Fictional Realness in Drag and Horror Hosting: Article Review

 In this article, Parry (2015) brings forth the ideas of ‘colloquial performance practice’ and ‘fictional realness’ to describe different types of performance in spaces like drag balls and music groups. Colloquial performance practice refers to forms of performance that are informal and related to everyday life and experiences. Realness is described by Parry as a form of colloquial performance that repeats, adapts, and appropriates aspects of reality for marginalized spaces in order to create a new, often subversive form of performance. This practice can give marginalized people access to forms of reality that they may not otherwise be afforded. Parry relates this to the concept of ‘minor literatures’ which transcend the original meaning of a text by reclaiming and adapting aspects of its meaning that relate to experiences outside of the majority. Building up layers of cultural references, experiences, fictions and subversive interpretations can be understood as 'affective inhabitation' which creates new knowledge through its emphasis on texture and feeling. Parry explains that these texts cannot be read through traditional language, logic or lenses, but rather must be understood through their chosen affect. Fictional realness, a form of affective inhabitation (as opposed to just imitation) combines layers of fictionality and reality to appropriate texts, subverting or transforming their original meanings. Parry argues that this appropriation and the inability to define or read these performances through traditional means makes fictional realness a powerful form of resistance and expression outside of hegemonic forces. 

This article relates to my topic because it describes the impact of combining fiction and reality in performance, and the ways that it can be effective and subversive. A conversation with Dr. Kristine Weatherston gave me the idea to research the connection between drag performance and realness/fiction, which led me to find this article. I found Parry’s (2015) analysis really helpful, it provides a lot of information that I have been searching for when thinking about horror hosts’ fictionality. The idea of fictional realness being a form of performance that combines fiction and reality to create new meaning definitely rings true to horror host performances. This also reminded me of Nelson (2016) and McRobert’s (2015) discussion of negotiated authenticity and found footage, especially Nelson’s (2016) idea that fiction can use the ‘trappings of reality’ to create the appearance of authenticity. In horror hosting, hosts inhabit and appropriate forms of realness (Parry, 2015) in the role of both host and audience member. This dual role is something that I’ve been noting throughout my analysis, as the horror host both hosts the movie but also watches it alongside the audience in a communal way. They also appropriate some real cultural references, such as geographic references and local culture (in the case of Stella, the maneater of Manayunk), and more widely understood stereotypes that can be grounded in time and place (in the case of Svengoolie’s hippie persona). They also use the trappings of reality (Nelson, 2016) such as the hosting format, write-in and call-in segments, etc, to ground their show in the same world as the viewer. This realness (Parry, 2015) is colored by the sizable bank of references in the horror genre, and even among the horror hosting sub-genre. Horror hosts inhabit a fictional persona, and adapt the trappings of reality (Nelson, 2016) and real culture to fit into their world. They blend the lines between host and audience and between reality and fiction, as a fake(?) horror and a real host, in the real world. The way that these fictional elements combine with reality must create new layers of meaning (Parry, 2015), but the question remains as to what these new layers are. Does the audience suspend their disbelief and accept the host as real for the duration of the show, as with found footage horror (McRobert, 2015; Nelson, 2016)? Are the lines blurred between real and fake enough that the horror is as real as the host itself, or vice versa? And beyond just the meaning, the impact is of interest to me. How does the fictional realness of horror hosting impact the audience’s understanding of the horror movies that they show? How does it impact their relationship with the horror host?

I don’t think that the aspects of appropriation and reclamation by marginalized groups that Parry (2015) discusses are as relevant to my topic, but they could apply to certain examples who exist outside of the norms of even the horror hosting genre. For example, they could apply to the drag queen horror host Peaches Christ, or the host Penny Dreadful, who came out as a trans woman after many many years of horror hosting. It may be interesting to focus on these example later on to see how even within a fringe genre like horror hosting, further layers of appropriation can be subversive and powerful.

For my pre-production binder, I got some tips on additional questions I could ask. Specifically, questions that could help frame the topic from the perspective of my interviewees to help introduce the audience to horror hosting. Djeneba made a great point about connecting hosts to the culture of their time period, giving the example of the satanic panic as a force that may have impacted their reception. I got positive feedback on my reference materials and overall approach. My next steps are to narrow down my question list and consider which questions will be most helpful for framing my documentary and explaining concepts. That way, the audience can be introduced to the concept in a more dimensional way rather than just a dictionary definition. I need to start reaching out to interviewees as soon as possible too, because I know the deadlines will creep up on me.

For my proof of concept, I will be filming someone doing a task with a two-camera setup, one being handheld. Unfortunately I didn’t give myself enough time to film something relevant to my project, so I will probably film someone close to me like my sister while they do an everyday task like cooking. This will allow me to practice handheld filming and play around with both the T7i and the GH5 to see which one I prefer for my project. This will overall give me a better idea of how I want to film my project and which equipment to check out, and also just give me practice on different skills I’ll need to execute things. 

References

McRobert, N. (2015). Mimesis of media: Found footage cinema and the horror of the real. Gothic Studies, 17(2), 137–150. https://doi.org/10.7227/gs.17.2.9

Nelson, L. R. (2016). Choosing illusion: Mediated reality and the spectacle of the idol in Kōji Shiraishi’s Shirome. Journal of Japanese and Korean Cinema, 8(2), 140–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/17564905.2016.1222149

Parry, O. G. (2015). Fictional realness: Towards a colloquial performance practice. Performance Research, 20(5), 108–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/13528165.2015.1095983