36

Feeling sad this morning that everything I embraced as a theater kid and young adult to deal with being a hated weirdo has been appropriated by the QT.

Having grown up in the '80s, things like Rocky Horror Picture Show and Hedwig and the Angry Inch were all about gender non-comformity and being LGB, and embracing people's judgment as a badge of honor.

Looking back, it's depressing how indirectly both those shows force female fans to access the 'liberation.' Women's roles were either absent or burdensomely sexy. But in our Rocky group, girls were just as likely to be Frank N. Furter or Dr. Scott as Janet or Magenta. It felt more liberating dressing up in lingerie when you knew you were impersonating a man.

Just out of curiosity, I was looking to see what the party line is on both of these shows. Depressingly, both seem to be in that limbo where the essentially gay intentions of their creators have been dismissed so the new generation can reinterpret the material to support queer/trans views. But also most TRAs label them 'problematic.' That means their original intent is being gutted in new productions AND they are still considered inadequately pure. Laverne Cox of all people was cast as Frank N. Furter in a recent revival of Rocky in an effort to bend the knee to the TRAs. I am sorry, but that is just not a role you can play if you are simultaneously pretending to be a stereotypical woman.

Richard O'Brien, who wrote the Rocky Horror Show is transsexual, and on record defending J.K. Rowling and saying a man can't be an actual woman, just his own idea of one. John Cameron Mitchell, who wrote Hedwig, has gone to great lengths to distance Hedwig from trans ideology, saying Hedwig is not trans because he was mutilated and forced into gender reassignment against his will. In the end, he abandons his trans persona, with the implication he has found the missing part of himself and is now whole.

These creators are both still alive. This idea current right now that it doesn't matter what the living creator of something you love meant by it seriously bothers me. It's extremely narcissistic. The old idea that art is in part a form of communication from the creator to the audience has fallen dead out of fashion.

Feeling sad this morning that everything I embraced as a theater kid and young adult to deal with being a hated weirdo has been appropriated by the QT. Having grown up in the '80s, things like Rocky Horror Picture Show and Hedwig and the Angry Inch were all about gender non-comformity and being LGB, and embracing people's judgment as a badge of honor. Looking back, it's depressing how indirectly both those shows force female fans to access the 'liberation.' Women's roles were either absent or burdensomely sexy. But in our Rocky group, girls were just as likely to be Frank N. Furter or Dr. Scott as Janet or Magenta. It felt more liberating dressing up in lingerie when you knew you were impersonating a man. Just out of curiosity, I was looking to see what the party line is on both of these shows. Depressingly, both seem to be in that limbo where the essentially gay intentions of their creators have been dismissed so the new generation can reinterpret the material to support queer/trans views. But also most TRAs label them 'problematic.' That means their original intent is being gutted in new productions AND they are still considered inadequately pure. Laverne Cox of all people was cast as Frank N. Furter in a recent revival of Rocky in an effort to bend the knee to the TRAs. I am sorry, but that is just not a role you can play if you are simultaneously pretending to be a stereotypical woman. Richard O'Brien, who wrote the Rocky Horror Show is transsexual, and on record defending J.K. Rowling and saying a man can't be an actual woman, just his own idea of one. John Cameron Mitchell, who wrote Hedwig, has gone to great lengths to distance Hedwig from trans ideology, saying Hedwig is not trans because he was mutilated and forced into gender reassignment against his will. In the end, he abandons his trans persona, with the implication he has found the missing part of himself and is now whole. These creators are both still alive. This idea current right now that it doesn't matter what the living creator of something you love meant by it seriously bothers me. It's extremely narcissistic. The old idea that art is in part a form of communication from the creator to the audience has fallen dead out of fashion.

8 comments

I didn't know Richard O'Brien defended JK! I love him for that. Had to look it up. Here's what he said: “As long as they’re happy and fulfilled, I applaud them to my very last day. But you can’t ever become a natural woman. I think that’s probably where Rowling is coming from."

He's right.

Yet they struggle so hard to divorce JKR from her art. Hmmm.

Yeah--it doesn't work so well when the person is still wildly beloved by huge numbers of people and in the media virtually every day. :D

Fondly remembering a group of us heading down for the midnight showing of Rocky Horror at the Neptune Theater. Rice and toast in our purses. Dancing the Time Warp. Sometimes the purpose of a film, play, etc. is to just be entertaining. I guess we could of picked the movie apart, but it was 1979 and we knew nothing about trans world.

I went to a RHPS in December. It's still the great time it always was. Brad had scars from her top surgery and that made me sad but they didn't change or add anything to gender it up. I know Richard O'Brien is gender critical and that at least makes me happy. TRAs tried to disavow Riff Raff but it's his party, damn it. I have been wondering how John Cameron Mitchell feels about Gender stuff. I love Hedwig, but he also plays closely with TIM actor Patti Harrison on a show written by massive virtue signaller Aidy Bryant in Shrill. Even if he has drank the Kool aid you know he's still a TERF in the sheets, and I don't plan on not loving Hedwig any time soon over it. I had "I Put On Some Makeup" stuck in my head a couple days ago!

This idea current right now that it doesn't matter what the living creator of something you love meant by it seriously bothers me. It's extremely narcissistic.

Yeah, but i will say some things are open to interpretation and it's okay if the creator decides not to reveal it. Like, i'm pretty sure Robin Hobb tells readers it's up to them how they'd like to gender the Fool. But, it's fantasy and doesn't bother me so much. That is really interesting about the creators of Hedwig and Rocky Horror. And i just had to search Cox as Frankfurter, haven't found anything too much. That is nice about your friend group, i'd say the ones i've been somewhat adjacent too casted pretty similar to the original.

[–] Gyndalf 5 points Edited

Robin Hobb left the Fool’s gender ambiguous, so that makes sense. She’s written more than one rant about how much she hates gender bending/reimagining of her characters.

She actually feels very strongly that her words are read as she intended, to perhaps an irrational degree.

One of her rants on the topic is quoted here: https://fanlore.org/wiki/The_Fan_Fiction_Rant

I wanted to post the original from her blog but she deleted it.

(Sorry, I’m not really disagreeing with your central point, just happy to share the lore with another Hobb fan.)

Edit: many typos

Hedwig was conned. Frank N. Further was obviously jealous of Janet for being a woman.