(Viewer) Paris is Burning’s Juxtaposition

In the 1980s, living as an LGBTQ person was not easy. At the height of the AIDS crisis, people were turning to the LGBTQ community as scapegoats for the spread of it, with people even calling it “gay plague”. Because of this, most LGBTQ people had to hide this part of themselves when they were in public and surrounded by a majority of straight people. Not in the ballroom though. 

Paris is Burning, directed by Jennie Livingston, is a documentary that offers perspectives and tells the story of the lives of people involved in Harlem ball culture. In the ballrooms, these people were free of judgment. They were able to embrace their culture and escape from the oppressive limitations of the current society. Everyone had the opportunity to do what they wanted with the multitude of categories to participate in. It is here where the LGBTQ community of Harlem all felt accepted and felt pride in their community. Stemming off of these balls are “houses”. These houses are surrogate families that consisted of those who participated in the balls. The “mothers” of these houses were typically successful Drag Queens who gave back to people like them. It offered those who were excommunicated from their families a new home.

What made this documentary very interesting  is that this was only half of it. Throughout the whole film, Livingston turns to specific people and documents their lives which addressed race, class, and sexuality. For example, Livingston interviews Octavia St. Laurent, a typical drag queen who had the dream of becoming a model. Unfortunately though, this dream was not attainable at the time. Modeling agencies, typically run by straight white people, were not likely to accept black/latinx gay people so these aspiring gay models like Octavia were left in the dust and continued to struggle economically. This was seen with Venus Xtravaganza, who was horrifically killed as they was working as a sex worker to get money so that they can maintain their life. This horrific scene is the reason that people turned to these balls. It was a place where they escaped their racial, sexual, and economical oppression  

Overall, Livingston’s choice to continuously juxtapose the hardships of the outside world and the glory of the ballroom allows the viewer to feel more compassion for the LGBTQ community. When I saw how much fun and how happy the people were in the ballroom, I immediately felt terrible once the hard subjects were discussed. It is terrible what these people go through and I hope that Livingston’s documentary changed the perspectives of those who did not accept this community. 

3 thoughts on “(Viewer) Paris is Burning’s Juxtaposition

  1. Hi Corey,
    I agree with your ideas about the shift between the “hardships of the outside world” and “the glory of the ballroom.” I think Livingston’s choices about how to highlight these differences allowed the viewer a unique perspective. Attending the balls were a way for people within this community to feel seen and for that to escape the struggles that they were facing. Livingston did an excellent job at portraying the happy and carefree emotions people experienced during these balls, and it allowed the viewer to feel the energy of the audiences. Within the balls, they could be whoever they wanted to be, and they found solace within the community. Also, what resonated with me deeply was that the other drag queens were devastated by the loss of Venus Xtravaganza, but they didn’t seem particularly surprised. I think this says a lot about the struggles faced by this group.

  2. Hey Corey! I think your identification of juxtaposition as a motivating feature throughout Paris is Burning is wonderful. For me, it was additionally interesting to ponder the various layers and forms of juxtaposition and continuity within these ballrooms themselves. On one side, the vicious and unrelenting pressure of life outside of these rooms are reproduced in the cutthroat and “war-like” environments during the balls. In the walls of the ballroom, enclaves of identity are formed by houses that groups belong to. Throughout the film, the editing of various people who belong to differing houses discussing their prominence and “reign”. On the other, however, there is absolutely a contrast of hardship from the world and glory in the ballroom. What resides at the fault line between both, to me, is the question does Livingston’s representation of conflict and community help to reclaim the exertion of power and autonomy to the LGBTQ+ community? Great post!

  3. Great response Corey. It was fascinating to see throughout the documentary how many characters sought after fame. In reality, black, gay people did not have the opportunity to work in the fashion industry. Watching them chase a dream without opportunity was upsetting because you knew that they were most likely not going to acquire the status and riches that they worked hard for. Coming from a future perspective you gain empathy for what this group of people had to go through to gain the respect they have today. Furthermore it’s interesting to look towards now to see the representation this group of people has in society. This is heavily credited towards Harlem ball culture as a pioneer for LGBTQ, black rights.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *