#26
Posted: 9/1/04 at 9:10pm
Not too long ago in a different thread, someone (Margo?) after describing the unprecedented audience reaction to Dreamgirls (standing on seats and literally running up the aisles toward the stage) questioned whether or not we would ever see that type of thing again. That got me thinking as to why exactly it HAD happened. After some thought, I've come up with a little bit of a theory. It has to do with the timing in conjunction with gay history. We had already seen Judy's concert at Carnegie Hall, which is generally recognized as something of a 'coming out party' for New York gay men, and the rise of Bette Midler's shows just as the gay rights revolution was really taking off. And when Bette's shows transferred to Broadway, the gay men went with her - almost to show they could have their fun in public, not just in private (The Continental Baths.)
The early Eighties was when everything seemed to have fallen into place, and gay men were enjoying the most freedom publically they ever had. AIDS was right around the corner, but until then, it was party time!
And that's when Dremagirls hit. Obviously, not a 'gay' show. BUT, it was directed by an out gay 'hero' and dealt with the Supremes (oh, please - don't even go there.) Frankly, it could be described as the best drag show I've ever seen
SO, after having all this development, here we had a legitimate Broadway show, that seemed to fall so much in our territory. The fact that it dealt so strongly with a civil rights theme played a part - as did the fact that the leading lady was the absolute DEFINITION of the ostracized, over-talented, larger-than-life DIVA. AND, we felt - more than ever in our history - the ability to let our fabulous adoration OUT - and judgement be damned!
Now, I'm not saying this is the reason it occurred, but I do wonder if it played a part. Having had the priveledge of being one of those people on their seat, I can tell you from observation that gay men were, shall we say, liberally represented in the audience. And why not? We know greatness when we see it
If it's true at all, however, I'm not sure we WILL se that again - at least not for quite a while.
Anyway, just a thought. Also, along these lines. I remember thinking then, and I still do, that 'Family' should be adopted as the gay national anthem. I know that 'I Am What I Am' came along, but that has so much to do with SELF-empowerment - I've always wished we embraced a bit more of the community aspect of our lives.
The early Eighties was when everything seemed to have fallen into place, and gay men were enjoying the most freedom publically they ever had. AIDS was right around the corner, but until then, it was party time!
And that's when Dremagirls hit. Obviously, not a 'gay' show. BUT, it was directed by an out gay 'hero' and dealt with the Supremes (oh, please - don't even go there.) Frankly, it could be described as the best drag show I've ever seen
SO, after having all this development, here we had a legitimate Broadway show, that seemed to fall so much in our territory. The fact that it dealt so strongly with a civil rights theme played a part - as did the fact that the leading lady was the absolute DEFINITION of the ostracized, over-talented, larger-than-life DIVA. AND, we felt - more than ever in our history - the ability to let our fabulous adoration OUT - and judgement be damned!
Now, I'm not saying this is the reason it occurred, but I do wonder if it played a part. Having had the priveledge of being one of those people on their seat, I can tell you from observation that gay men were, shall we say, liberally represented in the audience. And why not? We know greatness when we see it
Anyway, just a thought. Also, along these lines. I remember thinking then, and I still do, that 'Family' should be adopted as the gay national anthem. I know that 'I Am What I Am' came along, but that has so much to do with SELF-empowerment - I've always wished we embraced a bit more of the community aspect of our lives.