Monday, August 26, 2013

The Miley Cyrus Spectacle at the VMAs

I can never recall being called a prude, but after watching Miley Cyrus’ performance at the MTV Video Music Awards this morning, I must say I was left even more creeped out then Will Smith and family appeared to be (ABC News). Being over 14 years old, I am not, of course, a fan of the Billy Ray Cyrus scion – but do believe that this performance went even further then those Lolita nymphet images that caused such a stir a few years ago in Vanity Fair. Cyrus is now 20 and free to do as she pleases, but there is just something unseemly about this teen stars growing up and giving these performances to remind fans of this transition (remember the Britney Spears kiss with Madonna several years back?). In any case, the performance and reaction does bring up a few interesting points for those of us who study popular culture seriously …

  1. Should parents of teenage stars be tried in court for reckless endangerment? Seriously. Besides the fact that Cyrus is singing about the new drug de jour Molly (a supposedly more organic form of Ecstacy), look around the American wasteland at all the ex-teen stars who are either drug addicts, has beens, overweight, in rehab or, maybe worst of all, trying to revive their careers on reality shows. On a side note, I can’t wait until Justin Bieber’s fall – believing him to be the latest incarnation of the devil (Damien Omen IV).
  2. Will cool always involve white people trying to act black? And does it have to end up so embarrassingly most of the time? Among the slants on the story today is appalling accounts of Cyrus twerking with Robin Thicke – after her tongue wagging (like a porn star), slapping a female dancer on the butt and dancing around a host of Teddy Bears like a furry in heat. Cultural critic John Leland argued in his book Hip: The History (NPR Interview), that hip has always evolved around the black-white “Dance of conflict & curiosity that binds it.” Hip emerges out of African American culture, though it draws its mass appeal, and sellability, from white desire to capture this mythologized vision of “blackness.” We see this with the Beats, the tough-nosed Noir stars of the 40s, the cool Hollywood stars of the 50s, the edgy rock stars from the 70s on and in so many other manifestations. With the teen pop star, it is pure imitation of hip, cool as pure commodity with no allegiance to its deeper adherence to: 1. Bohemianism (anti-materialism), 2. Individualism, 3. Creativity, 4. Cool Indifference (these kids are trying so hard with their spectacle performances) or 5. Rejection of social conventions (their tacit revolt is so couched within selling, it undermines any nod to stepping outside the normative).
  3. Robert Thomas Farris of Yale agrees with Leland’s contention, though giving it a more playful backdrop: “The telling point is that the ‘mask’ of coolness is worn not only in time of stress, but also of pleasure, in fields of expressive performance and the dance. Struck by the re-occurrence of this vital notion elsewhere in tropical Africa and in the Black Americas, I have come to term the attitude "an aesthetic of the cool" in the sense of a deeply and completely motivated, consciously artistic, interweaving of elements serious and pleasurable, of responsibility and play” or as designer Christian Lacroix argues, “"...the history of cool in America is the history of African-American culture. While one can find these cues throughout popular culture, it is particularly true of white teenage pop artists from the Backdoor Boys to N’Sync to Justin Timerlake, Justin Bieber and, to stay on topic, Miley Cyrus in this performance. It is important to note that this should not be seen purely in a negative light, as white people “acting black” certainly augured a forward movement in race relations in America – most obviously expressed in white teenage suburbia’s ongoing love affair with hip hop. 
  4. On a final note, many will be troubled by Cyrus acting like a “whore,” though few will say it. I would say the more troubling aspect is her acting like a consumer whore that will do anything to sell her “brand” to the public, now that she has transitioned fully from Disney star to young adulthood. The television show that made Cyrus such a huge celebrity pushed the notion that you could be famous and normal simultaneously. But is this possible? Of course not. Yet this notion is spoon-fed to our children, along with the idea that one must brand oneself at a young age if you are to succeed in a world that fully revolves around the spectacle society. Is this really a positive message for the youth of today and tomorrow? What are the long term effects of this messaging system on all those who fail to find fame or fortune? Is alienation amplified even further when one is constantly engaged in the process of creating the most appealing, and sellable, version of themselves to the world?

No comments: