it's interesting to note the "cultural" slant when Adrienne writes that no museum would do an exhibition on drag queens...... well, we at the Powerhouse Museum in Sydney, (Australia's largest and most comprehensive museum) have done not only an exhibition and a publication that touches on elements of drag and drag performance. 'Absolutely Mardi Gras: costume and design of the Sydney Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras' looks at the largest night time event in Australia's cultural calendar and one of the biggest in terms of economic impact. As a "carnival" performance, it challenges conventional perceptions of gender and dress and establishes the inner city precinct of Darlinghurst as a gay and lesbian space. It does so by a mixture of humour (camp) and the typical gender inversions of the gay and lesbian subcultures - drag (yes there is a lesbian form of drag too - as evidenced by one of the costumes in the parade now in our collection by artist Phillipa Playford called 'Cowdyke'). and to complement the exhibition, we showed films of the Mardi Gras and this year, with the book's publication held a Mardi Gras on film festival in association with the official Sydney Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras film festival by Queer Screen.....one of the highlights of our program was "Vegas in sapce - it's a babes only world" by the late drag artiste Doris Fish (distributed in NYC by Troma films). so...yes, there is an exhibition that touches upon drag, because in Australia and the UK, drag is much more understandable and accessible. Robert Swieca co-curator, Absolutely Mardi Gras Powerhouse Museum Sydney, OZ [log in to unmask] ---------- From: daemon To: MUSEUM-L Subject: Re: Film as a Valuable Museum Tool Date: Tuesday, 1 April 1997 6:48PM In a message dated 97-03-31 19:45:49 EST, [log in to unmask] (David Haberstich) writes: > Adrienne: A defense of "film as a museum tool," or even discussing a > museum film collection, are quite different from a recommendation to go > to a theater, see a commercial movie that depicts "a culture" (don't > they all, including Beavis and Butthead?), and put money in the > producer's pocket. Now, David. I think what we are talking about here (or at least what I was talking about) is the use of films which often are the only introduction the mass population has to a subject or "a culture" (as opposed to culture). In other words, the example I gave of "Once Were Warriors" is a painful but all too realistic portrayal of contemporary impoverished Maori straddling two worlds. A few people who I recommended it to were intrigued enough to seek more information on the Maori. This phenomenon happened to me after seeing a Frieda Kahlo art exhibit at the Museum of Women in the Arts. Her work moved me and I wanted to know more about her life which so obviously inspired her art. I consider that show to be a success for the reasons just explained, and would consider "Once Were Warriors" to have had the same effect. Cinema is a medium that most people are comfortable with. If included (as is done in most exhibits these days), it has the potential to make visitors comfortable enough to learn the information being presented in the exhibit. If a movie relates generally or specifically to a > museum exhibition, or if a movie is ABOUT a museum (take "Chances > Are"--please!) these are also valid topics for Museum-L. I think, > however, that recommending people go see a movie, apropos of no specific > museum-related connection, using only the amorphous and flimsy excuse > that it's about "culture" or "a culture," and gosh, aren't museums about > culture too (well, some are, some aren't) is really stretching the > concept of relevance. Unless I was asleep when I wrote my post, I do not think this is what I said. However, I think it is is a valid topic for discussion - people learn about different cultures all the time from movies. As an anthropologist, I am always excited (and usually disappointed afterwards) when a Hollywood movie attempts to discuss anthropological subjects (i.e. "primitive peoples"). Of course, they usually get it wrong. But, the impact is the same: audiences learn. The relevant topic for discussion here is, as you suggested, how do we attract audiences to exhibits as Hollywood does to their movies. Now, don't jump on me, of course they have more money, blah, blah,blah. But why aren't museums working in conjunction with the movie industry on a more regular basis to create films for museum exhibits? Production costs would certainly be considerably lower (shorter films), and what a tax write off. Now, I am getting ino an area that I know nothing about here, but it seems to me that film is and can be used for educational purposes (even Selena) if one wants to adjust their lens accordingly. Although I have not seen Selena, I am sure it would be an interesting look at a cultural lifestyle. Hell, Wigstock, To Wong Foo..., The Bird Cage, and a few other films about drag queens have provided an interesting peek into that world. But, I'll bet no one is willing to do an exhibit on drag queens in their museum. How about discussing strategies for attracting > movie fans to museums...? See above. - Adrienne