Comments on: Miss Marigold on Miss America http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/02/01/miss-marigold-on-miss-america/ Responses to Media and Culture Fri, 12 Feb 2016 19:35:04 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.7.5 By: Amy Tully http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/02/01/miss-marigold-on-miss-america/comment-page-1/#comment-352 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:05:02 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=1459#comment-352 I didn’t watch the pageant itself, but I found myself inexplicably watching the “behind the scenes” show hosted by Clinton Kelly the night before the pageant. I was really struck by how blunt he was about the women’s bodies being on display, sometimes to the discomfort of the pageant officials participating in the pre-show. In one segment, for example, he talked about how he likes to watch to see “which boobs jiggle and which ones don’t” when the contestants walk down the stairs in swimsuits, implicitly, calling out the surgical enhancement that goes into attaining the wholesome Miss America ideal.

I think his commentary was premised on TLC casting him as “one of the girls” throughout the show – a position which seemed available to him only because he is openly gay. In the aforementioned segment, he was talking to a former Miss America winner in (who had quite a few comments of her own about the contestants’ bodies) and it seemed to be framed as the type of backstage gossip that the contestants themselves might engage in. He also gathered “backstage secrets” in the women’s dressing room and was privy to a lot of spaces and conversations that would have traditionally been open only to women.

Anyway, I found the whole spectacle fascinating. I wish I had something brilliant to say about it, but I am still processing it (and wishing I had watched the entire behind-the-scenes show instead of changing the channel). But perhaps some of you all have more thoughts on it…

]]>
By: Sarah Jedd http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/02/01/miss-marigold-on-miss-america/comment-page-1/#comment-332 Mon, 01 Feb 2010 20:01:31 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=1459#comment-332 Melissa, I think that would be a fascinating project, and I wonder if like the famous “Women read the Romance” article Miss A viewers are performing resistive readings or reading against the grain at all.

I wonder how many people, Erin, fall into the second camp (or are a hybrid of the two kinds of viewers you mention, like I am). Banet-Weiser’s book agrees with your discussion of “wholesomeness.” Another thing that sets Miss A apart from Miss USA contestants is her ideal averageness. She’s not the hottest or the sexiest, but she is the most like the (starving, surgically enhanced) girl next door.

Lindsay, you’re exactly right– Banet-Weiser’s thesis is also about race and nation-building and Western, Epcot-center depictions of race in pageants, and I agree with you that Cameron is the “right” Miss A for this particular moment. If, that is, Miss A is at all right for us anymore.

Kelli, thanks for the link to the article and to your post– can’t wait to check them both out!

]]>
By: Melissa Click http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/02/01/miss-marigold-on-miss-america/comment-page-1/#comment-331 Mon, 01 Feb 2010 19:47:58 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=1459#comment-331 Sarah,

This is a powerful piece on a topic that’s easy to ignore–I think you (and the commenters above me) have demonstrated that the pageant HAS overstayed its cultural welcome–it probably did about 25 years ago! I haven’t watched the pageant in years, but am frustrated to know it hasn’t really changed at all. It would be interesting to know the demographics of the audience and to learn why people watch it and what sense they make of it. It’s a great project in the making!

]]>
By: Kelli Marshall http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/02/01/miss-marigold-on-miss-america/comment-page-1/#comment-330 Mon, 01 Feb 2010 19:47:31 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=1459#comment-330 Just read your blog post. Nice! If you haven’t seen it, you might find ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY’s article “Who Killed Miss America” right in line with what you say early on about the pageant’s falling ratings: http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/01/30/miss-america-2010/

PS. If you’re interested, I also just published a blog post on this year’s pageant, specifically about Rush Limbaugh’s turn as a host. =) http://kellimarshall.net/unmuzzledthoughts/television/miss-america/

]]>
By: Erin Copple Smith http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/02/01/miss-marigold-on-miss-america/comment-page-1/#comment-328 Mon, 01 Feb 2010 17:26:54 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=1459#comment-328 Awesome post, Sarah! So much food for thought!

Pageants seem to have such a strange status within American culture anymore–they’re obviously wildly popular among a segment of America, but the rest regards them with a strange mix of skepticism, cynicism, derision and even fear. Think of shows like Toddlers & Tiaras. Ads for that show come on and so many of us experience a simultaneous shudder, as we recall Jon Benet Ramsey (yes, still) and news stories about pageant tots getting plastic surgery, hair extensions, teeth whitening, etc. ad nauseam (literally). There’s also the Miss USA contest, which has been tarnished in recent years by scandal and Donald Trump, yet remains on network TV because of Trump’s backing.

And then there’s Miss America, bravely soldiering on despite its exile to cable, trying to keep pageants “wholesome” by claiming that the swimsuit portion is about health and fitness, not scantily clad supermodel-esque women displaying their bodies as objects of desire. (And, my personal favorite, such excellent talent show pop-up information as “Secretly wants to open a cupcake shop.” What is more wholesome than cupcakes? Also: not so secret anymore, huh?)

All of which is to say…yes, the pageant seems anachronistic. And it certainly invites two types of viewers: those who watch, eyes gleaming, for the majesty and brilliance of it all, with the hopes that their toddlers might one day be Miss America, and those who watch to mock, operate as fashion and talent critics, and perform feminist analyses. (I’ll let you guess which camp I fall into.) And yet I don’t know that it’s going anywhere (other than the basic cable home it now claims), because its duality almost seems to secure its place as a cultural touchstone. Someplace we return to once (or so) a year, to remind ourselves that either (a) America is still the home of the wholesome and lovely, or (b) America is still really sad and freaky and behind-the-times.

Wow. I had more to say about this than I would ever have guessed.

]]>
By: Lindsay H. Garrison http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2010/02/01/miss-marigold-on-miss-america/comment-page-1/#comment-327 Mon, 01 Feb 2010 16:31:41 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=1459#comment-327 Great analysis, Sarah. You raise an excellent question. What struck me about this year’s last four finalists was that they all appeared to be “ethnically ambiguous.” I’m reminded of Mary Beltran’s current work on celebrity and claims of “post-racial” America — Given the recent rhetoric of America as “post-racial,” especially in the wake of Obama’s election (which, we were informed via pop-up box, that Caressa Cameron in fact performed at the inaugural celebrations), and other such discourses, I would argue that Miss America still performs the important cultural work Banet-Weiser identifies. While Cameron isn’t the first light-skinned African-American Miss America (Vanessa Williams, anyone?), I think crowning her at this particular historical moment carries significant meaning, perhaps of our desire to see a “post-racial” America (despite the fact that in the material reality for many people, we are far from it).

]]>