In the past couple of days, I have discovered RVCBard and become a fan.
A few days ago, Nick Keenan encouraged the alpha bloggers in the community to find a new voice and mentioned the underrepresentation of women out there. RVCBard commented:
*meekly raises hand*
I’d love to be asked to join the theater blogging community.
Then I come in with a hardy "Hear! Hear!" and she challenged me back with a couple of good questions, so I'm addressing them here:
ME (on RVC's blog): I so totally get it. Very often, after I post something in my own blog, I feel this wave of remorse, like I've gone too far in asserting my own opinion, and who the heck do I think I am to spout my mouth off like that?
RVC: Have you had experiences where people have said (or done) something to that effect to you?
Me (responding here, now): No, not really. It just seems that the current alpha bloggers are pretty quick to dismiss the non-alphas. Not in an active way - they've all been perfectly welcoming and polite in the very limited exchanges I've personally had with them. But there is a tightly knit club who constantly discuss (and diss, like today) each other's ideas, and I am too easily intimidated. I get shy and worry that these guys are so prolific I don't really have anything new and noteworthy to add. Feeling moved enough to speak up and being refuted is cool; I love a good debate. It's the fear that those bloggers I admire may just read and go, "Eh, lightweight, not worthy of the conversation" that makes me timid. I'm feeling a little "Long time listener, first time caller" at the moment.
---
And RVCBard also poses: This is probably fodder for another post, but do you feel that you're judged as a person more on your attractiveness to men than your character or your ideas? Do you experience men not knowing how to "handle" you if you don't present yourself as a sexual object?
My response: Yes, I think people in general are often judged by the way they look more than their character or ideas, and that can apply to me at times, too, at least on first meeting. For me personally, it hasn't been so much about sex as about, actually, credibility. What I have faced more is the assumption that because I come across as sweet or soft somehow, my dinner table contributions must therefore be more likely to skew towards the domestic tasks involved in preparing the food than the intellectual discourse that happens there. (This does not by any means come from my husband; one of the reasons I fell in love with him was because we're the kind of well-matched geeks who are prone to spending our Friday night with a political documentary and a bottle of wine, followed by a rousing, slightly tipsy debate over Ralph Nader, and he treats me 100% as a worthy contributor.) But I have experienced from time to time the assumption that because of the way I look (less sex object, more reasonably cute girl next store... who is maybe starting to show her age just a tad...) I probably don't have any valuable insights unless we're talking about nail polish. And, actually, I know absolutely nothing about nail polish.
Again, I'm going to refer to Malcolm Gladwell, because I'm always obsessed with talking about whatever I'm reading at the moment. In Blink, he points out our unconscious associations with appearance through statistics about the height of Fortune 500 CEOs. Gladwell asserts that the average CEO (who is almost invariably a white man) is about three inches taller than the average American man. He says, "In the U.S. population, about 14.5 percent of all men are six feet or taller. Among CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, that number is 58 percent. Even more striking, in the general population, 3.9 percent of adult men are six foot two or taller. Among my CEO sample, almost a third were six foot two or taller." He goes on to state that there are arguably valid reasons why there aren't many women or minorities in the executive office - that historically they have been held by back discrimination or cultural patterns, "So, today, when boards of directors look for people with the necessary experience to be candidates for top positions, they can argue somewhat plausibly that there aren't a lot of women and minorities in the executive pipeline. But this is not true of short people. It is possible to staff a large company entirely with white males, but it is not possible to staff a large company without short people. There simply aren't enough tall people to go around. Yet few of those short people ever make it into the executive suite."
To make a long story short, yes, I have been judged by the way I look in the past, but so has everybody. The nice thing about the blogosphere is that appearance can be made a total non-issue by just not putting it out there for people to see. The only reason it comes up for me in this forum is because cultural expectations are so ingrained in my everyday life. Not being taken seriously is really freaking frustrating. And so sometimes it's just easier to read all this stuff, formulate all these opinions and then share them with my husband in the privacy of my own home.
But there are just too many interesting people writing out there that I want to converse with.
Photo (and cupcake) by Zalita
16 comments:
What do you think it would take for theater blogosphere to be more welcoming to "non-alphas" (God, I hate that pecking (pecker?)-order terminology)? What other methods of discourse can we use to introduce, exchange, and expand ideas? What aspects of a more "feminine" style do you think could help things?
I'm a girl, I blog about theatre without wanting to punch people's heads in, I think theatre is an art form and full of interesting ideas and worthy of serious discussion. And I get way more readers than any of them. Go figure!
RVC - Well, I think it will take people like us weaseling our way into the "inner" circle. That will probably take time, but we're already beginning to make strides. I think Nick is absolutely right - we just have to get in there and do it. And trust that those who are interesting in our voices will find us if we keep putting ourselves out there. I don't think the atmosphere is going to change for us, but that we need to get in there and change things ourselves. What do YOU think?
Alison - Awesome! Thanks for popping in and bringing your blog to my attention. I am definitely going to enjoy getting caught up with you, and I'm excited to find a powerful voice already out there paving the way for us.
I think I can make do with weasling, but snakes are sexier.
Hi Laura - nice to find you blog, too. And RCVBards. There are different kinds of blog cultures - the theatre blogs in Melbourne, where I am, have a different air, they tend to be more about theatre and less about brawling (which I confess has depressed me a bit about the US blogs lately), though I guess there's plenty of argument. It might be that there are more women blogging, I don't know... I'm just very thing about any argument being civil, though: you can differ - even differ passionately - without calling other people names.
And you make your own "inner circle". Exert that gravity! Speaking as one who knows, living slightly above Antarctica at the edge of the world...!
When I left yesterday, I left the door open. Please feel free to take my seat at the table. While I understand that some might find the verbal fisticuffs offensive or intimidating, if the American theatrosphere had a little more life those brawls wouldn't be necessary. Perhaps you can bring some life to it. But as I click through my Bloglines feeds, more often than not I encounter boring advertisements for one's own shows and that's about it -- certainly very few new ideas. Passionate engagement was my thing, but I think a reflective, dare I say poetic, or personal approach would be most welcome (at least by me). Anything that would bring a little life to the 'sphere. Was it Jimmy Porter in Look Back in Anger who said ""Oh heavens, how I long for a little ordinary human enthusiasm"?
"And you make your own "inner circle". Exert that gravity! Speaking as one who knows, living slightly above Antarctica at the edge of the world...!"
I've never had any correspondence with Allison that I can recall, but I like this sentiment quite a bit.
No one owns the blogosphere. Thank goodness for that. None of us wants to have play rules created by anyone else regardless of taste/whatnot.
I have no idea what it means to be a woman or to be black and female or what it is to be Australian.
I think it is a shame that so many people feel that the voice with which I speak is somehow determental and negative. It concerns me that someone, anyone would think they couldnt speak or email me or what have you because of the voice I use when speaking to Scott.
I am starting to understand this though. I wrote about it today in response to Mac Rogers.
It doesnt surprise me that Allison has a wider readership. I think her success and content is strong (when I go there not often but I do). I dont know that her readership when compared to others has so much to do with her gender or her civility. She has always struck me more as a journalist, a respected journalist with a voice that speaks to many. Unless you know me or my theatre company or found me from Scott or Don, I'm really just a nobody who sends out these messages in a bottle.
For me this whole thing with Scott, has really been this thing between me and him. I dont if that is who you are referring to when you talk about some "inner circle" of alphas.
Anyway, I have spoken about my approach to Scott and how it is different that how I approach others. I would hope that you would take me at my word...and start talking back when you have something to say about a certain topic anybody brings up.
RVC, you brought up something interesting the other day. You asked (I dont know the degree of earnestness) if you could elaborate on something I wrote.
I was truly surprised. No one has ever asked for my permission to refer to something I posted on a public forum. They just went ahead and did it. It was public.
Anyway, I think you should habe at it! I think you should speak to that which compels you, and not worry about other bloggers (especially in regards to gender).
This is your blog. You have a voice just as relevent as anyone elses. I haven't stopped blogging when someone tells me my stuff is too strong too violent too whatever (too alpha?).
Oh and Allison, I read some of the things you and Scott have written to each other...I'm totally convinced you never wanted to punch his head in (smile and shrug).
Lets keep talking. The great thing about RVCbard.blogspot.com is no matter what I say...you have the final word here!
Hope that was positive enough that people will start talking to me again.
(wink)
-dv
Oops laura, I meant Trailing Spouse Blues Blog...I got a little confused about which link got me where. Everything I would have said to RVC applies to you...to anyone
all the best
dv
If you've got some background with William Gibson (though not necessary), it will help with the following : the internet (and blogs) organize themselves surreptitiously and organically into little neighborhoods within cities, within sovereign territories, within the web. Some neighborhoods are nicer than others. Some streets are cul-de-sacs. Before you sign a lease on a street populated by bellicose intellectual brawlers, make sure you've surveyed the terrain.
ps. An often overlooked tool in the blogger's kit: "sending someone to Coventry." Try it. You might like it.
Rat Sass is a persona. Yeah, it’s also nick@ or Mr. Fracaro. Angry White Guy is a persona. Yeah, it’s also Don or Mr. Hall. The Outraged Professor as Scott Walters The Devil Vet as Bob Fisher. And so on. So how do you craft that, the representation from which you speak? Trailing Spouse will likely not speak with much machismo; and that persona likely expects the "alpha male mask" to lead the debate. (There are "real" alpha males in life, but none in the blogosphere, only cheap imitations.)
Alison at her blog often addresses herself in the third person as “Little Alison.” Is there some correct way for a Rat Sass talk to a Little Alison? And who will define that correct way? Rat Sass sometimes visits Little Alison’s blog, but she makes little girl faces at him all the time as if he is ugly and troll-like. She is not quite the censor but she is not very welcoming of his presence, so Rat Sass doesn’t visit Little Alison very often.
Rat Sass likes the Profane Schoolmarm as his debate partner. They have invented a cheeky repartee that is entertaining to watch but only those skilled in the subtleties of such poetic exchange should participate.
In blogging we perform the representations of our self. What part or how much of your “real” self you allow or emphasize within your creation is your choice.
I find the contradiction in comments here and here interesting. Some seem to be of the opinion, "If you can't take the heat, go away and bake some little girly theatre cupcakes on your own time," and others seem to be protesting, "No, really, we're nice! Speak up!" I recognize both as valid reponses and frankly am more interested in the disparate voices, one conversation approach than the separate but equal one.
I'm also a bit mystified by the whole "persona" approach. For me, the whole point of blogging is to put my own point of view into words; purely selfish, frankly. And I read other people's blogs because I am interested in somebody else's point of view from where they're standing. I can kind of see why somebody might want to do it. But I guess I would just prefer do my acting on stage. Which is perhaps why I write grant proposals rather than plays, I guess.
I could do with a whole lot less 'persona' and a lot more 'personal'. Folks hide behind their masks in the blogging world even harder than the real one.
Forget the 'alphas'. Forge this trail on your own. The 'alphas' will eventually follow, trust me.
Everybody has got a mask...remember "Singles"
Kyra - "I think not having an act, being yourself...that's your act"
Just saying...
Nah, I get enough persona during rehearsal. This for me is about note-sharing with peers trying to crack open theater or another aspect of theater for themselves. And often having difficulty, and wanting feedback.
I have several friends who I chat with about theater blogs who have been flabbergasted when I've told them that there aren't many female theater bloggers out there. Alison, you've been my only peek into Australian theater at all for a few months now. I think they'll be glad to have your perspectives to relate to - I know I was - and I hope we have a rich conversation as a result.
Paul, Nick K,
Wikipedia definition the "persona" in psychology:
"The persona is also the mask or appearance one presents to the world. It may appear in dreams under various guises (see Carl Jung and his psychology). Importantly, the persona, used in this sense, is not a pose or some other intentional misrepresentation of the self to others. Rather, it is the self as self-construed, and may change according to situation and context."
The blogging persona then. The private v. personal.
Post a Comment