Mae West
What does it mean to be an ally?
Is there such a thing as the perfect ally?
I’ve been paying careful attention- I think we’ve all been paying a little more attention lately- to our news feeds. It seems like, lately, all I see are think pieces trying to make everything problematic. It’s good to question, but is all of this nitpicky-ness doing more harm than good?
It’s fantastic that we are becoming more curious about our world. We are asking tough questions, getting really curious, having hard conversations. For the past few days, I’ve been following all of the drama happening on YouTube. So. Stupid. I know. If you knew me when I was 13 years old, you probably knew I had a huge crush on Shane Dawson. Naturally, I was curious about this so-called drama between him, Jeffree Starr, some girl named Tati (?), and James Charles. Again. I cannot stress enough. So STUPID. But watching these YouTubers “taking accountability” was an interesting performance in itself. None of them seemed like genuine apologies, and yet, they were. Most of the time, it seemed like these apologies were being made to cover their own asses. Maybe.
I’ve been noticing this unique “performance” among my white friends for quite some time. I personally don’t feel the need to proclaim my allyship on social media, but I certainly support those who do it anyway. At the end of the day, actions speak louder than words. There have definitely been times where my actions have made me a worse ally, and there are times when my actions has made me a better ally. So are all of these think pieces coming out (most recently, I saw one claiming that Hamilton was problematic??) also rooting out our ability to be imperfect humans?
. . . .
So, today I’ve decided to share a little bit about a hardly perfect ally. She’s one of the greatest sexual pioneers of the 1930s, and her name is Mae West. I’m a huge fan of classic films. TCM used to be on my TV at all times. But, believe it or not, I’ve never seen Mae West on film. She’s one of those icons that you hear about but you might not actually know anything about because it was just way before your time. A few things about her:
It is rumored that she actually based her look on some of the most famous cross dresser/drag queens of the 1920s, Gene Malin, Julian Eltinge, and Bert Savoy.
She didn’t actually achieve a film career until her early 40s.
Upon moving to Hollywood to start her film career (she was in high demand; studio heads practically begged that she move to LA), she went to the head of Paramount to negotiate her pay. She asked her boss (male, of course): well, how much do you make? He told her, and she then said: then pay me a dollar more. And she got it. Throughout her movie career, she would continue to call the shots, not just with her pay, but from every aspect of any production (directing, casting, lighting, costumes).
She made Cary Grant a leading man. No one at Paramount batted an eye at him before. He was simply a pretty face, great for screen testing.
She was arrested for censorship, served jail time, and this made her even MORE famous.
Her entire career was based on her “cancellation” from Broadway.
So why was she arrested in the first place? It wasn’t for her play, SEX in 1926 (tickets were sold out weeks in advance, by the way). It was for The Drag in 1927. This one, unlike SEX, never made it to Broadway and was censored and shuttered before the production ever moved to New York. The production was said to feature many queer men just being their queer selves: it contained depictions of gay sex, gay nightlife, crossdressing— all of which were being heavily prosecuted against at the time. This production was INCREDIBLY radical, but was it radical for the right reasons?
I look back on the trial pictures of West with her entire cast of The Drag behind her. I find it touching that all of the folks came out to support her and to support this production at a time when their very livelihoods were at stake. But then I put this into the context of SEX. Put this picture alongside the fact that, immediately after returning from jail after this censorship arrest, she revived SEX just to say “I’m back.” It’s there where I see a pattern that will continue throughout the rest of her career: shock value. She wanted to shock and disturb a public just itching for a sexual awakening. There’s value in that. There’s a flavor of progress, for sure. However, from the perspective of a 2020 audience, there is also some exploitation when it comes to the gay community as well. There’s even a complicated relationship between her and the Black community. In most, if not all, of her films, she made sure that Black women were cast. They were cast as maids (eh), but they weren’t caricatures like Hattie McDaniel’s character was written as in Gone with the Wind. They would gossip with Mae, hang out with Mae, sing with Mae. They were her girls. They were the “quirky Black best friend” before that was even a thing. And that sounds really really regressive now, but back then, it was pretty unheard of.
So maybe as time passes every ally will become a problematic one? Certainly Hamilton is seemingly and suddenly approaching the realm of the problematic. Just make sure that the problematic doesn’t erode the revolutionary— that we don’t forget our history, warts and all.
