金同志奖:从金球奖到同性恋联盟的奖项合法化

Benjamin Kruger-Robbins
{"title":"金同志奖:从金球奖到同性恋联盟的奖项合法化","authors":"Benjamin Kruger-Robbins","doi":"10.7560/vlt8904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:This article historicizes how the Golden Globe Awards and the George Foster Peabody Awards selectively commended television programming with gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) themes from the 1970s through the mid-1990s. I argue that these awards programs' different legitimizing practices helped to define LGBTQ+ programming as elite, sequestering it from television's everyday discursive positioning. I first consider how the outcast status of the Golden Globes, organized by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, compelled greater attention to \"queer\" television oddities, even while the recognitions upheld a troublingly classed framing of LGBTQ+ shows that dovetailed with the organizer's late-1980s discrediting following disclosures of bribery and other dealings. The Peabodys, on the other hand, promoted standards for \"respectable\" programming and therefore refused recognition of gay-themed shows until doing so became politically expedient in the late 1980s. This academic awarding institution later singled out \"quality\" entries for acclaim, paving the way for more contemporary associations between LGBTQ+ television and premier viewing platforms. Ultimately, I argue that activist media watchdogs such as the Gay and Lesbian Alliance against Defamation (GLAAD) emulated the Globes' and Peabodys' public relations strategies, becoming de facto awards organizations in the 1990s that adopted \"quality\" criteria for recognizing queer-themed shows.","PeriodicalId":335072,"journal":{"name":"The Velvet Light Trap","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Golden Gays: Awards Legitimation from the Globes to GLAAD\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Kruger-Robbins\",\"doi\":\"10.7560/vlt8904\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT:This article historicizes how the Golden Globe Awards and the George Foster Peabody Awards selectively commended television programming with gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) themes from the 1970s through the mid-1990s. I argue that these awards programs' different legitimizing practices helped to define LGBTQ+ programming as elite, sequestering it from television's everyday discursive positioning. I first consider how the outcast status of the Golden Globes, organized by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, compelled greater attention to \\\"queer\\\" television oddities, even while the recognitions upheld a troublingly classed framing of LGBTQ+ shows that dovetailed with the organizer's late-1980s discrediting following disclosures of bribery and other dealings. The Peabodys, on the other hand, promoted standards for \\\"respectable\\\" programming and therefore refused recognition of gay-themed shows until doing so became politically expedient in the late 1980s. This academic awarding institution later singled out \\\"quality\\\" entries for acclaim, paving the way for more contemporary associations between LGBTQ+ television and premier viewing platforms. Ultimately, I argue that activist media watchdogs such as the Gay and Lesbian Alliance against Defamation (GLAAD) emulated the Globes' and Peabodys' public relations strategies, becoming de facto awards organizations in the 1990s that adopted \\\"quality\\\" criteria for recognizing queer-themed shows.\",\"PeriodicalId\":335072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Velvet Light Trap\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Velvet Light Trap\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7560/vlt8904\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Velvet Light Trap","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7560/vlt8904","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:本文回顾了20世纪70年代至90年代中期,金球奖和乔治·弗斯特·皮博迪奖是如何有选择地表彰同性恋、双性恋、变性人和酷儿(LGBTQ+)题材的电视节目的。我认为,这些颁奖节目的不同合法化做法有助于将LGBTQ+节目定义为精英节目,将其与电视的日常话语定位隔离开来。我首先考虑的是,由好莱坞外国记者协会(Hollywood Foreign Press Association)主办的金球奖(Golden Globes)被排斥的地位,是如何迫使人们更多地关注电视上的“酷儿”怪咖,尽管它的认可支持了LGBTQ+节目令人不安的分类框架,这与组织者在20世纪80年代末因贿赂和其他交易被披露而名誉受损相一致。另一方面,皮博迪夫妇提倡“体面”节目的标准,因此拒绝承认以同性恋为主题的节目,直到20世纪80年代末,这样做才成为政治上的权宜之计。这个学术颁奖机构后来挑选出了“高质量”的参赛作品,为LGBTQ+电视和主要观看平台之间更多的当代联系铺平了道路。最后,我认为激进的媒体监管机构,如同性恋反诽谤联盟(GLAAD)模仿了金球奖和皮博迪电影节的公关策略,在20世纪90年代成为事实上的颁奖机构,采用“质量”标准来表彰酷儿主题的节目。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Golden Gays: Awards Legitimation from the Globes to GLAAD
ABSTRACT:This article historicizes how the Golden Globe Awards and the George Foster Peabody Awards selectively commended television programming with gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) themes from the 1970s through the mid-1990s. I argue that these awards programs' different legitimizing practices helped to define LGBTQ+ programming as elite, sequestering it from television's everyday discursive positioning. I first consider how the outcast status of the Golden Globes, organized by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, compelled greater attention to "queer" television oddities, even while the recognitions upheld a troublingly classed framing of LGBTQ+ shows that dovetailed with the organizer's late-1980s discrediting following disclosures of bribery and other dealings. The Peabodys, on the other hand, promoted standards for "respectable" programming and therefore refused recognition of gay-themed shows until doing so became politically expedient in the late 1980s. This academic awarding institution later singled out "quality" entries for acclaim, paving the way for more contemporary associations between LGBTQ+ television and premier viewing platforms. Ultimately, I argue that activist media watchdogs such as the Gay and Lesbian Alliance against Defamation (GLAAD) emulated the Globes' and Peabodys' public relations strategies, becoming de facto awards organizations in the 1990s that adopted "quality" criteria for recognizing queer-themed shows.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信