In Spectacle of the Other Stuart Hall writes, "Representation is a complex business and, especially when dealing with 'difference', it engages feelings, attitudes and emotions and it mobilizes fears and anxieties in the viewer, at deeper levels than we can explain in a simple, common-sense way." So I ask you, in a world where women tennis stars are paid millions to wear as little as possible on the courts, what is underlying the public hysteria surrounding Venus Williams 2010 Australian Open outfit, an outfit that she designed for herself under her label?
It appears that the spectacle of the black female bootie threatens the spectra of upper-class respectability surrounding the predominantly white sport of tennis, a sport that has only had 2 black elite female stars in the last 20 years -- Venus and Serena Williams. What I find truly humorous and troubling is that tennis fans and the mainstream media find it plausible that one of the world's best women's athlete would actually go on international television flashing her butt and vagina. What does this say about the contemporary representational status of black urban femininity and sexuality?
Despite their athletic accolades and millions, Venus and Serena will always be "othered" as declassé black girls from Compton Los Angeles. To be a black woman means to be always outside of heteronormative respectability.
The comments on YouTube of the linked clip are interesting, and I think quite telling of popular perception of black female sexuality. The black female body is outside of the acceptable norm of white "pure" female sexuality. Imagine if Maria Sharapova had worn flesh colored underwear - Maxim magazine would be all over it. Her sexuality, as opposed to Venus', is celebrated, obsessed over and desirable. Venus Williams' sexuality, on the other hand, is threatening and something that must be controlled.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.stylelist.com/2010/01/25/venus-williams-wears-nude-shorts-shocks-tennis-spectators/#comments
ReplyDeleteI'm not familiar with the sports and how people in U.S. view female tennis stars. But I found some other interesting comments Venus' outfit and the Williams sisters. Although I don't have the background information (e.g. ethnic/racial background) of the people who wrote the comments, it is still interesting to see different people have different readings on the Williams sisters and Venus' outfit. For instance, someone pointed out that, if it was Maria Sharapova (white female tennis player), not Venus, who wore the outfit, then people would not have found it "disgusting" or "inappropriate." Then the writer of this comment was blamed of making things racial. Although I don't have any information (e.g. racial/ethnic background) of these people, it is interesting to see how the people involving in the discussion were also racialized based on what they said.
I also found an interesting point that we didn't discuss in class. Some people who left comments touched the issue of representing the nation,USA. Different people read the body of Venus differently. They try to put different labels onto her and try to make her to represent something. When some people think Venus was the worst athlete representing the USA, it also urges me to think what components made her disqualified to the nation? Her flesh-colored underwear, her skin color, her sex/gender/sexuality, or all these things? What would people say if Michael Phelps wears flesh-colored swim briefs in Olympics?
While checking out pictures of other female tennis players' objectification (a good website is here) , I came up with the following reading in the psychoanalytic vein. As opposed to the current fixation on Venus's bum, most images of female tennis players focus on the chest -- especially the bent-over chest sag-age. This (more acceptable) fixation on the white female breast can be read in opposition to the taboo calling of attention to the black arse. Instead of the displacement of the phallus, here we have the displacement of the boooty onto the fetishized breast. Therefore the recent media attention around Venus's "objectionable" knickers is an instance of the taboo of the posterior being breached in an inappropriate manner (or indulging in an unfetished/unmediated fantasy). The presentation of the breast is more acceptable to the hegemony as it is the appropriate displacement of our bestial urges (which are centered around the female arse, that distributor of our body's trash) onto the more "civilized" realization of these urges (in the breasts, the provider of nutrients to our offspring).
ReplyDeleteWow. These are great comments, which together are productively moving the conversation forward. Starting with Steven's comment, Hall would suggest that the fetishization on the black bootie is about sexual, racial, and even class displacement. It connects to the Cartesian split, mind over body...and "naturalization" of the black body more generally. Where blackness is connected to primal nature and biological/racial excess, and , therefore in need of containment, as Samantha suggests. The discursive disciplining of Venus and the black body speaks to the need to maintain phallic/racial/class power. The social acceptance of commodifying breast (a reproductive organ) versus the butt (a non-reproductive organ) also speaks to power. What is interesting to me is the discursive formations that links blackness-sexuality-butt-excess against its oppositional binary whiteness-reproduction-breast-reserve. Finally, Priscilla's question about audiences is indeed a provocative one. I would ask the question whether not wanting to make things "racial" is again about maintaining power through silence and erasure?
ReplyDeleteIt looks like all of us were unable to avoid the comments sitting below the youtube video:
ReplyDeleteThat's fucking rank
disgusting. she looks like a fucking ape.
and
thats nasty....on so many levels...
They are just a few of the startlingly abrasive and relatively anonymous sound-bites we get from the youtube-viewing community, which, among others, includes us.
Hall is correct in naming it the "Spectacle" of the Other because exactly what we can see is a showy demonstration of revulsion (or) hate (or) antagonism which implicates a sense of separation, distance and a violent attempt at distinction.
Hall asks why “difference is so compelling a theme, so contested, an area of representation”—but difference is of course a necessitated result of representation. And I just want to call out some of these overconfident and out-of-line commentators. The act of representation is identifying that which is outside of oneself. But marking something as different, exotic, strange or distinctive is actually a reaction to a thing’s comparability—to oneself! One doesn’t need to differentiate a table from oneself; a table doesn’t have the same shape that I do, nor does it communicate to other tables in the way that I communicate to other humans. I can’t draw parallels between the table’s urban and rural communities in the way I do for my own. Tables don’t walk, they don’t talk, and I can reasonably wait for a distant point in the future for the day that I may be suspicious of the table, itself, marking these same differences between us.
But as much as I insist I don’t look Chinese or Jamaican or even “American”, there is enough of myself that I see in the strange and separate “other” that I must mark it, forcibly, intentionally, and in some cases as we see, violently, as “different”.
So you, you-tube subscriber, that insists on the nastiness of this crazy black lady as someone that, presumably, lacks nastiness.....I suggest a moment's reflection on how quickly you've turned off those who will automatically assume your complete idiocy, even if, for them, they are doing so from a "completely different" and maybe even pretentious elevated level of scholastic open-mindedness. :)
In response to this post, I am already in a state of bias with regard to my response. However, this case and many others that are focused on black sexuality and the possible threat that it may have to Anglo-America. The xenophobic angst regarding African-Americans is truly disdainful and in conjunction with the above, everyone wants something spicy or nouveau to have a sickening little discussion about.
ReplyDeleteIt never occurred to any one of the commentators or the people who had to "hide their faces" from her bodily "exposure" that not only is she an individual of common sensical foundations but also that she's been playing tennis for eons. The fear of an African-American that makes logistical and rational decisions in everyday life and in the space of conscientious careers creates fear; and for the Venus to wear flesh-colored underwear she not only crossed the limited cognitive space that African-Americans are placed in, but she's also stretched the boundaries of being a black woman. The sad thing being that this is the response when those commentating are ignorant, close-minded and unaware of necessary changes needed in the world.
I have to say that these comments are truly great to read everyone has brought so many interesting views on the situation. I really think that race and gender play such a big role in this issue, we have the following; a successful, empowering black women, with amazing talent, who makes millions of dollars probably more, who pushes the limits with an interesting wardrobe choice and immediately get chewed up on the stop. I truly think that's because she is a women and a black women at that, people will jump at the opportunity of saying she is doing something inappropriate. I feel like her winning so many trophies, being an excellent athlete and successful designer completely disappears and the possibility of her being naked is some how much more important than all of her achievements combined. I truly feel like when your a women of color and you achieve more than what society say you can people are constantly waiting for you to fall on your face... this is a perfect example but the media failed because she clearly had chonies on. (I used my red hat Professor)
ReplyDeleteNeyshalee appreciate the red hat response. It's hard not to react emotionally to this "media event." Excellent conversation about representation and difference -- the ideological power of difference and the psychological power of difference in defining our self and our own identities. Difference and marking difference through the other is profoundly embedded in power and the maintenance of power. One interesting observation is that when it comes to the issue of respectability -- racialized and gendered communities are sometimes the most self-disciplining. This touches on the comments made by Peter and others in class, about the ways in which we police and discipline ourselves in attempt to gain respectability, equality, and power -- sometimes being complicit in participating in the discourse maintains our inequality. In the case of Venus, by disciplining her sexuality and femininity through her style choices.
ReplyDeleteI personally feel that the underlying public hysteria surround Venus outfit is racial. I agree with my classmate, the view of black women in regards to sexuality is tainted. It goes back to the imagery of Sara Baartman and how black women's body are often made a skeptical of. The fact that people would think that Venus would play with no undergarments is outrageous. For someone to make that implication projects the idea that they view black women as being savage. Venus is a professional tennis player, she is definitely aware of the fact that she is in a "fishbowl" so to speak. She is aware of that fact people are constantly watching her and her actions. She gets paid to maintain a "pure" image of herself to avoid ridicule and speculations. So why in the world would she play tennis without undergarments, I don't think people think sometimes before they speak. At the same time, growing up as a black woman I experienced this same type of oppression in regards to my sexuality/femininity. My mother would scold me if I wore anything to school that was remotely revealing. I couldn't fathom why I couldn't wear those cloths when I saw my fellow classmates wearing them and they weren't deemed "slutty". As time progressed, I realized the double standard for black women and non-black women and how their bodies are viewed in certain clothing by society. Our bodies are built differently but that does not give others the right to degrade Venus for her skin-tone undergarments when white women's skin-tone undergarments weren't publicized for speculation.
ReplyDeleteTo continue the discussion….what captures my attention the most is the fight about who has power over the body. Through history one can see that every time women try to take control over their body (biological, politically, etc.) censorship arises. The body in this case the public, black, female body operates as a place for contestation that is, Venus decides what to wear. But at the same time the body is captured in this battle were the media also reduces Venus to her corporeality… the display of her body. This way the media devalues her great performance as an athlete by creating a spectacle about her underwear and dress… going back to my original point here the body is the place site were representation occurs.
ReplyDeleteThinking about this I want to share a quote:
“Our body is not in space like things; it inhabits or haunts space. It applies itself to space like hand to an instrument, and when we wish to move about we do not move the body as we move an object. We transport it without instruments… since it is our own and because, through it, we have access to space.” (5)
- Merleau Ponty, The Primacy of Perception
The hysteria surrounding Venus’ flesh-colored undergarments speaks to the notion that whiteness is the standard in society. As was brought up in class, when one speaks of “flesh” as a color, it is generally assumed to equate fair, light, white.
ReplyDelete(Tangent: Did you know the Crayola crayon colored “Flesh” was renamed to “Peach” in 1962 in step with the U.S. Civil Rights Movement? This notion addresses the idea that meaning is constitutive and always evolving through representation.)
It is outrageous, yet not surprising, for the media to spotlight such an “issue.” It exemplifies the media’s habit of exploitation through representation. This “story” is feeding the fire of black women as “animalesque,” a deviance from the standard white heteronormative female body. Skin tone and the body, particularly the bootie, is a marker of this difference and identification, which is commodified. The process of commodification is a projection of objectification. Venus’ body has become an object to be scrutinized and judged on the basis of socially constructed “standards” of society. Who’s to say that Venus’ choice of clothing is “wrong/inappropriate”? Discourse and representation have normalized what is “appropriate/attractive/beautiful/etc” in a woman in our society. These choke-holds on sociocultural diversity constrain open-mindedness. I think it is necessary for individuals like Venus, especially because she is a successful black woman in the limelight, to challenge societal perceptions. The media’s reaction to this case verbalizes the status quo, yet one can only hope that as critical thinkers with agency, viewers assess the situation for themselves and challenge their own perceptions of identity. Venus has a choice to wear what she wants, and is well aware that she will be seen. I would be interested to hear what Venus had to say in reaction to this “drama.”
Just wanted to add this because this is something I noticed as I was looking at the pictures once they the photographers noticed that Venus might be really play without underwear, instead of taking pictured of her playing, they took pictures of her when her skirt was flying up and at any moment you could see under her skirt. There was a even a picture of her just bending over to get something out of her bag. I think that's ridiculous and I wanted to throw that out there.
ReplyDeleteAs I read this article and read the response of my fellow classmates I am taken back slightly. I do believe that Venus becomes a spectacle to the public because she is a young, successful, black, and a woman in a sport that is mainly populated by the white race. Yes I do believe because she is black people are more aware of her dressing and are more likely to criticize it. Since slavery black women have been under pressure and abused because of the built of their body and their choice of clothing. This article makes me think of Sara Bartman, a woman who was brought into the public eye because of her bodily stature. Sara Bartman, also known as the "Hottentots Venus", as a black woman was put on display to the public because of her features. Other America lived in fascination with her and criticized her body. So I kind of feel that history shows that since the beginning of time black women and the bodies have always been a serious topic to other races. And will always be of topic and scrutiny.
ReplyDeleteSo I am not shocked that Venus is being depicted as a “ratchet” and/or “disgusting” woman. It’s amazing that Venus is the subject of topic because of her choice of clothing but why is it not the same issue with the white women in this sport. Are not all the tennis uniforms made just about a like? Hasn’t fashion for a while now been geared towards the exploitation of women in general, with clothing being made shorter and tighter? It doesn’t matter who makes it, it all still looks the same. So why is it okay for a white woman to wear such clothing and not be a target but when a black woman does so it is an issue and distraction to the sport? As many know the built of your body will affect the way your clothing fits. But I don’t think someone should have sacrifice their individuality and style because it looks different on them. I personally feel that Venus clothing is acceptable, the only difference is that her clothing fits differently because of the built of her body. So by Venus embracing her body, she is embracing the idea of being the target of criticism in the sport. Her choice of clothing shows that she will not conform to the idea that she is stereo-typical “hussy” but she will exercise her freedom and character. The clothes that she wears do not determine her character nor her game. But America get so caught up into stereo-typing and passing judgment on people that they don’t actually realize that they are self consciously racial profiling, stereo-typing and discriminating because of another’s race. But all this is just personal opinion
After reading the post and all the comments above, I came up with a question in my mind that what kind of expectations people actually have on an African American female athlete, or more generally speaking, on women. In most of the pictures, Venus Williams looks professional and serious. However, these features didn’t help her make the media and the public pay more attention on her athletic skills. The public deliberation is focusing on the color of her underwear.
ReplyDeleteI’m wondering whether the media and the public are expecting a more passive or more reticence female celebrity instead of a strong, tough and successful one. That might be why people tried to ignore the success Venus has made in her career. From my point of view, the media and the public are judging and suspecting Venus’ professionalism owning to the sexual stereotypes.
Why it’s considered normal when male athletes rip off their shirts and become bare-chested in order to celebrate their triumph? Why it’s regarded abnormal and inappropriate when Venus wears the flesh colored underwear she designed for herself? I agree that there is a gender difference. But if female athletes are coached like men, the media and the public should treat them equally when it comes to clothing.
When I first heard about this "scandal", I knew that it was going to spark this great debate on what is appropriate attire for playing sports and on what person. It is just so sad that in 2010, people are still concerned about what an African-American female is wearing, especially someone who is in the public eye and is the best at what they...who happens to be an African-American from Compton, CA.
ReplyDeleteI think this issue is about race, sexuality, a sense of belonging, and plain jealousy/hatin'. As an African-American who is dominating a sport that is perceived as being a white sport until the Williams sisters came along, it is still hard for these elite people to grasp the fact that they are great at what they do. Never in a million years would they have thought that some sisters from the streets of Compton, CA would one day change the game of tennis forever.
To think that Venus Williams would play as a PROFESSIONAL tennis player in a televised tennis match commando, really belittles her as a person and as a person who takes their craft very seriously.
Once again, this is an example of how African-American women are represented in the media, for this controversy over the color of her panties is another way of telling this African-American tennis player that she still does not belong in this sport because of the color of her skin, despite the fact that the Williams sisters have generated more viewership for tennis matches ever.
Honestly, I think that the constant referral back to the YOUTUBE videos show that racial difference is a key factor within this discussion. I think that if Venus showed signs of whiteness she would not be as ridiculed. The expectancy level and standards change for marginalized individuals. However, I think the logic behind wearing such an outfit is a cry for attention rather than something to be seen as hyper-sexuality at its best. I think sexuality is something that Venus never usually gets referred to as because she is considered the "ugly" sister for lack of a better term. The fact that she would possibly consider changing her style so that she could gain attention in other areas, proves that she is operating under the dominant ideologies that make up our society. I do agree with Kortney and everyone else who agrees that representations of the black female body has been diluted and fixed. There should be no type of fixation or representation when you consider people of color or minorities. We are all different and represent different things. We may identify as one single ethnic group. However, when you consider each individual, you base them according to their own criteria (in a perfect world). Furthermore, the critics are making marginalization and racial difference key factors that operate within and through our media, homes, and everyday life.
ReplyDelete