The Rise and Fall of Gay Culture

Rating:
Summary: The Rise and the Fall
Review: Author Daniel Harris's book of critical essays is breath of fresh air for gay scholars in the field of gay studies. Harris looks critically at several different areas of gay culture: gay males and "diva" worship, gay romance in the personal ads, how gay men helped the underwear revolution, the AIDS "crisis", leathermen, gay pornography in both film and literature, gay magazines, drag and gay propaganda. Whiles Harris's book is now six years old, it is for me, relevant and fresh as he argues about the dangers in assimilation into heterosexual, mainstream culture. I wished he would have pointed out more clearly how gay men can stop and fight against assimilation through building our culture which I think for any scholar is a very blurry answer. Be prepared, this book generated quite a bit of debate in a book group that I belong to in Chicago and I feel that it gets similar reactions in any part of gay community when it is read. For me, though I wished more gay men would read such a fine work as this. If anything can be said for this work, it does generate thought and critical discussion which I think more and more people do not want to engage in, because it is so much easier not to. Plus society doesn't reinforce this; so much as it does the idea of the "status quo."

Rating:
Summary: The Location of Culture
Review: Harris is a gifted writer and manages to educate while entertaining. I enjoyed this book particulaly because of its examination of the historical evolution of many aspects/artifacts of gay culture: from personal ads & camp to underwear & porn. Many of the younger generation, as Harris explains, have probably never understood the context of their creation and the history of their evolution. However, I do not agree with Harris's basic premise that gay culture is somehow dissapearing or disolving into straight culture. The author seems intent on locating gay culture in the past and demonstrating how it has been obliterated. The book does not seem to take into account how every subculture naturally changes with the times and must absorb certain aspects of the dominant culture. Hasn't this been to our advantage in terms of the AIDS crisis? Isn't living isolated from mainstream culture in the gay ghetto really a life of intellectual and political poverty? Harris accurately portrays the double-edged sword of materialism which empowers the gay community and enslaves it simultaneously. I do not feel that this trend is any different, however, from current practice in the heterosexual world. What is new is the "exploitation" of gay men through the same means that Madison Avenue has seduced women, a recognition of one of the inherent characteristics of the modern gay man: plenty of disposable income. Though Harris seems truly alarmed and deems these changes "a fall", nothing could be further from the truth. The book fails to recognize that diversity and adaptation are the hallmarks of a vibrant empowered subculture, one that should be recognized as such by the dominant culture even as both sides realize that gay culture simply will never be completely absorbed into straight culture because of its intrinsic differences and economic viability. None of the important changes that have taken place post-Stonewall could have happened without altering the fabric of gay society, and if this means that drag queens are more masculine and kink is more feminine, that is a SMALL price to pay.

Rating:
Summary: The Location of Culture
Review: Harris is a gifted writer and manages to educate while entertaining. I enjoyed this book particulaly because of its examination of the historical evolution of many aspects/artifacts of gay culture: from personal ads & camp to underwear & porn. Many of the younger generation, as Harris explains, have probably never understood the context of their creation and the history of their evolution. However, I do not agree with Harris's basic premise that gay culture is somehow dissapearing or disolving into straight culture. The author seems intent on locating gay culture in the past and demonstrating how it has been obliterated. The book does not seem to take into account how every subculture naturally changes with the times and must absorb certain aspects of the dominant culture. Hasn't this been to our advantage in terms of the AIDS crisis? Isn't living isolated from mainstream culture in the gay ghetto really a life of intellectual and political poverty? Harris accurately portrays the double-edged sword of materialism which empowers the gay community and enslaves it simultaneously. I do not feel that this trend is any different, however, from current practice in the heterosexual world. What is new is the "exploitation" of gay men through the same means that Madison Avenue has seduced women, a recognition of one of the inherent characteristics of the modern gay man: plenty of disposable income. Though Harris seems truly alarmed and deems these changes "a fall", nothing could be further from the truth. The book fails to recognize that diversity and adaptation are the hallmarks of a vibrant empowered subculture, one that should be recognized as such by the dominant culture even as both sides realize that gay culture simply will never be completely absorbed into straight culture because of its intrinsic differences and economic viability. None of the important changes that have taken place post-Stonewall could have happened without altering the fabric of gay society, and if this means that drag queens are more masculine and kink is more feminine, that is a SMALL price to pay.

Rating:
Summary: Wrong yet again.
Review: I am the author this book and would like to state here how offended I was by the homophobic remarks of the reader whose comments follow. I am an openly gay man and a passionate supporter of gay rights. No one who reads my book could imagine otherwise. Perhaps if this reader had had the courage to use his e-mail address, I would be able to answer his comments directly, but as is so often the case with bigots, he has chosen to remain anonymous.

Thanks. Daniel Harris

Rating:
Summary: Don't Agree With Everything Harris Says, But ...
Review: I can't say I agree with everything Harris says in the book, but I extend a hearty "thank you" for bridging some issues that need to be talked about. His analysis of Gay pornography's progression from films of the 70's that portrayed sex as something that happened to everyday people in real places to today's videos where sex resembles some kind of sterile medical procedure among bodybuilders is probably the best summation of his thesis. His book examines the creation of the prepackaged, instant, just add water Gay male that has occurred as target marketing and image building has taken precedence over the needs and feeling of people.

Rating:
Summary: Reading the Book for Class
Review: I had spotted Daniel Harris' "The Rise and Fall of Gay Culture" at a local bookstore and picked it up out of curiousity. I read it this summer when I had the chance. This semester at university, my sociology professor told us to choose a book about a subculture and discuss it, and I chose this book.

I think Harris is too bitter in his analysis of our current gay status. Sure, pride parades can be pathetic spectacles of leathermen, babies with rainbow patches, dogs with AIDSWalk shirts. But however much this culture has assimilitated, I doubt we should complain. To be able to confront issues concerning sexuality in all aspects of life is something that past generations of gays, specifically the gay men that Harris discusses, were not able to do. I appreciate his detailed analysis of certain aspects of gay male culture, such as the ads, bear culture, the leather movement--but I was disturbed by his characterization of AIDS as kitschified, and disagreed with many of his points. I think it's important to read this book critically, not openly. Taking what Harris says as verbatim would cause for much bitterness and, methinks, self-hatred. We don't need more of that, we have Jerry Falwell. There were certain things that Harris didn't cover which I wish he had, such as the rainbow as a symbol, the role of FTM transpersons, where Stonewall really fits, etcetera. Still, I would recommend this book to anyone interested in studying gay male culture from a subjective, critical perspective.

Rating:
Summary: I have recently suffered this book
Review: I wear my reading this book like a badge of courage. It was a hard thing to finish. The book is not without its merit. Harris does write quite well. He produces some great one-liners such as "...virtuso of self-taxidermy..." and "...the orgasm is not just a religious experience it is a natural disaster." Sadly, he seems to often confuse the usage of possesive pronouns, he confuses my with our. The pomposity involved in this man's claiming to speak for gay men everywhere is absurd. Harris clearly does not get the concept that people are indeed different and that this is okay. I have never been drawn to the subculture myself, but I feel no animosity towards those that are. I just recognize that gay people are a composite of various different personality types. I also find it amazing that Harriscan find nothing good about "gay" life today. He seems to bemoan everything, to the point were one is forced to wonder if his metanarrative is in fact that he longs for more descrimation against gays (at least "we" stuck together back then). Harris is clearly bright, but he is also what William Golden would call a 2nd degree thinker. He does more than just emote in this book, he does think, but for him thought is limited to simply tearing down the established paradigm. Harris offers no self-made synthesis, no hope or directive for the improvement of a gay communtiy he sees as being doomed. He just rambles off a list of things that are wrong with it (wrong of course because things were better back in the day, what ever that means). Materialism sucks, okay we got it. Was oppression so great? What else is there? Harris doesn't know. Do you? God, I hope "we" (if he can speak for all homosexuals everywhere, I might as well give it a try) can find a better way. Soemthign that is better than the closeted and superficial past and the materialistic superficial present.

Rating:
Summary: I have recently suffered this book
Review: I wear my reading this book like a badge of courage. It was a hard thing to finish. The book is not without its merit. Harris does write quite well. He produces some great one-liners such as "...virtuso of self-taxidermy..." and "...the orgasm is not just a religious experience it is a natural disaster." Sadly, he seems to often confuse the usage of possesive pronouns, he confuses my with our. The pomposity involved in this man's claiming to speak for gay men everywhere is absurd. Harris clearly does not get the concept that people are indeed different and that this is okay. I have never been drawn to the subculture myself, but I feel no animosity towards those that are. I just recognize that gay people are a composite of various different personality types. I also find it amazing that Harriscan find nothing good about "gay" life today. He seems to bemoan everything, to the point were one is forced to wonder if his metanarrative is in fact that he longs for more descrimation against gays (at least "we" stuck together back then). Harris is clearly bright, but he is also what William Golden would call a 2nd degree thinker. He does more than just emote in this book, he does think, but for him thought is limited to simply tearing down the established paradigm. Harris offers no self-made synthesis, no hope or directive for the improvement of a gay communtiy he sees as being doomed. He just rambles off a list of things that are wrong with it (wrong of course because things were better back in the day, what ever that means). Materialism sucks, okay we got it. Was oppression so great? What else is there? Harris doesn't know. Do you? God, I hope "we" (if he can speak for all homosexuals everywhere, I might as well give it a try) can find a better way. Soemthign that is better than the closeted and superficial past and the materialistic superficial present.