May 1, 2021 • 30 mins
This year’s landmark Audio Description of the Academy Awards got us thinking about a hallmark of Oscar night: glamour! What are the visuals of glamour? Is glamour about wearing the right gown and accessories, or is there more to it than just fashion? Has glamour changed over time? And just who gets to be glamorous, anyhow?
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
JJ Hunt (00:04):
Talk description to me with Christine Malec and JJ
Hunt.
Christine Malec (00:29):
Hi, I'm Christine Malec.
JJ Hunt (00:30):
And I'm JJ Hunt. This is talk description to Me where
the visuals of current eventsand the world around us get
hashtag in description richconversations.
Christine Malec (00:47):
This has been a big year for audio description
and one of the watershed momentsis having the Oscars described
very, very big news in theaccessibility world. And so that
means that JJ and I will not begiving a detailed dive into into
(01:08):
the Oscars. But what we thoughtwe would do was take a bit of a
either a call it a step back, ora dive in to talk about the idea
of glamour and how that concepthas evolved or not or changed
over the last 100 years or so.
And so, JJ, what do you knowabout the the Oscars this year?
(01:29):
That's a pretty big deal to haveit described for the first time
JJ Hunt (01:33):
Oh, massive, just massive. So the audio
description was provided byAudioEyes, in the team was very
active on social media, theyposted pre show notes, they
connected with users throughoutthe event. I mean, it's just a
major undertaking. So in a hugecongratulations to the audio
eyes teams. That's justabsolutely fantastic. But I
(01:53):
think we should also tip our hatto the others who made this a
reality, right? I've got noinsider information here. But I
am fairly confident that theidea to describe the Academy
Awards didn't originate with theAcademy, right? These things
happen because users demand it,because the agitators keep
poking. Because strong, wellconnected organizations make
(02:18):
really good pitches and worktheir relationships. Honestly,
months, even years of work cango into making events like this
happen for the first time. So amassive congratulations to
everyone who sent an email tothe academy or the broadcaster's
insisting that they provide ad.
Congratulations to those whoprovided feedback throughout the
(02:38):
event and said, this is what'sworking, this is what's not. And
and congratulations to ourfriends at the audio description
project, who I know we'reinvolved in the lobbying and the
orchestrating of the event. Sotruly, like a huge step forward
for for audio description. Socongratulations to everyone
involved.
Christine Malec (02:59):
Totally. Hats off. These things never happen
in a vacuum. It's lots of peopleadvocating over lots of time. So
double Thumbs up for that. Whenyou and I talked about what what
our discussion would look like,I realized that the idea of
glamour is quite visual. And soI might have a few vague notions
(03:19):
of feathers and sequins andstuff. But there's way more I
know there's way more to it. Andso I think we were going to
start maybe back in the in the1920s. And I'm sure that this
notion must be linked with filmand the availability of of
images for farsighted people tolook at. So what can you say
(03:41):
about the start of the idea ofglamour in the in the modern
world?
JJ Hunt (03:44):
Yeah, glamour is really linked, our current notion of
glamour in Western cultures isreally quite strongly linked to
this golden era of Hollywood.
And glamour is really tricky todefine. Right? It's one of those
things that a lot of peoplewould say, "I know it when I see
it", you know, it's tricky. Soglamour is an alluring romantic
attractiveness that relies quiteheavily on elegance, class,
(04:11):
charisma, charm, and wealth. Andfor a lot of those words that I
just threw out there are visualcomponents. Visual elements. But
there's also just, there'sattitude, right? There's there's
something ethereal about aboutglamours. And a lot of it, like
I say goes back to golden eraHollywood, and fashions change
(04:34):
fairly quickly. But glamourseems to have a bit of a longer
lifespan. So that really couldbe argued that just about every
era since the 1920s has reliedon golden era Hollywood for its
core understanding of glamourand I do think that's true for
the visuals of glamour. Rightnow. We are definitely in an era
(04:56):
when midcentury glamour is veryhot. So the Oscars right now
glamour is really, it's kind ofself referential. It's really
quite meta. So the Hollywoodstars looking glamorous now,
they do so by drawing on thefashions and styles of old
Hollywood stars. And that's how,that's how our notion of glamour
(05:19):
is kind of feeding itselfbecause of the the Hollywood
connection from the 20s to the1950s.
Christine Malec (05:29):
I'm interested in the fact that it's not just
about the clothes, or the stylesbut it's it's probably to do
with your department or yourcarriage or the way you hold
yourself or your some personalcharisma that I think that was a
word you used. Is it possibleto? I guess when you see it? You
(05:52):
see, one person might have oneaspect, but not the other? Like,
is it possible for someone to bein a stunning gown, but just not
carry it off? Or someone to bein something really simple but
have a carriage that's just likethey could be wearing of house
dress and they'd still lookgood?
JJ Hunt (06:07):
Yes, absolutely. Like the donning of the gowns or
tuxedos alone will not make youglamorous. Glamour is in no
small part about your attitude,like you say it's how you carry
yourself. It's really important.
Visually, the way that comesacross is, is a confidence, a
kind of confidence. So we'retalking like a chin up a back
(06:29):
straight kind of confidence, notcocky, cocky, and boastful is
not glamorous, but real, genuineconfidence cut that comes across
in smooth movements. So glamourtends to be, there's an elegance
to its smooth movements notrushed, not nervous, not jerky
(06:50):
or halting. There's an elementof ease in the way someone
carries themselves in the endand the expression on the face
is generally it's pleasant. Butit kind of resides somewhere
near arrogant or aloof, not likeI say not cocky, but tends to be
relaxed, right? Even if you'resmiling. It's a relaxed smile,
(07:11):
trying too hard in any onedirection. Kills glamour, a net
brow, not glamorous dartingeyes, a tense jaw fidgeting,
those are not glamorous glamourtends to have an ease. There's a
smooth kind of flow to yourgestures to your gait. Glamour
is not rushed. You have to be atease with yourself at ease in
(07:34):
those clothes to be glamorous.
And you're absolutely right. Iknow people who are glamorous,
wearing a you know, a sweaterand capris. And I know people
who can put on the fanciesttuxedo and never come close to
glamorous. You have to have theattitude. It's so important.
Christine Malec (07:57):
I know that we're going to be talking mostly
about women's styles. But thosequalities you describe men can
have those two. So let's Can wetake a second to just talk about
what glamour means in men?
JJ Hunt (08:09):
Sure. Yeah, absolutely.
So glamour can definitely beapplied to men or women. You can
have a glamorous car, you canhave a glamorous building. Men
certainly can be glamorous, itjust happens to be the case that
fashion for men tends to be alittle smaller, it's a little
tighter, the there are morerestrictions. And that was
certainly the case in the 20s30s 40s and 50s. Right when
(08:33):
you're talking Hollywood goldenera. So then glamour for men, as
you're looking at fine suits andtuxedos neatly trimmed hair. For
formal events like the Oscars,it was all black tuxedos, you
might get a white bow tieinstead of a black bow tie like
that's the kind of that that wasthe reach that you were allowed
(08:57):
to have that was that that wasthe stretching you're allowed to
do the boundaries. That but youknow, you can accessorize with
maybe a nice pocket square orcufflinks very minimal
accessorizing facial hair ingeneral was not considered
glamorous, then perhaps you canhave a fine mustache that hugged
the upper lip like Clark Gable,I found a really great photo of
(09:20):
Clark Gable with Grace Kelly atthe 1954 Oscars. And he's got
this like very Gable smile whichis he's got a dimpled chin, the
smile is pulled up to one sideas you know his he's got a bit
of a squint in his eye a glintin his eye and his hair is
slicked back he's had a cleanpart on on the left. And it
(09:40):
appears to be outdoors. Gable iswearing a dark overcoat over his
tuxedo you can see the black tieunderneath. He's got a dark
overcoat on over his tuxedo witha long white scarf and white
gloves poking out of the pocket.
That was glamour for men in thatera.
Christine Malec (10:06):
Before we start digging into the specifics of
what glamour looks like, I'mcurious about one other thing.
How does body type play intothis? Can someone of any body
type be glamorous?
JJ Hunt (10:18):
God, great question. In thinking about the people who
are at the Oscars thinking aboutthe famous people who are
considered glamorous,theoretically, sure, but it's
hard to find the examples ofthem. We're not presented with
many.
Christine Malec (10:35):
Let's talk about specifics. What were
glamorous people, mostly women,I guess, looking like when
glamour first became a public,something for public
consumption?
JJ Hunt (10:46):
So this Hollywood glamour of the 20s 30s 40s and
50s. I mean, obviously, that's abig span, 40 years into the
early 60s. There were lots ofdifferent styles that were in
vogue at the you know, duringthat time, but like I said,
glamour kind of has a longerlifespan. So if you want some
cultural references, as we'retalking about this to help kind
(11:06):
of place the era think like LanaTurner, Lauren Bacall, Elizabeth
Taylor Grace Kelly, MarlenaDietrich, Sophia Loren, Sidney
Poitier, Cary Grant, ClarkGable. For movies we're talking
The Jazz Singer, Forbidden, KingKong, Gone with the Wind,
Casablanca, Sunset Boulevard,North by Northwest. This is the
era we're talking about. And forwomen, golden era glamour,
(11:32):
generally meant a dress or agift not generally always meant
a dress or a gown. Like therewas no pant glamour, you
couldn't be glamorous and pantsin this era nautic and just not
the case for women. So we'retalking long floor length,
gowns, even gowns with a traingenerally strapless with very
fine straps. And again, thesewere all white women, these were
(11:56):
all thin women. That was, forpopular culture of the day, ie
white culture of the day, thatwas what glamorous looked like
in body type. So a few specificclassic gowns, Grace Kelly in
1954 wore to the Oscars, she afair skinned white woman quite
(12:16):
lean blonde hair was up, she hada delicate teardrop earrings in
and she wore the silky mintgreen gown became very famous at
a reasonably stiff bodice with astraight neck line. And it had a
pair of very fine straps overeach shoulder, and really quite
luxurious amounts of drapedfabric in the skirt that were
(12:37):
gathered at the back. And shewore elbow length white gloves.
And what's amazing about thisdress now is that she wore that
same dress three times todifferent events to the Oscars
to a photoshoot and to someother event I can't remember
now, it's extremely were almostunheard of, for someone to wear
(12:58):
the same gown the same dress,like to multiple events in
different occasions. My goodnessnever happens. Audrey Hepburn
1956 she again very thin, smallwhite woman with dark hair
pulled back into a bun and in 56she wore a white gown with a
fitted bodice and again astraight neck line with wide
(13:21):
straps this time, not thinstraps over the shoulders. Her
long skirt had had a stiff trainand she also wore white elbow
length gloves and fairly boldmakeup so her lips her brows and
her eyes really popped againsther fair skin. Sophia Loren
1958, the Italian actress withdark brown hair light brown
(13:44):
skin. She wore a fitted dresswith a low straight neckline and
thin straps that reallyaccentuated her hourglass figure
for the time. That was a fairlysexy cut, to accentuate the
figure and not have a skirt thatflared at the bottom but
reasonably fitted. No gloves butinstead she had a white first
(14:09):
stole and a lacy choker aroundthe necklace. So that's the kind
of glamour for women that wewere there was kind of
foundational so long, longskirts, long hands often a
luxurious amount of fabric.
Right? That's one of the you'vegot enough money to have this
much fabric gathered andtrailing behind you. Clean,
elegant lines and silhouettes.
(14:33):
Fairly minimal accessorizing,bold makeup, dramatic makeup
right deep red lipstick, heavylashes and brows. And so these
aren't just dresses and gownsthat look beautiful or sexy.
There's also an elegance tothem. That's important, right?
There's a class element at play,the white gloves, the
(14:54):
sophisticated cuts, so it's notgaudy in this era. It it's
clean, it's classy. And again,the way these women are carrying
themselves as they present orreceive their Oscars or walk
down red carpets, if there wereany, there's a regal quality to
(15:15):
the way people are carryingthemselves. That's kind of the
foundation of glamour thatpeople call upon now.
Christine Malec (15:22):
Would they ever have their hair down?
JJ Hunt (15:27):
That's interesting. I'm trying to I'm just going back
over the images in my mind. AndI think mostly up mostly up or
side part. So certainly not justdown and draped onto the
shoulder, there's always a do.
So there might be like,luxurious curl in the hair and
aside, then swept to the side,but generally, pulled back
(15:49):
pulled up some sort of jewel inthe hair, so maybe a band like a
tiara or something in the hair.
But not, not just down the backof the shoulders as if you know
you're you're out and about forthe day for these for the
Academy Awards. There's a "do"involved, there's an up, there's
(16:12):
a swept, there's a curl.
Christine Malec (16:14):
And so how do these looks change? Maybe
starting in the 60s,
JJ Hunt (16:18):
Into the 60s, we're transitioning out of the fairly
conservative glamour of theGolden Era, right? So this is
the 1960s we're into second wavefeminism, what was then called
the women's liberation movement.
And Motown was also becomingvery influential, not just the
music, but also the fashion. Sofor the first time, it wasn't
(16:38):
just white men deciding what wasglamorous on behalf of everyone
else, right? So Audrey Hepburnin Breakfast at Tiffany's seems
to me like a pretty good exampleof this transition away from
conservative glamour. So in manyways, her classic black dress is
classic Hollywood glamour,right? It's very sleek black
(16:58):
dress. It's very elegant, verysophisticated, sleeveless, very
high neckline, almost up to theshoulders quite a high neckline.
Black gloves above the elbow -not white gloves - black gloves
above the elbow. Her hair is upwith a glittery tiara that
matches the pearls and diamondsaround her neck. But now there's
(17:20):
more of an embracing of theovert sexuality that wasn't
always present in earlierdecades. So she's got a slit up
the leg of her floor lengthfitted dress and like Sophia Ren
had that fitted dress, but shewas a bit of a special case. You
know, now we've got AudreyHepburn with that slit up the
leg, the floor length fitteddress, and frankly, the way she
(17:42):
holds her foot long cigaretteholder in her mouth could be
considered suggestive, right. Sothis is a transition still some
of the conservative glamour butthere's some new ideas in this
glamour too. And then there arethe Supremes, right, Motown's
the supreme is a somewhatrotating lineup of very
talented, beautiful black womenthat included the likes of Diana
(18:04):
Ross, Mary Wilson, FlorenceBallard. Sometimes the Supremes
wore matching gowns when theywere performing and you know, at
Sullivan Show or in concert,sometimes their matching gowns,
frankly, would have lookedperfect on the red carpets of
decades gone by, complete withpearls and elbow length white
gloves, and straightened blackhair and wigs in up dues. But
(18:26):
they also wore skin tightsequined dresses with bold,
dramatic makeup, glossy lips,heavy eye shadow, and their hip
shifting dance moves. They'resynchronized finger snapping
they're generally slow andgentle, very smooth movement
(18:46):
movements. They were absolutelysexy, but they were modest and
they were refined. The Supremeis very convincingly adopted the
confident attitudes, movementsand gestures of glamour. So
really, the importance ofattitude and glamour cannot be
overstated. And now with withthe likes of the Supremes, we
(19:09):
have women of color consideredglamorous in mainstream - that
is white - popular culture. Thatwas pretty revolutionary in the
1960s.
Christine Malec (19:22):
What about hemlines? Do they start moving
around at that time?
JJ Hunt (19:26):
They do! So in the in the 60s, you've got the
miniskirt that's popular andfashion certainly has an
influence on glamour. And sosome of those shorter hemlines
get pulled into, into glamour,you see the not always miniskirt
but you see the hemlines risinga bit you are allowed to be a
(19:48):
little bit more a little bitovertly sexy as you're being
glamorous. And you can see somemore of this pulling of fashion
into glamour in the 1970s rightso in the center That means
materials and colors areshifting. So you've got like
rayons and lamay. and vibrantshades of yellow, pink and
(20:09):
turquoise is really brightshades that you probably
wouldn't have seen earlier. Thisis the disco era, right? You
wouldn't have seen those colorsand some of those fabrics in
glamour in earlier years. Andthere's a more, there's a casual
quality to 1970s fashion thatgets pulled into glamour as
well. So now you have miniskirtsthat were pulled into glamour in
(20:30):
the 60s. You've also got pantsand jumpsuits that are kind of
more popular in glamour. Sothere are glamorous gold lame
jumpsuits, you find in the1970s. And you also in the 70s
start to get this funny offshootof glamour glam. So glam rock,
even glam drag, were some of thetrappings of glamour, like the
(20:54):
glitter that you know, thesparkly, the attitude, the
drama, those elements ofglamour, are fully embraced. But
the actual wealth and power thathad been key to the original
notion of glamour isn'tavailable. So you kind of you're
trying to gain some of the powerand some of the notions of
(21:14):
wealth through the trappingseven if you don't have it
yourself, right, that's a littlebit of what glam was about. And
obviously, it's outside of ourscope. But there is some really
interesting material available.
Some very cool reading and someinteresting videos out there on
the role of glam in LGBTQhistory. So some very cool stuff
(21:36):
that people talk about there. Sothat's kind of where you start
to get in the 1970s. As you say,the mini skirts, pant suits,
there's a shifting of glamour inthe 70s. And then into the 80s.
I think it's fair to say thatthe 1980s was about as far away
from the simplicity and eleganceof classic Hollywood glamour as
(21:59):
we have been. So glamour fashionin the 80s got big. Big
shoulders, big bows, big hair,oversized blazers, layers of
eyeshadow, puffy sleeves. So thepart of traditional glamour that
was fully embraced was thedisplaying of wealth and power
(22:20):
that was still attached toglamour. So bigger jewelry,
flashy cars, prominent brandnames on handbags and things
like that. That wouldn't havebeen considered glamorous in
years gone by. But in the 80s,it's bigger, it's bolder, and
you lose some of the simplicity,some of the clean lines and the
(22:43):
cuts of dresses from earliereras and instead have, frankly,
what we would probably considernow a little bit gaudier than
classic Hollywood golden eraglamour.
Christine Malec (23:04):
And so since the 80s is it sort of a cycling
of style, the round and roundthat contributes to glamour
between the 80s and say, now?
JJ Hunt (23:13):
Yeah, we're definitely cycling back. Through the 90s
into the 21st century, we aremoving back to a version of
glamour that I would say iscloser to the golden era of
Hollywood glamour. But nowthere's a bit more flexibility.
Our understanding of who can beglamorous has expanded
considerably, and men have a bitmore choice when being
(23:36):
fashionable and glamorous. Sofor example, in 2017, Chris
Evans and Riz Ahmed both woreblue tuxedos to the Oscars, and
Terrence Howard wore a beltedblue silk smoking jacket. And
now on red carpet events Beyonceand Jay Z are always sought out
by the photographers. In 2005Beyonce wore a strapless curve
(24:01):
hugging black velvet gown with atrain and she had long fan
shaped diamond earrings with amatching bracelet. And Jay Z
wore a black tux with that hadgently curving silk lapels into
lapel pin. And in 2018, aChilean actress named Daniela
Vega attended the Oscars in adecidedly glamorous, gathered
(24:24):
floor length deep wine coloredgown, and she was the first
openly trans performer topresent on stage at the Academy
Awards. In 2014 Lupita Nyong'owon Best Supporting Actress for
12 years a Slave. She's a leanmuscular, young Kenyan-Mexican
woman with dark short naturallycurly hair. And when she stepped
(24:46):
onto the stage, she had to holdup the hem of her long pale blue
Pete pleated dress and the dresshad the famous Marilyn Monroe
very deep v neck line that dipsall the way To the waistline. So
we're getting different peoplewho are allowed to be glamorous,
and who are seen as glamorous byalmost everyone in our culture.
(25:10):
In 2019 actor Billy Porter worea truly fabulous and glamorous
tuxedo gown to the Oscars. He'sa lean black man with short
naturally curly hair and agoatee with a little bit of gray
in it. And the tuxedo top to hisgown was in black velvet with a
(25:30):
chest high cumberbund andoversized black bow tie. He had
ruffled cuffs on his whiteshirt, and on the bottom, the
ball gown was an absurdlyluxurious wealth of black
velvet. There must have beenserious infrastructure under it
because it just billows out allaround him probably five feet
(25:50):
across where it gathered on thered carpet. And when Porter was
posing for photos, he maintainedonly the slightest of smirks,
very cool, very detachedconfidence. Because even in a
gown like this, you cannot beglamorous without the attitude.
Christine Malec (26:08):
Your discussion of the inclusion of new groups
of people in who can beconsidered glamorous, makes me
wonder whether there has everbeen people with an obvious
disability who've appeared onstage at the Oscars.
JJ Hunt (26:25):
There have there have been a few but they're
relatively few and far between.
So Christopher Reeves after hisaccident, I think it was 1996 he
came on stage in a wheelchair ina full tuxedo, white bow tie. He
actually had some medicalequipment, I'm not sure what if
(26:47):
it was, he had a plastic tubingthat came from under the collar
of his white tuxedo shirt, andthen tucked into his black
waistcoat. And he came on stagein a power chair - but that was
from backstage! This is anotherissue that the Academy Awards
often has, is that you have to,if you are an Academy Award
(27:11):
winner, climb stairs to get uponto the stage. And there's
something glamorous about, as asI mentioned, holding up the hem
of your gown and walking up thestairs. It's supposed to look
very glamorous. But that's areal accessibility issue. And
this year, there was a ramp putat the side of the stage because
(27:32):
Crip Camp was nominated for BestDocumentary and there were
several members of the team whouse wheelchairs. Three members
of the team in wheelchairs andone has a service dog as well.
And I'm just looking at an imageof this group of people who are
(27:55):
posing on the red carpet, theCrip Camp team, and one woman is
wearing a beautiful, looks likea floral print gown with a wide
slit up her leg. Another womanin a silky white pantsuit, and a
gentleman and a blue tuxedo. Imean, they're gorgeous. They're
(28:17):
looking absolutely glamorous andso I would tell you absolutely,
these are glamorous people. Thewoman in the in what looks like
floral printed dress also hasthese Catseye glasses and a big
smile, and dangly earrings. Andthe woman in the in the silky
(28:39):
white pantsuit has what lookslike open toed red shoes. It's a
flash of color that matches herred nail polish and lipstick,
and she's wearing darksunglasses. Like, these are
absolutely fashionable,absolutely glamorous people. But
I'm not sure how many frontpages they appeared on after the
(29:02):
event. My God even the servicedog has gold jewelry around its
collar, and little puple gartersaround his legs that match the
harness on his back. It's aglamorous group by any
[measure]. Because glamour is aconceit, glamour is an idea and
(29:26):
it's about what is generallyconsidered. Do I think those in
that group from Crip Camp lookglamorous. Absolutely! I've got
no hesitation in saying yes, Ibelieve them to be glamorous.
Christine Malec (29:43):
Yeah.
JJ Hunt (29:44):
Are they considered glamorous by the definition of
glamour that is currently heldacross the culture? I'm not sure
as a describer I can say that,and that's a, that's a, that's
an unfortunate moment.
Christine Malec (30:00):
We love making this podcast. If you love
hearing it, perhaps you'llconsider supporting its creation
and development by becoming apatron. We've set up a Patreon
page to help cover the costs ofputting the show together. You
can contribute as a listener oras a sponsor to help ensure that
accessible and entertainingjournalism continues to reach
our community. Visit patreon.comslash talk description to me
(30:23):
that's pa t ar e o n.com slashtalk description to me have
feedback or suggestions of whatyou'd like to hear about here's
how to get in touch with us. Ouremail address is talk
description to me@gmail.com. OurFacebook page is called talk
description to me. Our websiteis talk description to me.com
(30:44):
and you can follow us on Twitterat talk description.
Talk description to me with Christine Malec and JJ
Hunt.
Christine Malec (00:29):
Hi, I'm Christine Malec.
JJ Hunt (00:30):
And I'm JJ Hunt. This is talk description to Me where
the visuals of current eventsand the world around us get
hashtag in description richconversations.
Christine Malec (00:47):
This has been a big year for audio description
and one of the watershed momentsis having the Oscars described
very, very big news in theaccessibility world. And so that
means that JJ and I will not begiving a detailed dive into into
(01:08):
the Oscars. But what we thoughtwe would do was take a bit of a
either a call it a step back, ora dive in to talk about the idea
of glamour and how that concepthas evolved or not or changed
over the last 100 years or so.
And so, JJ, what do you knowabout the the Oscars this year?
(01:29):
That's a pretty big deal to haveit described for the first time
JJ Hunt (01:33):
Oh, massive, just massive. So the audio
description was provided byAudioEyes, in the team was very
active on social media, theyposted pre show notes, they
connected with users throughoutthe event. I mean, it's just a
major undertaking. So in a hugecongratulations to the audio
eyes teams. That's justabsolutely fantastic. But I
(01:53):
think we should also tip our hatto the others who made this a
reality, right? I've got noinsider information here. But I
am fairly confident that theidea to describe the Academy
Awards didn't originate with theAcademy, right? These things
happen because users demand it,because the agitators keep
poking. Because strong, wellconnected organizations make
(02:18):
really good pitches and worktheir relationships. Honestly,
months, even years of work cango into making events like this
happen for the first time. So amassive congratulations to
everyone who sent an email tothe academy or the broadcaster's
insisting that they provide ad.
Congratulations to those whoprovided feedback throughout the
(02:38):
event and said, this is what'sworking, this is what's not. And
and congratulations to ourfriends at the audio description
project, who I know we'reinvolved in the lobbying and the
orchestrating of the event. Sotruly, like a huge step forward
for for audio description. Socongratulations to everyone
involved.
Christine Malec (02:59):
Totally. Hats off. These things never happen
in a vacuum. It's lots of peopleadvocating over lots of time. So
double Thumbs up for that. Whenyou and I talked about what what
our discussion would look like,I realized that the idea of
glamour is quite visual. And soI might have a few vague notions
(03:19):
of feathers and sequins andstuff. But there's way more I
know there's way more to it. Andso I think we were going to
start maybe back in the in the1920s. And I'm sure that this
notion must be linked with filmand the availability of of
images for farsighted people tolook at. So what can you say
(03:41):
about the start of the idea ofglamour in the in the modern
world?
JJ Hunt (03:44):
Yeah, glamour is really linked, our current notion of
glamour in Western cultures isreally quite strongly linked to
this golden era of Hollywood.
And glamour is really tricky todefine. Right? It's one of those
things that a lot of peoplewould say, "I know it when I see
it", you know, it's tricky. Soglamour is an alluring romantic
attractiveness that relies quiteheavily on elegance, class,
(04:11):
charisma, charm, and wealth. Andfor a lot of those words that I
just threw out there are visualcomponents. Visual elements. But
there's also just, there'sattitude, right? There's there's
something ethereal about aboutglamours. And a lot of it, like
I say goes back to golden eraHollywood, and fashions change
(04:34):
fairly quickly. But glamourseems to have a bit of a longer
lifespan. So that really couldbe argued that just about every
era since the 1920s has reliedon golden era Hollywood for its
core understanding of glamourand I do think that's true for
the visuals of glamour. Rightnow. We are definitely in an era
(04:56):
when midcentury glamour is veryhot. So the Oscars right now
glamour is really, it's kind ofself referential. It's really
quite meta. So the Hollywoodstars looking glamorous now,
they do so by drawing on thefashions and styles of old
Hollywood stars. And that's how,that's how our notion of glamour
(05:19):
is kind of feeding itselfbecause of the the Hollywood
connection from the 20s to the1950s.
Christine Malec (05:29):
I'm interested in the fact that it's not just
about the clothes, or the stylesbut it's it's probably to do
with your department or yourcarriage or the way you hold
yourself or your some personalcharisma that I think that was a
word you used. Is it possibleto? I guess when you see it? You
(05:52):
see, one person might have oneaspect, but not the other? Like,
is it possible for someone to bein a stunning gown, but just not
carry it off? Or someone to bein something really simple but
have a carriage that's just likethey could be wearing of house
dress and they'd still lookgood?
JJ Hunt (06:07):
Yes, absolutely. Like the donning of the gowns or
tuxedos alone will not make youglamorous. Glamour is in no
small part about your attitude,like you say it's how you carry
yourself. It's really important.
Visually, the way that comesacross is, is a confidence, a
kind of confidence. So we'retalking like a chin up a back
(06:29):
straight kind of confidence, notcocky, cocky, and boastful is
not glamorous, but real, genuineconfidence cut that comes across
in smooth movements. So glamourtends to be, there's an elegance
to its smooth movements notrushed, not nervous, not jerky
(06:50):
or halting. There's an elementof ease in the way someone
carries themselves in the endand the expression on the face
is generally it's pleasant. Butit kind of resides somewhere
near arrogant or aloof, not likeI say not cocky, but tends to be
relaxed, right? Even if you'resmiling. It's a relaxed smile,
(07:11):
trying too hard in any onedirection. Kills glamour, a net
brow, not glamorous dartingeyes, a tense jaw fidgeting,
those are not glamorous glamourtends to have an ease. There's a
smooth kind of flow to yourgestures to your gait. Glamour
is not rushed. You have to be atease with yourself at ease in
(07:34):
those clothes to be glamorous.
And you're absolutely right. Iknow people who are glamorous,
wearing a you know, a sweaterand capris. And I know people
who can put on the fanciesttuxedo and never come close to
glamorous. You have to have theattitude. It's so important.
Christine Malec (07:57):
I know that we're going to be talking mostly
about women's styles. But thosequalities you describe men can
have those two. So let's Can wetake a second to just talk about
what glamour means in men?
JJ Hunt (08:09):
Sure. Yeah, absolutely.
So glamour can definitely beapplied to men or women. You can
have a glamorous car, you canhave a glamorous building. Men
certainly can be glamorous, itjust happens to be the case that
fashion for men tends to be alittle smaller, it's a little
tighter, the there are morerestrictions. And that was
certainly the case in the 20s30s 40s and 50s. Right when
(08:33):
you're talking Hollywood goldenera. So then glamour for men, as
you're looking at fine suits andtuxedos neatly trimmed hair. For
formal events like the Oscars,it was all black tuxedos, you
might get a white bow tieinstead of a black bow tie like
that's the kind of that that wasthe reach that you were allowed
(08:57):
to have that was that that wasthe stretching you're allowed to
do the boundaries. That but youknow, you can accessorize with
maybe a nice pocket square orcufflinks very minimal
accessorizing facial hair ingeneral was not considered
glamorous, then perhaps you canhave a fine mustache that hugged
the upper lip like Clark Gable,I found a really great photo of
(09:20):
Clark Gable with Grace Kelly atthe 1954 Oscars. And he's got
this like very Gable smile whichis he's got a dimpled chin, the
smile is pulled up to one sideas you know his he's got a bit
of a squint in his eye a glintin his eye and his hair is
slicked back he's had a cleanpart on on the left. And it
(09:40):
appears to be outdoors. Gable iswearing a dark overcoat over his
tuxedo you can see the black tieunderneath. He's got a dark
overcoat on over his tuxedo witha long white scarf and white
gloves poking out of the pocket.
That was glamour for men in thatera.
Christine Malec (10:06):
Before we start digging into the specifics of
what glamour looks like, I'mcurious about one other thing.
How does body type play intothis? Can someone of any body
type be glamorous?
JJ Hunt (10:18):
God, great question. In thinking about the people who
are at the Oscars thinking aboutthe famous people who are
considered glamorous,theoretically, sure, but it's
hard to find the examples ofthem. We're not presented with
many.
Christine Malec (10:35):
Let's talk about specifics. What were
glamorous people, mostly women,I guess, looking like when
glamour first became a public,something for public
consumption?
JJ Hunt (10:46):
So this Hollywood glamour of the 20s 30s 40s and
50s. I mean, obviously, that's abig span, 40 years into the
early 60s. There were lots ofdifferent styles that were in
vogue at the you know, duringthat time, but like I said,
glamour kind of has a longerlifespan. So if you want some
cultural references, as we'retalking about this to help kind
(11:06):
of place the era think like LanaTurner, Lauren Bacall, Elizabeth
Taylor Grace Kelly, MarlenaDietrich, Sophia Loren, Sidney
Poitier, Cary Grant, ClarkGable. For movies we're talking
The Jazz Singer, Forbidden, KingKong, Gone with the Wind,
Casablanca, Sunset Boulevard,North by Northwest. This is the
era we're talking about. And forwomen, golden era glamour,
(11:32):
generally meant a dress or agift not generally always meant
a dress or a gown. Like therewas no pant glamour, you
couldn't be glamorous and pantsin this era nautic and just not
the case for women. So we'retalking long floor length,
gowns, even gowns with a traingenerally strapless with very
fine straps. And again, thesewere all white women, these were
(11:56):
all thin women. That was, forpopular culture of the day, ie
white culture of the day, thatwas what glamorous looked like
in body type. So a few specificclassic gowns, Grace Kelly in
1954 wore to the Oscars, she afair skinned white woman quite
(12:16):
lean blonde hair was up, she hada delicate teardrop earrings in
and she wore the silky mintgreen gown became very famous at
a reasonably stiff bodice with astraight neck line. And it had a
pair of very fine straps overeach shoulder, and really quite
luxurious amounts of drapedfabric in the skirt that were
(12:37):
gathered at the back. And shewore elbow length white gloves.
And what's amazing about thisdress now is that she wore that
same dress three times todifferent events to the Oscars
to a photoshoot and to someother event I can't remember
now, it's extremely were almostunheard of, for someone to wear
(12:58):
the same gown the same dress,like to multiple events in
different occasions. My goodnessnever happens. Audrey Hepburn
1956 she again very thin, smallwhite woman with dark hair
pulled back into a bun and in 56she wore a white gown with a
fitted bodice and again astraight neck line with wide
(13:21):
straps this time, not thinstraps over the shoulders. Her
long skirt had had a stiff trainand she also wore white elbow
length gloves and fairly boldmakeup so her lips her brows and
her eyes really popped againsther fair skin. Sophia Loren
1958, the Italian actress withdark brown hair light brown
(13:44):
skin. She wore a fitted dresswith a low straight neckline and
thin straps that reallyaccentuated her hourglass figure
for the time. That was a fairlysexy cut, to accentuate the
figure and not have a skirt thatflared at the bottom but
reasonably fitted. No gloves butinstead she had a white first
(14:09):
stole and a lacy choker aroundthe necklace. So that's the kind
of glamour for women that wewere there was kind of
foundational so long, longskirts, long hands often a
luxurious amount of fabric.
Right? That's one of the you'vegot enough money to have this
much fabric gathered andtrailing behind you. Clean,
elegant lines and silhouettes.
(14:33):
Fairly minimal accessorizing,bold makeup, dramatic makeup
right deep red lipstick, heavylashes and brows. And so these
aren't just dresses and gownsthat look beautiful or sexy.
There's also an elegance tothem. That's important, right?
There's a class element at play,the white gloves, the
(14:54):
sophisticated cuts, so it's notgaudy in this era. It it's
clean, it's classy. And again,the way these women are carrying
themselves as they present orreceive their Oscars or walk
down red carpets, if there wereany, there's a regal quality to
(15:15):
the way people are carryingthemselves. That's kind of the
foundation of glamour thatpeople call upon now.
Christine Malec (15:22):
Would they ever have their hair down?
JJ Hunt (15:27):
That's interesting. I'm trying to I'm just going back
over the images in my mind. AndI think mostly up mostly up or
side part. So certainly not justdown and draped onto the
shoulder, there's always a do.
So there might be like,luxurious curl in the hair and
aside, then swept to the side,but generally, pulled back
(15:49):
pulled up some sort of jewel inthe hair, so maybe a band like a
tiara or something in the hair.
But not, not just down the backof the shoulders as if you know
you're you're out and about forthe day for these for the
Academy Awards. There's a "do"involved, there's an up, there's
(16:12):
a swept, there's a curl.
Christine Malec (16:14):
And so how do these looks change? Maybe
starting in the 60s,
JJ Hunt (16:18):
Into the 60s, we're transitioning out of the fairly
conservative glamour of theGolden Era, right? So this is
the 1960s we're into second wavefeminism, what was then called
the women's liberation movement.
And Motown was also becomingvery influential, not just the
music, but also the fashion. Sofor the first time, it wasn't
(16:38):
just white men deciding what wasglamorous on behalf of everyone
else, right? So Audrey Hepburnin Breakfast at Tiffany's seems
to me like a pretty good exampleof this transition away from
conservative glamour. So in manyways, her classic black dress is
classic Hollywood glamour,right? It's very sleek black
(16:58):
dress. It's very elegant, verysophisticated, sleeveless, very
high neckline, almost up to theshoulders quite a high neckline.
Black gloves above the elbow -not white gloves - black gloves
above the elbow. Her hair is upwith a glittery tiara that
matches the pearls and diamondsaround her neck. But now there's
(17:20):
more of an embracing of theovert sexuality that wasn't
always present in earlierdecades. So she's got a slit up
the leg of her floor lengthfitted dress and like Sophia Ren
had that fitted dress, but shewas a bit of a special case. You
know, now we've got AudreyHepburn with that slit up the
leg, the floor length fitteddress, and frankly, the way she
(17:42):
holds her foot long cigaretteholder in her mouth could be
considered suggestive, right. Sothis is a transition still some
of the conservative glamour butthere's some new ideas in this
glamour too. And then there arethe Supremes, right, Motown's
the supreme is a somewhatrotating lineup of very
talented, beautiful black womenthat included the likes of Diana
(18:04):
Ross, Mary Wilson, FlorenceBallard. Sometimes the Supremes
wore matching gowns when theywere performing and you know, at
Sullivan Show or in concert,sometimes their matching gowns,
frankly, would have lookedperfect on the red carpets of
decades gone by, complete withpearls and elbow length white
gloves, and straightened blackhair and wigs in up dues. But
(18:26):
they also wore skin tightsequined dresses with bold,
dramatic makeup, glossy lips,heavy eye shadow, and their hip
shifting dance moves. They'resynchronized finger snapping
they're generally slow andgentle, very smooth movement
(18:46):
movements. They were absolutelysexy, but they were modest and
they were refined. The Supremeis very convincingly adopted the
confident attitudes, movementsand gestures of glamour. So
really, the importance ofattitude and glamour cannot be
overstated. And now with withthe likes of the Supremes, we
(19:09):
have women of color consideredglamorous in mainstream - that
is white - popular culture. Thatwas pretty revolutionary in the
1960s.
Christine Malec (19:22):
What about hemlines? Do they start moving
around at that time?
JJ Hunt (19:26):
They do! So in the in the 60s, you've got the
miniskirt that's popular andfashion certainly has an
influence on glamour. And sosome of those shorter hemlines
get pulled into, into glamour,you see the not always miniskirt
but you see the hemlines risinga bit you are allowed to be a
(19:48):
little bit more a little bitovertly sexy as you're being
glamorous. And you can see somemore of this pulling of fashion
into glamour in the 1970s rightso in the center That means
materials and colors areshifting. So you've got like
rayons and lamay. and vibrantshades of yellow, pink and
(20:09):
turquoise is really brightshades that you probably
wouldn't have seen earlier. Thisis the disco era, right? You
wouldn't have seen those colorsand some of those fabrics in
glamour in earlier years. Andthere's a more, there's a casual
quality to 1970s fashion thatgets pulled into glamour as
well. So now you have miniskirtsthat were pulled into glamour in
(20:30):
the 60s. You've also got pantsand jumpsuits that are kind of
more popular in glamour. Sothere are glamorous gold lame
jumpsuits, you find in the1970s. And you also in the 70s
start to get this funny offshootof glamour glam. So glam rock,
even glam drag, were some of thetrappings of glamour, like the
(20:54):
glitter that you know, thesparkly, the attitude, the
drama, those elements ofglamour, are fully embraced. But
the actual wealth and power thathad been key to the original
notion of glamour isn'tavailable. So you kind of you're
trying to gain some of the powerand some of the notions of
(21:14):
wealth through the trappingseven if you don't have it
yourself, right, that's a littlebit of what glam was about. And
obviously, it's outside of ourscope. But there is some really
interesting material available.
Some very cool reading and someinteresting videos out there on
the role of glam in LGBTQhistory. So some very cool stuff
(21:36):
that people talk about there. Sothat's kind of where you start
to get in the 1970s. As you say,the mini skirts, pant suits,
there's a shifting of glamour inthe 70s. And then into the 80s.
I think it's fair to say thatthe 1980s was about as far away
from the simplicity and eleganceof classic Hollywood glamour as
(21:59):
we have been. So glamour fashionin the 80s got big. Big
shoulders, big bows, big hair,oversized blazers, layers of
eyeshadow, puffy sleeves. So thepart of traditional glamour that
was fully embraced was thedisplaying of wealth and power
(22:20):
that was still attached toglamour. So bigger jewelry,
flashy cars, prominent brandnames on handbags and things
like that. That wouldn't havebeen considered glamorous in
years gone by. But in the 80s,it's bigger, it's bolder, and
you lose some of the simplicity,some of the clean lines and the
(22:43):
cuts of dresses from earliereras and instead have, frankly,
what we would probably considernow a little bit gaudier than
classic Hollywood golden eraglamour.
Christine Malec (23:04):
And so since the 80s is it sort of a cycling
of style, the round and roundthat contributes to glamour
between the 80s and say, now?
JJ Hunt (23:13):
Yeah, we're definitely cycling back. Through the 90s
into the 21st century, we aremoving back to a version of
glamour that I would say iscloser to the golden era of
Hollywood glamour. But nowthere's a bit more flexibility.
Our understanding of who can beglamorous has expanded
considerably, and men have a bitmore choice when being
(23:36):
fashionable and glamorous. Sofor example, in 2017, Chris
Evans and Riz Ahmed both woreblue tuxedos to the Oscars, and
Terrence Howard wore a beltedblue silk smoking jacket. And
now on red carpet events Beyonceand Jay Z are always sought out
by the photographers. In 2005Beyonce wore a strapless curve
(24:01):
hugging black velvet gown with atrain and she had long fan
shaped diamond earrings with amatching bracelet. And Jay Z
wore a black tux with that hadgently curving silk lapels into
lapel pin. And in 2018, aChilean actress named Daniela
Vega attended the Oscars in adecidedly glamorous, gathered
(24:24):
floor length deep wine coloredgown, and she was the first
openly trans performer topresent on stage at the Academy
Awards. In 2014 Lupita Nyong'owon Best Supporting Actress for
12 years a Slave. She's a leanmuscular, young Kenyan-Mexican
woman with dark short naturallycurly hair. And when she stepped
(24:46):
onto the stage, she had to holdup the hem of her long pale blue
Pete pleated dress and the dresshad the famous Marilyn Monroe
very deep v neck line that dipsall the way To the waistline. So
we're getting different peoplewho are allowed to be glamorous,
and who are seen as glamorous byalmost everyone in our culture.
(25:10):
In 2019 actor Billy Porter worea truly fabulous and glamorous
tuxedo gown to the Oscars. He'sa lean black man with short
naturally curly hair and agoatee with a little bit of gray
in it. And the tuxedo top to hisgown was in black velvet with a
(25:30):
chest high cumberbund andoversized black bow tie. He had
ruffled cuffs on his whiteshirt, and on the bottom, the
ball gown was an absurdlyluxurious wealth of black
velvet. There must have beenserious infrastructure under it
because it just billows out allaround him probably five feet
(25:50):
across where it gathered on thered carpet. And when Porter was
posing for photos, he maintainedonly the slightest of smirks,
very cool, very detachedconfidence. Because even in a
gown like this, you cannot beglamorous without the attitude.
Christine Malec (26:08):
Your discussion of the inclusion of new groups
of people in who can beconsidered glamorous, makes me
wonder whether there has everbeen people with an obvious
disability who've appeared onstage at the Oscars.
JJ Hunt (26:25):
There have there have been a few but they're
relatively few and far between.
So Christopher Reeves after hisaccident, I think it was 1996 he
came on stage in a wheelchair ina full tuxedo, white bow tie. He
actually had some medicalequipment, I'm not sure what if
(26:47):
it was, he had a plastic tubingthat came from under the collar
of his white tuxedo shirt, andthen tucked into his black
waistcoat. And he came on stagein a power chair - but that was
from backstage! This is anotherissue that the Academy Awards
often has, is that you have to,if you are an Academy Award
(27:11):
winner, climb stairs to get uponto the stage. And there's
something glamorous about, as asI mentioned, holding up the hem
of your gown and walking up thestairs. It's supposed to look
very glamorous. But that's areal accessibility issue. And
this year, there was a ramp putat the side of the stage because
(27:32):
Crip Camp was nominated for BestDocumentary and there were
several members of the team whouse wheelchairs. Three members
of the team in wheelchairs andone has a service dog as well.
And I'm just looking at an imageof this group of people who are
(27:55):
posing on the red carpet, theCrip Camp team, and one woman is
wearing a beautiful, looks likea floral print gown with a wide
slit up her leg. Another womanin a silky white pantsuit, and a
gentleman and a blue tuxedo. Imean, they're gorgeous. They're
(28:17):
looking absolutely glamorous andso I would tell you absolutely,
these are glamorous people. Thewoman in the in what looks like
floral printed dress also hasthese Catseye glasses and a big
smile, and dangly earrings. Andthe woman in the in the silky
(28:39):
white pantsuit has what lookslike open toed red shoes. It's a
flash of color that matches herred nail polish and lipstick,
and she's wearing darksunglasses. Like, these are
absolutely fashionable,absolutely glamorous people. But
I'm not sure how many frontpages they appeared on after the
(29:02):
event. My God even the servicedog has gold jewelry around its
collar, and little puple gartersaround his legs that match the
harness on his back. It's aglamorous group by any
[measure]. Because glamour is aconceit, glamour is an idea and
(29:26):
it's about what is generallyconsidered. Do I think those in
that group from Crip Camp lookglamorous. Absolutely! I've got
no hesitation in saying yes, Ibelieve them to be glamorous.
Christine Malec (29:43):
Yeah.
JJ Hunt (29:44):
Are they considered glamorous by the definition of
glamour that is currently heldacross the culture? I'm not sure
as a describer I can say that,and that's a, that's a, that's
an unfortunate moment.
Christine Malec (30:00):
We love making this podcast. If you love
hearing it, perhaps you'llconsider supporting its creation
and development by becoming apatron. We've set up a Patreon
page to help cover the costs ofputting the show together. You
can contribute as a listener oras a sponsor to help ensure that
accessible and entertainingjournalism continues to reach
our community. Visit patreon.comslash talk description to me
(30:23):
that's pa t ar e o n.com slashtalk description to me have
feedback or suggestions of whatyou'd like to hear about here's
how to get in touch with us. Ouremail address is talk
description to me@gmail.com. OurFacebook page is called talk
description to me. Our websiteis talk description to me.com
(30:44):
and you can follow us on Twitterat talk description.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.