Paris is Burning

In the 1980’s, Jennie Livingston set out to create a documentary, published in 1990, chronicling the life and culture surrounding the New York drag ball scene. Her work, though highly criticized, is also highly praised for its queer visibility, and it was a major success.

I personally struggle a great deal with my opinion of the work. On one hand, the film is primarily focussed upon the community, and their experiences, told from their point of view. There is little actual shown of the creator herself in the film. It would have been easy for Livingston to make the film about herself and her journey that led to her discovery of the drag balls, but she was faithful to her subjects and focussed on their stories, and I am glad that such vanity was avoided, but on the other side, she used the images and stories of these people, reached success and did not think to give what was due for their time and histories being used. 

It is very hard to articulate my feelings on the matter, because the situations involved are incredibly complex. Phillip Brian Harper discusses in the article “The Subversive Edge,” the issues surrounding the legal claims made after Paris is Burning became a success. It is true that smaller films often do not have the funding to properly give compensation for time and such, but these were already people who struggled to make ends meet and accomplish the things they desperately wanted, and to use them without giving back after it became a major success was a slight against them. Signed releases or not, using them for fame was unjust. It speaks very little of care for the community.

My feelings remain complicated regarding the film and the way it handles the lives of its subjects, particularly upon Venus Xtravaganza. The film spends a strong portion of time with Venus only to, in the end, reveal she was killed. The use of the trauma of the community as one of its members was killed felt like a harsh stab, utilized coldly and for shock value. It hurt a great deal to discover one of the people we became invested in was dead before the film was done, and the film did not truly give the time to grieve. Perhaps it was a reminder of how difficult life is for these communities, but it was one that didn’t quite feel respectful.

Another concerning piece of this great puzzle is the way the film treats ethnicity. Bell Hooks wrote an article, entitled “Is Paris Burning?” that explored a variety of critiques of the film, from authorship to the film’s treatment of race, especially “the way in which colonized black people (…) worship at the throne of whiteness” (Hook). Hook is referencing the drag balls’ collective desire to essentially become affluent by becoming white. Hook’s scathing critique that white straight people had no issue seeing the film because it praised them for existing as they are was accurate. There is no threat to white people in watching these communities try to pass as them.While I do not like the execution of the film, it’s treatment of its subjects and the injustice that surrounds it, I do feel Paris is Burning was necessary. It brought the struggles, hopes, and joys of the queer communities to screens across the country, giving young queer people an image to remind them that they are not alone, that there are other people like them who are unashamed to be who they need to be.