Going into this film, I expected to see people getting crafty to make the stereotypical flashy drag outfits, accompanied by a tight-knit community that was bonded over similar backgrounds. I had a very surface-level understanding of both New York City boroughs and ball circuits (sorry, I grew up under a rock). I was not expecting the amount of materialism or community complexities I saw.
Though I knew that drag and the ball circuit were known for exaggeration, I was expecting it to be more thrift store and handmade pieces. However, Paris is Burning proved that no one really escaped the materialism of the 80s and 90s, as they wanted extravagance so bad that they were willing to steal. In fact, they stole so much that stealing got its own slang term, mopping. Their materialism was also highlighted by their dreams and aspirations- most of them wanted fame and money. While some of this makes sense, as drag is so heavily influenced by idolism and the idols were all super materialistic, I still thought they would live more within their means and find alternatives so they could look extravagant for less. Usually I don’t see the point in having unreasonable aspirations, yet in this documentary I found it inspiring that they were dreaming so big, rather than starting with dreaming of being able to know what they were going to eat every night.
I was also shocked by some of the complexities of the community. I really thought the groups would be united by similar traumas and backstories, and that the similarities would help them respect each other, and to be one tight family unit. However, people were stealing each other’s things (like the person who stole the shoes), the families were divided, and the families fought more than I expected. Granted, the fights seemed like they were generally settled in competition at the balls, but they discussed it more than I would have thought. Similarly, the concept of shade was also incredibly shocking to me, at least at first. Like I said above, I expected a community that would support each other, and finding some nitpicky thing and digging at it seemed cruel. However, the more I thought about it, the more I realized that shade seemed kind of like the things I do with my other friends with dead dads. Similar to the people in the film not giving each other shade for their sexuality, but giving each other shade over how they do their makeup, we won’t make a joke about anyone not having a dad but we will make a joke about acting like you don’t have a dad. We know that no matter how bad the jokes and comments seem from the outside, nothing said is meant to actually hurt anyone’s feelings. Because of this, we feel more comfortable making jokes and nitpicking behavior, because we’re all united by a common trauma, and I think that’s part of what makes a community a family, so I don’t know why it was shocking to me at first.
Also on the topic of shade, I had no idea that it originated in drag. I would have thought it originated somewhere on social media, then grew in popularity after Taylor Swift released “You Need to Calm Down.” Similar to Jennie Livingston, some people critiqued Swift for enabling cultural appropriation and not fully understanding and representing the community she was inspired by. While she used members of the LGBTQ+ community in her music video for the song and donated to GLAAD, knowing a little more about the ball community and origins of the word, I feel like she didn’t give the ball community enough recognition. The ball community is continuously swept under the rug- just look at how many of their murders are left unsolved, and how little care law enforcement has for that. While Jennie Livingston provided a start point, it seems like we haven’t progressed much since then.