discourses that surround it. In engaging the show, a number of outlets have discussed it without making explicit references to the "alternativeness" of drag performance. Drag Race has been successful in reappropriating conventions, rearticulating them, and presenting drag performance as an art form, a career, a lifestyle, and anything but marginal. Drag staples such as reading and lip syncing are now part of the vocabulary of reality television via 1) the show itself and 2) the media discourses that surround it. Entertainment Weekly's online PopWatch, for instance, reported on the most recent episode of Drag Race by addressing not that the show is original in its casting of drag queens, but by ignoring the drag component of the show altogether, emphasizing the fashion disasters that link the show to, rather than distinguish it from, other fashion programming. Even the report's address of host RuPaul centers squarely on the runway outfit she wore (the author loves it), not her drag status.

On the flip side are reports that emphasize the core components of drag which make up many of the show's mini challenges: impersonations, catty banter, clever names, excessive dress, makeup techniques, posing, modeling, photography, and singing, to name but a few. Interestingly, these articles emphasize the constitutive elements of drag not in terms of their "otherness" to "straight" performances, but on their own terms. The queens are critiqued in print and online for not fulfilling the expectations of drag performance, not for failing to fulfill the expectations of normative performance. Also of note (and often referenced): unlike Runway, Top Model, and other fashion competition programs, the stars of Drag Race must fulfill multiple roles: as designers, as models, as celebrities, as "out of drag," as "in drag," etc. This multiplicity of performativity allows Drag Race to address such issues as body image in more substantial ways than either Runway or Top Model--just like drag. The intertextuality of the show is further dependent on celebrity culture ("The Snatch Game"), RuPaul's fame ("Sashay Shante" is a famous line from RuPaul's early 90s hit "Supermodel" and itself a reference to the film Paris is Burning), film and television references, and more. As a result, the program crosses not only the borders of genre and textual reference, but broader cultural borders as well. The discourses that constitute, surround, and extend from Drag Race celebrate not only the show's recycling and reinterpretation of fashion competition programming, but of the function of drag itself. As such, Drag Race contributes as much as it borrows, its position one of progress and reciprocity.

Comments:
I really think you're on too something with this idea of reciprocal intertextuality, particular the ways in which your use of the word connotes both borrowing back-and-forth, but also a larger political move toward mutual recognition, even respect. It's a little unclear, though, how exactly you intend the term, so more explication of that would help make your point here. The textual analysis is quite convincing, and well-contextualized in terms of the show's broader cultural reception, it's just that the theoretical claim lack some specificity.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?