Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: John Dean on Prop 8 and the blame game Previous entry: Colin Powell smacks down the wingnut faction of the GOP

Goodbye Bettie Page

Bettie Page died after spending 10 days on life support in Los Angeles.  She was 85 years old.

If you’re a feminist with an oft-uneasy relationship with pornography (pro the idea of erotic materials, anti the flagrant sexism that marks most of them) and you’ve got any relationship whatsoever to the hipster culture of the past, oh, 20 years, then it’s hard not to have mixed feelings about Bettie Page.  Or, not Bettie Page the actual human being. That’s easy.  I’m saddened that Page spent most of her life in despair, distraught that this is the fate society hands so many women, and glad that she finally started to see financial gain from the resurgence in popularity of pictures taken of her throughout the 50s.  And skeptical that she made even a fraction of the money owed to her, especially since her fate was in the hands of men like Hugh Hefner who knew that any amount was more than she was getting before.

No, it’s her image that is hard to wrap your mind around.  It looms extremely large for a woman most people know almost nothing about.  I’d be lying if I didn’t say that I don’t see the appeal, from the playful look in her eyes in most pictures, to her refreshing lack of shame, to the way she squares her shoulders, and of course her kitschy style that seamlessly adapted itself to punk rock reimagination decades later.  She is very rock and roll, compared to Marilyn Monroe, who was very bachelor pad.  I’ve got the straight-cut bangs like she does, and the fact that she inadvertently made them popular decades after she gave up the business no doubt contributes to why I’ve got them.  (Well, her and Audrey Hepburn.) 


I have no doubts about why she’s popular at all.  The image overload has diminished the power of her image, but for a lot of the kind of rock music loving weirdos who felt alienated from the standard cheesecake middle American version of sexuality—-Playboy, Hooters, blond bimbos who all but say, “You want to put what where? *giggle*”—-the Bettie Page pin-up pictures offered something genuinely fun.  She’s not playing stupid in these pictures, and it’s genuinely hot. She’s naughty without seeming to have an ounce of guilt to her. They cater to the fantasies of men who want something more interesting than cheesecake.  But it was women (well, women like me and a lot of women I know) who put her popularity over the top.  I suspect a lot of women see her picture for the first time and think, shit, I can actually be sexy without getting breast implants, dyeing my hair blond, and adopting a cloying posture. For real.  Not the consolation prize sexy, where you’re not the hot cheerleader but you’ll do.  Genuinely sexy, sexy in a way that Hooters and sterile Playboy spreads doesn’t even come close to reaching. And that’s a powerful thing to think for anyone, but if you’re a woman and a disproportionate amount of your worth is based on your sexiness, it’s huge.

Of course, Bettie Page is still thin and white and conventionally pretty.  So the profundity of this to the women that have felt probably sounds weak and whiny.  Like, “Ugh, I’m a tall brunette who trips over her own feet, but Bettie Page made me feel like I can be sexy.”  I’m not putting that out there to garner anyone’s sympathy, or suggest that the sexiness problems of women who are close to the mainstream ideal but just a little out of it are major issues.  They’re not.  I’m just explaining why she mattered to the people she mattered to.  Page isn’t really an alternative in any radical way, and to be fair, I don’t think anyone really is suggesting she is.  Hers was just an image that was the same old thing, but with a little more brazenness and a little more rock and roll. 

Pin-ups are an interesting phenomenon.  They’re hardly considered pornography anymore, especially if the naughty bits are covered up, but they are undeniably fantasy.  They’re incredibly sexist—-a pin-up is all about using a woman’s body and never a man’s as a stand-in for sex.  (Beefcake exists, but isn’t near the cultural phenomenon.)  But a lot of pin-ups are really appealing to women, because they show women in playful poses and just generally seem fun and relaxed, and not as fraught and depressing as so much other porn is. If we’re going to use women’s bodies as a stand-in for sex, we should at least show said women smiling, having fun, and looking confident.  The best Page pin-ups were definitely of this variety.  Certainly you contrast the one I have above with images like these that are weighed down with racist and imperialist subtext, and the one above feels downright innocent.  It’s hard to even imagine there was any intent behind it at all but having fun.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 08:10 PM • (40) Comments

They’re incredibly sexist—-a pin-up is all about using a woman’s body and never a man’s as a stand-in for sex.  (Beefcake exists, but isn’t near the cultural phenomenon.) But a lot of pin-ups are really appealing to women, because they show women in playful poses and just generally seem fun and relaxed, and not as fraught and depressing as so much other porn is.

I have a Vargas on my wall.  I never actually thought of it as pornography; maybe it’s because it seems so much tamer than what’s in porn these days and I therefore took it out of context.

Comment #1: Linnaeus  on  12/12  at  08:29 PM

a pin-up is all about using a woman’s body and never a man’s as a stand-in for sex.

Hmm, is “sex” and “titillation” the <u>same</u> thing?*  IMO, pinups are like a cup of coffee, they mildly get the pumps going a bit faster, but unlike porn, aren’t intended to be perused “in private”, ahem.

*obviously related, hell, intertwined, but not the same thing

Vargas is ok, but Elvgren is the good stuff.

Comment #2: Eric, Rejector of Memez  on  12/12  at  08:44 PM

Years ago a female friend and I went to a somewhat avant-garde dance recital at UCLA.  At different points in the performance, a woman and a man were both completely naked.  The man’s dance was exuberant and un-self conscious; the only word for the woman’s dance was morose.  And worse - the dance seemed to indicate she was being punished for her nakedness.  I remember talking with my friend afterward and wondering why there was happy naked guy and miserable naked woman - it bugged both of us, and is, to this day, the one thing I remember about that evening.

I hate the Playboy/hooters look; it’s so manufactured and disinterested.  Give me playfulness anyday.

Comment #3: Mutant Poodle  on  12/12  at  08:57 PM

Add: She was an active sincere Christian who didn’t think nudity and a little spanking play was evil. Sweet person, from what I’ve heard. Gone to her reward, I hope.

Comment #4: M. Peachbush  on  12/12  at  09:09 PM

I’m pretty sad about this.
I just wish that she could have gotten all the money owed to her from the use (and abuse) of her images.
I love old pin-ups. I painted some nose art on an old dresser of mine in high school and I have an IKEA chest of drawers that I painted an Elvgren (I think) on (Happy Medium). SO I’ve been kinda of obsessed with them for a long time.

There seems to be something more interesting about them than the almost clinically detailed vaginal/breast shots that make up “spank material” now… but then again- I didn’t grow up in the 50’s and I’m sure that the images are viewed differently by my grandmother and mother…

Comment #5: Danica Lefse Queen  on  12/12  at  09:33 PM

Although I’ll miss her, I’m also glad that Bettie’s suffering is over. She had been in poor health for several years.

God bless her.

Comment #6: CHV  on  12/12  at  09:34 PM

Eric, the point you’re pointedly missing is that it’s not about you. The wrong in porn and titillation is not in the thrill it gives the viewer, but the use it makes of the object.

Next: bearbaiting: worse for the audience than the bear? No.

Comment #7: clew  on  12/13  at  02:17 AM

Since discovering Bettie Page in my late-teens I have always had an intense interest and fascination with her images, which became an interest in her life (at that time, she was still the legendary pin-up who had disappeared).  When I looked at her images, for the first time I realized that sexuality and sex should be fun and should involve laughter and a healthy sense of irony (how can you be serious when bodies make some of the most outrageous sounds at certain moments).  Her wink seemed to indicate that she was in on a joke, while also telegraphing that sexual expression is fun/normal/not something to feel shame about.

The more I learned about her life, though, the more problematic she became as an icon.  I personally cannot look at a Bunny Yeager photograph without seething inside.  And Hugh Hefner can eat shit.

Comment #8: history_mom  on  12/13  at  03:56 AM

Wikipedia:

She would in time attend three bible colleges, including…Multnomah School of the Bible in Portland, Oregon

Holy CRAP.

Comment #9: Auguste  on  12/13  at  04:24 AM

I remember talking with my friend afterward and wondering why there was happy naked guy and miserable naked woman - it bugged both of us, and is, to this day, the one thing I remember about that evening.

Mutant, I’m sure you’ve noted a similar dichotemy in male vs. female strip clubs (and/or their portrayals in the media).  Male strippers and their (mostly) straight female patrons turn those bars into benign-seeming carnivals; atmosphere is generally very different in peeler pubs with women onstage.  It’s probably not hard to speculate this into theory.

Re Page, I guess it’s all up to Dita, now.

Comment #10: Ranylt  on  12/13  at  09:58 AM

They’re incredibly sexist—-a pin-up is all about using a woman’s body and never a man’s as a stand-in for sex.

I think this statement is an unsustainable over-generalization.  It assumes, for example, that men have no aesthetic sense outside of covetous sexuality; it makes an implied statement that in het males “my god, she’s beautiful and I want to visually enjoy her loveliness” is synonymous with “boy, I’d like to fuck THAT!”.

I can’t speak for other men but I can tell you this about me: I have lost count of the number of times that I have seen women who I found so lovely that I could stare at them for hours, but towards whom I had no sexual attraction.  Art and sex may have a huge Venn element to them, but they ain’t the same thing.

Comment #11: seeker6079  on  12/13  at  10:15 AM

You’ve showered yourself with faint praise, seeker.

Comment #12: staydaddy  on  12/13  at  11:43 AM

staydaddy:

A flaw in Amanda’s argument as presented* is that it assumes that male aesthetic admiration of women can’t be divorced from possessory sexuality, or, alternatively, that the aesthetic sense does not exist at all.**  Wanna step out from behind your rather small wit and address the issue?  (While you’re at it you might want to go to dictionary.com and brush up on a gap in your own knowledge: the difference between the words “could”, which was used in the post, and “did”, which was not.)

* - She has consistently shown herself to be an enemy to simplistic and insulting notions on the right that men are merely vehicles for moving uncontrollable and uncivilized primate lust around, hence the limitation “as presented”.

** - A point which would astonish every single het male who photographs or paints men and gay males who photograph or paint women.

Comment #13: seeker6079  on  12/13  at  11:57 AM

seeker, you can try to argue that pin-ups are about sex, but I’m afraid you won’t get far.  Loveliness without sexuality in women tends to be part of art that isn’t about getting said women into sexy costumes.

Comment #14: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/13  at  12:14 PM

I mean, you seem to think I’m arguing that the Mona Lisa is about sex.  No, I’m talking about girlie pictures.

Comment #15: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/13  at  12:14 PM

Well, not only about sex.  Mostly about sex, and intended as legal wank material.  But also it’s art and evocative of other kinds of pleasure and escape.

Comment #16: lonespark  on  12/13  at  12:34 PM

Amanda, I’m not overly comfortable with the implied class bias in your reply.  Not everybody who has an aesthetic sensibility has an artistic sensibility.  Somebody might look at this and see the beauty of it, and somebody else might need this.  A pinup can be mostly about sex, granted, and usually is.  Hell, a Rubens can be mostly about sex.  But it ain’t necessarily “all about” it and it’s that absolutist position that i take issue with; it’s s needless either/or thinking. 

I simply try to make the point that painting bold, black lines on a floor and saying on this side it’s art and on this side it’s pinup/porn isn’t an artistically sustainable position and if we advance it we are getting a bit elitist and shutting down other people’s potential gateways to art simply because we’re notionally above such things.  When you say “Loveliness without sexuality in women tends to be part of art that isn’t about getting said women into sexy costumes” you come perilously close to one of the few insightful things the pornographer Bob Guccione ever said: when asked the difference between porn photos of a woman and artistic photos, he replied Art was when the camera wasn’t in focus.

Beauty exists.  Line exists, form exists, a non-sexual aesthetic exists.  Whether the man or woman is dressed like crap and peering over a pile of papers or whether they’re in some bit of skimpy ridiculousness is quite, quite irrelevant.  We can’t invest them with beauty or take it away by putting them in and out of “sexy” poses or dress.

Comment #17: seeker6079  on  12/13  at  12:36 PM

lonespark took far fewer words to say most of my post better.

Comment #18: seeker6079  on  12/13  at  12:37 PM

I’m afraid that if I’m under the “wrong” impression that pin-ups are about sex, then I got that impression from men. 

Like Harlan Ellison: “I cannot to this day see a photo of Bettie Page without getting an erection.”

Mark Mori: “She’s a kind of Che Guevara of sex,” said Mark Mori, an Emmy-winning filmmaker whose authorized documentary about Page will be released next year.

Owen Gleiberman: “It has often been said that Bettie Page, the legendary ‘50s pinup with the pert features framed by those famously severe black bangs, was the rare American sex goddess who was equally at home projecting the image of a good girl or a bad girl. Frolicking, naked, in the ocean foam, her leg extended with playful pleasure, she was all dazzle and sunshine: the girl next door who said yes yes yes.”

I’m sorry if I “generalized” that the male opinion of pin-ups is the non-silly one.  Of course, there are a few outliers that look at a Playboy spread and assume that it’s “about” shoes.  But I think it’s fair to argue that some things aren’t that mysterious.  Action movies are about excitement.  Pin-ups and other pornographic imagery are about sex.  Now, there’s nothing wrong with sex.  The only reason I can fathom that this statement would offend someone is if they feel guilty about sex and try to pass off sexual past times as something more noble. But I’m with Harlan Ellison—-it’s about sex, and there’s nothing wrong with sex.

By the way, I never said it wasn’t art.  Who says art can’t be about sex?  If it gets you off your bizarre high horse, then pin-ups are an art form that use women’s bodies as the standard stand-in for sex.

Comment #19: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/13  at  12:47 PM

Amanda, the question isn’t whether my horse is high or bizarre, or not, is not an issue.  Dammit, the question is whether or not the horse is pretty!!!

Comment #20: seeker6079  on  12/13  at  01:26 PM

I’d have to agree with seeker that art that is titillating is not necessarily all about titillation. Furthermore, titillation depends on context.

Is the Aphrodite of Knidos all about sex?

Comment #21: Scott P.  on  12/13  at  02:07 PM

Scott and seeker, would you care to explain why the huge majority of images of attractive nude or semi-nude people, whether the principal intent is aesthetic appreciation of loveliness or titillation, are images of women? I think you’re both missing the point, which is that the problem is not with sex, it’s with the consistent and nearly exlusive use of women as objects for mens’ aesthetic or sexual stimulation.

Oh, and your “concern over implied class bias” can go fuck itself. This is not a class issue. No one gets a pass on sexism, and the wealthy (Hugh Hefner, maybe?) are as guilty as anyone else.

Comment #22: grolby  on  12/13  at  02:25 PM

I wonder what it is about pinups that draws the “this is art not porn” defense out of the woodwork.

Pinups were created to be porn.  They were marketed as porn.  They were consumed as porn.  Just because we have some kind of hipster “ironic” distance from them now does not change the fact that we are ironically enjoying porn.

That is not to say that individuals are somehow magically unable to see them as anything *but* porn.  But to say that an individual does not see them as porn *at all* strikes me as… well as a lie.  Like saying that you see an advertisement for peanut butter as clever commentary on the relationship between a mother and her children and *not at all* as an attempt to get you to buy peanut butter.  Now if you told me that you saw both of those things in the image then I’d admit that you have a point.  But to say that you don’t see the meaning laying right there on the surface is just disingenuous.

Comment #23: Megan  on  12/13  at  02:41 PM

I didn’t see any mention of the bondage. Coincidence, I’m drawing an hommage pinup to Page.

Comment #24: Sirkowski  on  12/13  at  03:25 PM

Sir, I was mostly trying to analyze the images that seem to resonate most with the hipsters that revived her image.  A few are bondage shots—-her posing with a whip, mainly.  But I don’t really see many of her tied up.  I mean, I’ve seen those pics, but mostly in the “did you know Bettie Page also did S&M;stuff?” context. I think she was also doing S&M;when she was arrested.

Comment #25: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/13  at  03:45 PM

I don’t think there’s a clean separation between high-minded aesthetic appreciation and crotch-level attraction.

“I have seen women who[m] I found so lovely that I could stare at them for hours, but towards whom I had no sexual attraction”

And yet no admission of staring for hours (or even minutes) at images of gorgeous men. Wonder why, if the appeal was merely *aesthetic* and unconnected with sex, as you claim.

Comment #26: wapsie  on  12/13  at  04:57 PM

“can go fuck itself”.  Yeah, I really feel like answering your question now, grolby.  Amanda responded on the merits can stuck a good knife in without lowering the tenor.  Save it for trolls, willya?

waspie, you’ll note that I didn’t stare for hours, the phrase was “could”.  As for the other, I used a female example simply because the post was about Betty Paige and pinup art.  Sorry to break it to you, but, yes, I have seen males of that sort of startling beauty that I could have stared at for hours.  The fact that I am not a photographer is an occasional source of frustration for me.

Megan, what part of “needless either/or thinking”, “a huge Venn element” and my arguing against an absolutist theme suddenly becomes a statement for one side of the either/or thinking?

Comment #27: seeker6079  on  12/13  at  05:18 PM

They’re incredibly sexist—-a pin-up is all about using a woman’s body and never a man’s as a stand-in for sex.  (Beefcake exists, but isn’t near the cultural phenomenon.)

So am I understanding you correctly when I believe you’re pointing out that more people of both genders would hang pin-up picture than Beefcake, and that’s pushing it into the sexist realm?

I find it hard to believe that with all the fireman calenders floating through the mainstream that it does.
Or does the fetish for firemen (and any uniformed occupation) remove it from comparison?

Or maybe I’m confused by the “cultural phenomenom” part.
I’m not sure I explained my confusion here, it really seems like things are being talked around.  I’m hoping to an “ah-ha!” moment where I can graps your ideas.

Comment #28: cynickal  on  12/13  at  06:16 PM

Huh, cynickal?  When desperately trying to confuse the issue, it helps to at least pretend to be coherent.

Comment #29: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/13  at  06:22 PM

Well gosh seeker, I am SO VERY SORRY that I hurt your feelings. Seriously, I said something mean and therefore you need no longer trouble yourself with my question? That really does a lot to correct my impression that you were arguing in bad faith with your statement about class judgment on Amanda’s part. I am not ignorant to class issues, but it’s a mystery to me how you managed to parse that out - so it came across to me as a flimsy excuse to justify your position. But hey, it’s been a long couple months and I’ve been grumpy, so I’m probably lashing out on The Internets more than is warranted. My apologies.

And cynickal, I am anxiously awaiting any kind of evidence that fireman calendars have anything like the cultural penetration that cheesecake pin-ups and calendars do. I can tell you that I have NEVER seen a fireman calendar on the wall of a business or dorm room, not even ironically. The same could not be said of cheesecake calendars. Sheesh, you’d have had a better case with Abercrombie & Fitch shopping bags.

Comment #30: grolby  on  12/13  at  06:54 PM

So am I understanding you correctly when I believe you’re pointing out that more people of both genders would hang pin-up picture than Beefcake, and that’s pushing it into the sexist realm?

I’m parsing this as: More people of both genders are currently interested in female pin-ups than in beefcake, and it’s preposterous to associate this with sexism.

Alternately: It’s not true that pin-ups are more popular than beefcake, and there can therefore be no suspicion of sexism in the existence of pin-ups.

I find it hard to believe that with all the fireman calenders floating through the mainstream that it does.

Translation: The ubiquitous presence of fireman calendars suggests that there is not in fact an imbalance the popularity of female pin-ups and beefcake. This would appear to contradict the first interpretation above, but would support the second.

Or does the fetish for firemen (and any uniformed occupation) remove it from comparison?

Translation: Pictures of men in uniforms may possibly not count as beefcake, for some reason imagined by this commenter.

The message I’m getting is that you should stop discussing the cultural significance of pin-ups and the conflation of women’s bodies with sex, because fireman calendars exist.

Comment #31: junk science  on  12/13  at  06:57 PM

seeker: Your diatribe against “either/or” thinking *seems* to be aimed only at those that would “shut down other people’s potential gateways to art” (ie: those that categorize and critique these images as pornography) and not those who would intellectualize these images as art and ignore their pornishness.  In other words, you *seem* to be coming down on one side of the either/or equation harder than the other.

Perhaps you feel similar frustration with hipsters who claim *only* to see these images in terms of line, form, etc. and *not* in terms of sexual power over the bodies of women.  If so, I didn’t get that impression from your post, but I might stand corrected.

Comment #32: Megan  on  12/14  at  12:52 AM

You do stand corrected.  If you want a good summary of my views on it then I recommend this:
http://www.orwell.ru/library/reviews/dali/english/e_dali
which expresses my views on the matter a million and three times better than I ever could.

Comment #33: seeker6079  on  12/14  at  12:06 PM

August, you have to understand that it is DOUBLE HOLY CRAP for me, as I attended high school and was on traveling teams with the sons of the dean of Multnomah School of the Bible.

Comment #34: Ms Kate  on  12/14  at  03:27 PM

That particular image doesn’t say “come degrade me and dominate me”.  That image shown (and many others of her posing) say “come play with me!”.

Huge difference.

Comment #35: Ms Kate  on  12/14  at  03:35 PM

“Sorry to break it to you, but, yes, I have seen males of that sort of startling beauty that I could have stared at for hours.”

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. But the gender of the pin-up is more than incidental. There are guys I find beautiful, too. I don’t pretend that it has zero to do with sexuality.

The main point was about supposing that there’s some clean separation between aesthetic appreciation of human form and sexuality: I don’t buy it. The soul is one, and affective response is a continuum.

Comment #36: wapsie  on  12/14  at  04:52 PM

I’ve always found the difference between art and pornography is about 20 pounds.

Seriously, if you look at pin-ups done by Vargas, Olivia, Frazetta, Vallejo, etc., those women are ROUND.  Round breasts, round little bellies, round hips, thighs, arms - and women only get that look when they’re carrying about 15-20% body fat.  The current societal standard is 8-10% body fat if a woman wants to be considered “beautiful.”  No wonder anorexia and bulemia are so popular.

Comment #37: Mhorag  on  12/15  at  01:56 PM

The ony place women are too skinny is in the mainstream media. Women look a lot more normal in pornography (considering most of it is amateur or small biz) than on primetime networks.

Comment #38: Sirkowski  on  12/15  at  04:04 PM

MsKate is right.  It’s something so hard to define.  Photographs are magic.  When you saw a picture of Bettie her spirit overwhelmed the image.  Yes, “come play.”  Perhaps, “let’s be naughty.”  Perhaps only very special people can overwhelm the limits of the media they appear in.

Comment #39: Magis  on  12/15  at  07:16 PM

yeah, Ms. Kate said the basic thing I was thinking.  Bodies in general can be sexy.  I have no problem with this.  Why women’s bodies are supposed to be attractive to everyone whereas men’s naked bodies are only supposed to be attractive to straight women-and really, if we’re honest about a lot of cultural narratives, only hot straight young women, more of a problem.  and truly sexist.  I have problems with only seeing images of women who, as you say, seem to be all but saying “you want to put what where?”  and, at least personally, I have problems with the idea that someone else wanting to fuck you gives you any kind of real power over them-yeah, maybe for about 10 minutes.  but images like this, images that make it seem like sex can really be fun for women, and women’s pleasure truly female owned?  hell yeah.

Comment #40: kb  on  12/16  at  01:02 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.