Talk:Camp (style)/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Intro

Can someone please justify "A part of the anti-academic defense of popular culture in the sixties, camp came to popularity in the eighties with the widespread adoption of Postmodern views on art and culture"? I think 80's adoption of postmodernism and anti-academic defenses of pop culture aren't self-evident or even necessarily true. --Smilingman 00:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Uh...

Can it be that this whole article is itself a demonstration of camp, what with it's over the top effeminate and naively pretentious style and content?

The whole thing is so drenched in second rate grad student lingo that's it's almost unreadable, except as some kind of meta joke on postmodernism... but then again postmodernism (as routinely misapplied to the humanities anyway) always tends to read that way.

I suppose whoever took the time to write thirty thousand words or so on 'camp' takes the subject sufficiently overseriously as to think they are providing important insight. Consequently I shall merely be the voice of reason here until deleted rather than personally attempting to cut the article down to sanity, a move which would certainly be considered 'vandalism' by the omnipresent wikipedia mobocracy.

Or it could be that I'm just providing a distraction to keep you from realizing the real enemy... capitalism! or something, look whatever man I don't care. I suppose even sociology grads need something to feel informed about. Just please know that you should never talk like this in front of an intelligent person not already beholden to your worldview as you'll end up sounding absurd. Oh but EVERYTHING is absurd from the perspective of multiculturalist social theory! Which is why you people are hopeless. Good evening ladies and gentlemen, civilization was nice while it lasted, please remember to turn the lights out when you're through with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.81.251.201 (talk) 22:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Examples of camp

The whole section needs to be written but I can't be bothered to do it.

How the hell could Metallica be considered "campy?" Many observers consider Metallica to be the best, most genuine example of thrash metal of all time. Metallica's style has never been exaggerated, ironic, over-the-top, or silly in my opinion. God help the person who listed Stryper next to Metallica in this section of the article.

If Metallica is a genuine example of thrash metal then Gwar is the camp version of it.

Words

What does "problematisation" mean? This word (and its presumed variant with a "z") does not seem to appear in dictionaries. Similarly, "historicity" herein seems to mean something different than the dictionary would indicate. A link to a Wiktionary entry or something would be appreciated. Or would doing so dumb down the text? ~ Vivacissamamente

Swish article

Swish is effeminate behaviour and interests, camp, emphasized, and sanctioned (Kleinberg 1978), in pre-Stonewall gay male communities.

Being swish includes sashaying and the use of limp wrists, falsetto voices, feminine pronouns, and superlatives (Sonenschein 1969; Tripp 197). Basically, everything up to the other side of camp, drag.

"Extravagant language is common. Such expressions as "Oh my word!" "Good heavens!" and "Oh, my dear!" are readily associated with other aspects of a feminine man. In describing ordinary experiences the male variant is likely to use such words as "terrific," "amazing," "completely devoted," "horrible," "tremendous," "sublimely," "charming," "appalling," "vicious," "loathed," and "madly." Exaggerations are made more consipicuous by placing undue or erroneous emphasis on certain syllables and intonations which leave little doubt of the effeminacy of the speaker." (Henry, 1955, p.291)

Source

Levine, Martin P. (1998). Gay Macho. New York: New York University Press. ISBN 0814746942.

Swish is on VfD, so I copied the article here so I may readd the info if deleted. Hyacinth 22:12, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Modern use of Camp

I would say that today we use Camp in a similar way to this old definition of Swish, above. "His voice and walk are naturally quite camp, but when he is around his parents or similar people, he seems more self-aware, and is more straight-acting."

There is an aggressive cross-dressing style of camp. Eg. "He puts his hand on his hip and delicately puts a 6 inch cigarette to his lips. He stands tall and looks down at you with a feigned contempt". An example of this sort of camp is how Tim Curry played Dr Franknfurter in "The Rocky Horror Picture Show".

When a man acts in this extreme-camp fashion, it is not purely that he is acting in a typically feminine way. In fact, it tends to stand out as unnatural even when a woman acts in this way, and then she is being camp also. An example would be how Madeline Kahn played Lili Von Schtupp in "Blazing Saddles".

This example leads to a less gender-bent camp to the campness of playing straight in a colourful or silly situation.For example Eg. Adam West played Batman in "Batman - The Movie" and in the Television Series. Here he played a stiff, adult, master detective, in spite of wearing a ridiculous outfit, solving ludicrous riddles, being introduced by a childish cartoon representation of himself with a peculiar "na-na-na-na-Batman" song.

Other examples of this kind of camp can be found in "A Very Brady Sequel", "What's up Doc" and "Zoolander" etc.

Richard Lynton 2004.

What is going on?

User:Scuiqui fox, the article first defined camp as a general phenomena. Your additional definitions were not the first to say that "camp is not only queer". Additionally you changed all instances of "gay" to "homosexual" for no reason. Richard Lynton (User:220.253.36.130), your comments were made in the middle of comments posted by me. What is going on? Vision problems? Computer trouble? Pages not refreshing? Hyacinth

Citations

Please be careful to preserve citations. Thanks and happy edits. Hyacinth 22:29, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone have a quote for Delany saying "a camp" referred to "female impersonators and other prostitutes"? This strikes me as a troubling phrase. BradGad [[User_talk:BradGad|(Talk)]] 22:32, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup

The article was listed for Wikipedia:Cleanup with no explination on this talk page so I removed the template. Hyacinth 22:29, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

What is missing...

Dearest,

I think the one thing avoided in this article of Camp was the logic behind the artifice. Jean Cocteau 's definition of Campy was "The lie that tells the truth.

As Susan Songtag admitted herself in the essay . She was an outsider to Camp and relpying too much on an outsider hurt your article as well as destroyed the objective. Susan Songtag did a wonderful job don't get me wrong but she was only attracted to style Camp not part of the Camp mentality. Atleast by her opinion, I think she is more campy then she is willing to let us know.

The biggest aspect of Camp that you skipped right over was it is actually a critical analysis and at the same time a big joke. Camp takes “something” (normally a social norm, object, phrase, or stlye) does a very acute analysis of what the “something” is. Then takes then “something” and becomes it. That is where to joke or humor comes in. For example when Breadesley's ink drawings were outragiously campy because they where blatant, vulgar, and just not the traditional way! Yet he was critical analyzing the traditions of his time by turning his nose up at them thus making him vulgar. Or when a homosexual is “flamer”, because the homosexual is intentionally toying with what it means to be “gay” in the eyes everyone else. THAT my friend is Camp.

Yes it's a joke but it's is also a very serious analysis done by people who are willing to make a joke out of themselves just to prove a point.

The second thing you missed was that to be Camp meant to be an illusion. Camp is to look like one thing but in reality to be another thing. Example Art Nouvea, the “lamp” looks like a vine and flowers but it's actually a "lamp". Camp is a big secret to the person being campy. Why do you think it is always associated with homosexuals? Because anyone who is camp has a dark secret they are intentionally making fun of or manipluating. This is way is got the homosexual tag it has but most modern "Goths" are campy as well.

It's about being pretenious and contentious; It is a heterdox bouleversement all wrapped up in a tongue and cheek pose, which elicits shock and is meant to be offensive.

You make it sound so clean and proper. That doesn’t sound very camp.

Please: Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks.

Secondly, this is an article about camp, not camp itself. Hyacinth 21:03, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Article Subject

Dear,

If the article is about Camp then isn't about Camp itself?

You're using a self reference problem that doesn't really work because it doesn't explain anything.

If you’re going to identify something the first thing you should do is define it. If the article is about Camp, you need to define what “Camp” is and what is not “Camp”. This article relies completely on Susan's defining Camp behavior not Camp, which is what the article is about correct? I found it unless in this sense because, if I don't know what Camp is then how does that help me? Telling what Camp behavior is, doesn't explain Camp any more then tell me an apple is red. There is so much more to the apple other then it is red so telling me an apple is red doesn't tell what an apple is.

Does that clarify things? I am not trying to be disgruntled but I find it awkward that the whole never tells anyone what Camp is but the article is about Camp. Encyclopedias are to help educate not to confuse me more. Does this explain what I feel the article is missing, well enough?

It might help if you use a Jean Cocteau reference or a Phillip Core reference. I mean I know what Camp is but the article is completely misidentifying and misleading. I am sorry.

Sincerely

Vesta

I concur. I am interested in a working definition of Camp, not a long list of things that are Camp. How are we to define wether or not something is or is not Camp without a definition? 72.60.21.19 07:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Elvis Presley

Can Elvis Presley himself be considered and example of Camp and Kitsch? I'm waiting for further approval before posting it, but as far as i'm concerned, he fits in all pre-requisites for being considered kitsch and camp.

No, you do not understand the distinction. Elvis Presley's style and the cult of flamboyant objects surrounded with it are kitsch, and the flamboyance of Elvis impersonators may be camp; but Elvis himself is completely in earnest - if at times a little too in earnest.

What he is, a term often crushed beneath the wheels of camp, is arch, sometimes called hammy, but inaccurately. Victor Mature is arch. Elvis Presley is arch. Randolph Scott is wooden. Alan Ladd is hammy. Keanu Reeves is louche. But Flash Gordon is camp.

Do you see?

Nuttyskin 04:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...

Ja Rule is camp? -- eo 21:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Placebo is camp? -- 72.60.21.19 07:10, 22 March 2006

Placebo is camp. (UTC)

Sontag's list

Once upon a time the article said this:

Susan Sontag, in her famous 1964 essay "Notes on 'Camp' ", emphasises artifice, frivolity, and shocking excess as the key notes. While the common use of the concept includes these, usually the element of naïve middle-class pretentiousness is highlighted. Typical examples of this latter use are Carmen Miranda's tutti frutti hats, low-budget science fiction movies of the 1950s and 1960s and the multi-genre pop culture of the 1970s and 1980s.

Now the article says this:

In her famous 1964 essay "Notes on 'Camp' ", Sontag emphasised artifice, frivolity, naïve middle-class pretentiousness and shocking excess as key elements of camp. Most of the popular culture references in Sontag's essay are fairly obscure and would be lost on most of today's readers. Less obscure examples cited by Sontag included Carmen Miranda's tutti frutti hats and low-budget science fiction movies of the 1950s and 1960s.

These are very different things that we are putting in Susan's mouth. Which is which? Hyacinth 11:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

"Most of the popular culture references in Sontag's essay are fairly obscure and would be lost on most of today's readers" is POV and should be removed. Obscurity is relative. --Chips Critic 03:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the offending phrase (and a bit). --Chips Critic 02:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

References

I added the {{unreferenced|date=August 2006}} tag because there are a number of specific claims this article makes that I'd like to see the reference for, and there are no notes within the article as to where the source for any given peice of information can be found. The gay community appreciating camp, for example, is a statement I'd specifically like to see a source for. Could some inline notes be added? Fieari 21:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I removed Template:Unreferenced. Please use Template:fact after each specific claim in need of citation. Hyacinth 09:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

It would be hard to find an authoritative text stating that gays appreciate camp. However, gay appreciation of camp is a well-known stereotype, which is certainly backled up by moutains of antedoctal evidence and this is a stereotype, which has never been challenged by the gay community as being inaccurate.

The problem with citing a source for gay appreciation for camp, would be like trying to find a source indicating that uneducated, working-class people are more likely to have a mullett and drive a Camero or Trans-Am, than educated people from a higher socio-economic class. There may be no concrete sociological data to support the connection between mulletts and Cameros to the lower classes, but few would dispute that such a connection exists. VonRatt 23 April 2006.

Bruce Lee

Removed ”many of them starring Bruce Lee”, since he died young and only ever starred in five films. -- Bossk-Office

Comedy Versus Camp

I was thinking... would it be a good idea to distinguish between camp and more traditional forms of comedy? I mean, there's a difference between a show or movie, etc. that's meant to be funny, but in which the characters act reasonably realistically versus one wherein they act in an over-the-top manner that people wouldn't act in in real life.

A good example would be BILL AND TED movies versus BACK TO THE FUTURE movies. They have similar subject matter, but the latter is a more pure form of camp as the characters act in a cartoonish way whereas the later-- while still funny--has the characters act in a more realistic fashion; the sci-fi elements notwithstanding.

What do you guys think?

Parody vs Camp

What is the difference between those two ideas? Is there any? Answer to this question would also help to understand the vague notion of camp.

Please sign your posts on talk pages per Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks! Hyacinth 11:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

At the risk of annoying some people, this extremely broad definition of "camp" is really bizarre and very confusing. This article seems to blur the lines between "cult", "parody", "cheesy" and "camp". The dictionary definition of the word is a) affected, effeminate - b) homosexual - c) done in an exaggerated way for effect. That's it, no more. By definition, it is not possible to be unintentionally camp, so what the hell is this article all about? You can't take something from 35 years ago that wasn't intended to be camp and decide that it now is. It has to be something else.

If there's an American usage of this word that transcends its actual meaning, then it needs to be made clear. Bretonbanquet 15:17, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Which dictionary? Hyacinth 11:28, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

The Oxford English Dictionary. Bretonbanquet 17:28, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it IS possible to be unintentionally camp and the dictionary definitions account for this. Please read Sontag. http://interglacial.com/~sburke/pub/prose/Susan_Sontag_-_Notes_on_Camp.html

"One must distinguish between na�ve and deliberate Camp. Pure Camp is always naive. Camp which knows itself to be Camp ("camping") is usually less satisfying."

contradictory definitions

These contradictory definitions are separated by only one sentence!:

Camp refers to the deliberate and sophisticated use of kitsch.

Today, camp falls into two distinct categories: intentional camp and unintentional camp. Intentional camp, as the name suggests, constitutes the deliberate use of camp for humour. Unintentional camp arises from naïveté or poor quality or tastes. Unintentional camp can thus be considered "true camp.

This makes no sense. According to the first definition, unintentional camp is kitsch, not camp. --Espoo 16:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree - this article needs a proper definition of whatever camp means in the US. Bretonbanquet 18:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

See the quotes below. It seems the "unintentional" bit will have to go. I couldn't find any references for this claim in the article either. --Espoo 02:56, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

American Heritage: NOUN: 1. An affectation or appreciation of manners and tastes commonly thought to be artificial, vulgar, or banal. 2. Banality, vulgarity, or artificiality when deliberately affected or when appreciated for its humor: “Camp is popularity plus vulgarity plus innocence” (Indra Jahalani). ADJECTIVE: Having deliberately artificial, vulgar, banal, or affectedly humorous qualities or style: played up the silliness of their roles for camp effect.

Merriam-Webster: 3camp Function: noun Etymology: origin unknown 1 : exaggerated effeminate mannerisms exhibited especially by homosexuals 2 : a homosexual displaying camp 3 : something so outrageously artificial, affected, inappropriate, or out-of-date as to be considered amusing 4 : something self-consciously exaggerated or theatrical

Compact Oxford: camp2 informal • adjective 1 (of a man) ostentatiously and extravagantly effeminate. 2 deliberately exaggerated and theatrical in style. • noun camp behaviour or style.

Cambridge: camp (STYLE) Show phonetics adjective INFORMAL 1 (of a man) behaving and dressing in a way that some people think is typical of a homosexual: What's the name of that amazingly camp actor with the high voice and a funny walk?

2 using bold colours, loud sounds, unusual behaviour, etc. in an amusing way: Their shows are always incredibly camp and flamboyant.

New Oxford: camp2 informal: adjective (of a man or his manner) ostentatiously and extravagantly effeminate: a heavily made-up and highly camp actor. deliberately exaggerated and theatrical in style, typically for humorous effect: the movie seems more camp than shocking or gruesome. noun [mass noun] deliberately exaggerated and theatrical behaviour or style: Hollywood camp. verb [no obj.] (of a man) behave in an ostentatiously effeminate way: he camped it up a bit for the cameras. -DERIVATIVES campily adverb campiness noun campy adjective. -ORIGIN early 20th cent.: of unknown origin.

That's pretty much what I always understood camp to be. Unless anyone can find references or acceptable definitions of camp meaning something other than what's outlined above, then the article needs some real pruning. Bretonbanquet 16:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I tried to steer the article back to the dictionary definitions by removing obvious references to "unintentional camp". More work is still required. --Blainster 18:26, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I am the one who wrote most of the article on camp including the difference between intentional and unintentional camp. I believe that the confussion some have had concerning intentional and unintentional camp arose from the fact that originally, the definition of camp referred exclusively to intentional camp. Eventually, the definition grow to include unintentional camp, to the point where the term camp is most often used to refer to unintentional camp.

John Waters intentionally uses camp in his films. In other words, he is in on the joke. By contrast, shows like The Brady Bunch and Leave It To Beaver were never meant to be camp when they were created, but today they are some of the most commonly cited examples cited when explaining the concept of camp to a person unfamiliar with the concept of camp. Few would dispsute that these shows are camp, and they must be considered unintentional camp, as they were not meant to be camp when they were created.

The dictionary definitions of camp need to be improved and brought up to date. As is often the case with dictionary defintions, these definitions have not caught up with the times to reflect how the term camp is most commonly used today. They appear to have frozen a Mid-Twentieth Century definition of camp, which was devised when the concept of camp was in its infancy and had not fully developed to the point where it is today.

 VonRatt 23 April 2006.

"Few would dispsute that these shows are camp... " No, they are kitsch. Unintentional camp is a contradiction in terms. It is possible to enjoy these shows in a camp way - postmodern, ironic, etc. - but doesn't make the originals camp. I would say that items, works, sujects that we can enjoy like this are in themselves not camp, but kitsch.213.104.164.20 15:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Graeme

---

IMO camp is always intentional, but it is enough that intentionality is present either in the production of the cultural artefact or in the consumption of the artefact. It is indeed possible to take, for example, a crappy TV show that was not originally meant to be camp and watch it with an ironical attitude. In this case, the act of watching is indeed camp even if the TV show per se is not.Punainen Nörtti 14:29, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

But that isn't saying an awful lot of any use Punainen Nörtti! I can choose to watch Schindler's List in a camp way if I want to - it says nothing at all about the film, filmaker or anything other than my own stupidity. Anything can be subjected to ironic interpretation - this doesn't get us any closer to what is or is not camp in its own right.86.20.55.243 17:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Graeme

I think that the disambiguation page has quite a nice definition

Camp (style), an ironic appreciation of that which might otherwise be considered outlandish or corny

I think that camp is not a property that a thing has or does not have in its own right. Camp is rather a way to interpret things. It is possible that the maker of a thing has intended it to be interpreted as a camp, but it is also possible to enjoy as camp on things that were not originally meant to be camp. For example, imagine a person that wears corny clothes just because he thinks that they are corny. The clothes were not originally meant to be corny, and thus we have non-intentionality in the manufacturing process. However, the act of wearing them is camp (and the wearer has even intended his dressing style to be camp). I think that my example with the act of watching a TV show is analoguous.

Thus, I think that the question whether something is camp in its own right is meaningless. There are two meaningful questions: Is something originally intended to be appreciated as camp? and Is something appreciated as camp? Camp is not a property of an item but rather a relation between an item and its perceiver.

Update: According to the disambig page definition it is not possible to enjoy anything as camp. If you want to watch something, for example Schindler's list, as camp, you must first perceive it as outlandish or corny. I am not sure if I can find enough corny or kitchy elements from Schindler's list to enable me to enjoy it as camp. Mixing holocaust, a serious tragedy, with cheap Hollywood-style pathos does have some qualities thay perhaps could be enjoyed as camp, but nevertheless I am not sure if it would work for me.

Punainen Nörtti 14:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, there are a lot of confused opinions here. As mentioned up above, camp is not necessarily a quality inherent to a performance or a work of art but it is a manner of reading the work. Camp is a sensibility that the audience brings to the table. So "unintentional" camp is in fact what camp is primarily about and intentional campiness came later. Or rather there are works of art which appeal to a camp sensibility (Maria Montez) and there are works of art that are created by someone who views the world through a camp sensibility (John Waters). To quote Sontag: "One must distinguish between naive and deliberate Camp. Pure Camp is always naive. Camp which knows itself to be Camp ("camping") is usually less satisfying."

This is also made clear in the above dictionary definitions. "Banality, vulgarity, or artificiality when deliberately affected or when appreciated for its humor." And "something so outrageously artificial, affected, inappropriate, or out-of-date as to be considered amusing." These definitions both describe naive or unintentional camp.

Snakes on a Plane

Would the title of Snakes on a Plane be considered camp? Coffee 15:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I think so, but you'd need to cite it being called that (WP:NOR, WP:V) to put it in the article. --Davidstrauss 21:33, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

No, for God's sake! Have you even been reading this page?

SoaP is parodical (in that it extracts humour from a genre which usually intends only to elicit fright in the audience), but still contains fright elements. It is therefore an affectionate parody. In the sense that it is ironic, it belongs to the same super-huge grouping of ironic stuff as camp; in the way that Mohammed Karzai and Jenny McCarthy both belong in the same gigantic grouping of human beings, while not otherwise related.

That was irony, BTW

Nuttyskin 04:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

British Comedy - the camp tradition

There is a tradition of "camp" comedy in Britain. This is based primarily on the definition of camp as being a display of effeminancy, outrageous homosexual posturing etc.

At a time prior to the legalisation of male homosexual practice in the UK (1967) - and to this day - many of our most dearly loved comic characters and performers have paraded feintly veiled (and latterly not so veiled!) gay attitudes, innuendo and double entendres.

Examples: Larry Grayson, Kenneth Williams, the Carry On series, Frankie Howerd, Mr Humphries (from the TV show Are You Being Served?), the drag performers Lilly Savage and Danny La Rue, Graham Norton, Julian Clary...

(This is not to say that camp has been exclusively a male thing. Outrageous displays of femininity have also been a comic staple - either over the top sexiness or battle-axe grotesquery. See Barbara Windsor for the former; Hilda Baker for the latter.)

It is amusing to recall just how many mums and grannies of the 1960s and 1970s loved these guys, shieked with laughter at their goings-on, but would become outraged at the very idea that their favourites were in any way gay! "I bet he's married with six kids!" "Oh no! He's just a gentleman..."

These types of performers - with the exception of the new breed of more openly gay acts - are often derided these days by Gay Rights commentators for being "closet" but at the same time for perpetuating myths and stereotypes about gay men!

American TV seems much more relaxed about this - Jack from Will and Grace is the most joyous character in this tradition today. That he owes a debt to the British tradition might be confirmed by the numerous explicit references made to British popular culture in the show. 213.104.164.20 15:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Graeme

Unencyclopaedic

I've put a cleanup notice on this article because so much of it seems too informal, chatty and unsubstantiated. 86.134.37.181 23:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

It's also very hard to understand what the term actually means. You should be able to read the lead once, and very clearly pick out the definition. --P-Chan 15:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. This is certainly no example of objectivity but, quite simply, this article sucks. The article offers no real--or at least no readily apparent--definition of the term except through example, which must certainly be inappropriate for an encyclopedic article. Additionally, to define through example one must have a basis for example besides personal opinion, hearsay, or popular concensus. I'm not sure it would be possible to appropriately offer examples of camp through this medium with such constraints. Metalrobot 11:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

i agree, most of this article is POV.

This is one of the worst articles on Wikipedia I've ever read. It needs some serious cleanup. You can definitely define camp without having to get into seemingly unrelated aspects of gay culture.

This is only because none of you understand the subject. It is from popular culture, its edges are blurry, it is many things to different people and it is unencyclopaedic by definition. Not everything will fit into the Aritotelian grid. What do you do? Throw it away because it won't fit?

Or make the grid fit the subject?

Nuttyskin 04:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Steady, everyone. Camp as a style is difficult to define, and will necessarily include some generalities. There's no need to get all postmodern and upset about it. --K e rowyn ^{Leave a note} 23:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree with the above poster. This seems less like an article on camp and more like a rambling essay on gay culture, artistic vendettas, postmodernism with the odd anti-intellectual rant thrown in. Nuttyskin, even if camp is "unencyclopaedic by definition", this is an encyclopedia and not a book or paper, so I think we have to force it into the grid to a certain extent. I'll try go through and clean up some of the stuff that seems completely POV and unverifiable. --Smilingman 00:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Let us not forget the character "Camp Freddie", played by Tony Beckley in the original 1969 Italian Job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.65.31.9 (talk) 09:20, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

My observations on camp

I feel that camp, at heart, amounts to an extreme or parodic artistic realization of an illusion, especially a popular illusion. It is the artistic equivalent of exposing the fallacy of an idea by taking it to its logical extreme.

For example, the "swish" is a parodic realization of the stereotype of gay effeminacy. Adam West's Batman was a laughable personification of truth, justice and the American way, and the Batman series itself a garish incarnation of the Cold War battle between good and evil. The Dr. Strangelove story line is an exaggerated and unlikely fulfillment of Cold War paranoia.

The best camp strains the credibility of the illusion it parodies without breaking it. The parody is apparent to those who realize the illusion, but invisible to those who buy into the illusion. Carmen Miranda's tutti-frutti hats were clearly a parody of fashion, nevertheless, socially aspiring housewives bought and wore them believing them to be the height of fashion. Those who recognized Archie Bunker as a parody of conservative values laughed at his insane bigotries, even while working-class conservatives shouted "Amen" to his tirades.

Clearly, camp can be unintentional, for example, the movie "Reefer Madness" was written as a cautionary tale in the 1930's, when public awareness of the effects of marijuana was poor. When "Reefer Madness" was rediscovered in the 1970's, the public was much more familiar with the effects of marijuana, and the movie's exaggerated acting and incredible story line had turned into a parody of the true dangers of marijuana, and the movie became a favorite with the drug culture.

French slang ?

Just a detail, I guess, but the verb "camper" (to camp), is not slang at all. It has something to do with theater : a comedian represents a character, more than he "plays" the characater, he "is" the character, ... he "camps" the character. It also have an "affected" and eggagerated nuance (lets' say, Cyrano De Bergerac and DePardieu - I dont know the english word for "surjouer" - lets say "overplaying" ?), which might suggere distanciation. This is something about representation, wich the "camp" culture seems to be familiar with, I guess.

Hope you'll excuse my broken english, --Remka 13:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Si vous will excuser mon broken franglais?

Nuttyskin 05:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

NASCAR and professional wrestling examples of camp?

Is wrestling camp? No one involved in it seems to take themselves very seriously. I also loathe NASCAR, but I have heard the reason people enjoy it so much when there are so much better racing competitions in terms of technology, skill and speed (Formula 1 for exampple) is that people are facinated by the flair and personalities of the drivers. Does that make NASCAR camp?

2nd worst wikipedia article ever!!

This is the 2nd worst wikipedia article ever.Yet-another-user 05:59, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

How so? Hyacinth 21:47, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Trust me, it used to be much worse! Yet-another-user 03:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Celebrities

This is absolute nonsense. Isn't Wikipedia meant to be a compendium of objective fact? Why is there a whole section listing celebrities who, as some loser has decided, behave in a 'camp' way? I believe 'camp' is such a nebulous term that it doesn't deserve an article for itself, and Wikipedia doesn't deserve to exist, for tolerating such rubbish.

Format

Why is half of the article cited in MLA format? --Mentaka 23:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Adorno

I put in a citation added on the first Adorno reference. With my limited knowledge of Adorno and a quick scan of his Wikipedia article and the Frankfurt School article, I don't quite understand the connection to Adorno. Indeed, at least in "Dialectic of Enlightenment," Adorno's view of mass culture is nothing less than total condemnation. While we may say that camp opposes pop culture in some sense, it also celebrates it in a way that Adorno would be deeply horrified by. In fact, the Adorno Wiki article notes that he felt that pop culture was in fact the source of moral and social problems, hardly a view that practitioners of camp would endorse. And then Adorno's thought is used later in this article as a criticism of camp. So, perhaps this reference has to do with the later idea of "negative dialectics", one with which I am largely unfamiliar. If some can explain Adorno's non-critical relationship to camp or add a citation, I'd appreciate it.Dieziege 08:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Adorno does not discuss camp. He discusses mass culture. It is a complete misunderstanding to collapse the two. I deleted the Adorno discussion because it was not grounded in a specific reference--because it's false. User:Edward R. O'Neill March 22, 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.66.202.27 (talk) 15:43, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Eminem

A lot of the celebrity examples in the list are not camp in the slightest, but Eminem is probably the complete antithesis of camp. Whoever added that, please define your reasons. Note: cross-dressing a video is regarded as a parody and not camp. Christ. This article is terrible. 82.163.38.32 23:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Major copyvio

I am removing a lot of content that infringes on copyrights. A dead cert giveaway is when it has a source that means nothing, for instance "(moyer, p.29)". That's why I am removing it, if you revert it again justify YOUR reasons. 82.163.38.32 23:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

We should add a picture to this page. It'll make the concepts easier to grasp.

Camp in Japan?

Based on the materials provided on this page, one may conclude 'camp' is generated by a schism subjective to western standards. Point and case to its association, references, and historical ties to (but not limited to) 'displays of extravagance/flamboyance', 'bad taste' and 'effiminate-ness' which vary between one sociocultural group's norm to another. That being said, I motion to delete the section 'Camp in Japan' Dimas Subagio 00:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed: Camp as a destructive or misleading concept

As applied to Hollywood movies of the Golden Age -- roughly from the beginning of the movie era up through the 1950’s -- “camp” may be a destructive or misleading concept.

In film criticism, the term “camp” has frequently been used to disparage movies of the Hollywood Golden Age, which are claimed to be in bad taste and therefore unintentionally funny. Such criticisms rely on the notion that there are generally accepted standards for great art of any type, by reference to which so-called camp movies are deemed to be inane, in spite of their enormous popularity. Some critics of the camp school have implied that such criticisms should have general application to the entire output of Hollywood during its Golden Age. Such critics most often prefer European and arthouse films to Golden Age Hollywood fare. The influence of these critics is widespread, including upon film-makers in Hollywood today, and may be seen in a large number of comments posted over the Internet that attack old Hollywood movies, especially for seeming artificial, out-of-date and historically inaccurate.

This type of camp criticism belongs to an academic school of thought that condescends to American and popular culture. Traditionally, there has always been a dichotomy in American criticism over the relation between old-world and new-world values. Critics who favor old-world values have often claimed that the new world has no high-art culture of its own and that American and popular culture is invariably second-rate when compared to the classic culture of the old world.

Criticizing the Critics – Critics who dislike American popular culture may themselves be criticized for being heavy-handed, snobbish and witless. Many of the films the critics have attacked were not unintentionally, but intentionally, funny and deliberately took liberties with artistic style, realism and fact to achieve humorous effects. Whenever an old time movie seems unusually artificial, the film-maker is usually winking at the audience, like the rib-tickler in a vaudeville comedy. Critics who object to that kind of humor as "unintentional" run the risk of being thought witless or snobbish for not getting the joker's intent.

I removed the above as it describes nothing destructive and I would want some citations for many of the claims. Largely it is an overlong discussion over whether or not camp is bad or the people who think it is bad are bad, though it does not reach the conclusion that camp is good. Hyacinth 08:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Restored: Camp as a destructive or misleading concept

I put the comment back in because there are several statements made therein about the kinds of criticisms made by camp critics of old movies that anyone reading with comprehension should easily have understood as both "destructive" and "misleading": such as the use by some critics of the word "camp" as a synonym for "bad taste" in the context of disparaging Golden Age Hollywood movies. I could cite thousands of such recent disparaging comments that I have read on IMDB and also in countless film reviews that I have read in large circulation periodicals since the 1960s, but it is not necessary as many if not most of the other statements and opinions published in the article on "Camp" and in other "unsourced" articles on Wikipedia are similarly made without citation. It is in the spirit of a free access encyclopedia that this should be so. I should add though that many of the remarks I make are so obvious they are self-evident and don't call for citation. My remarks are intended to right the wrong that camp critics disproportionately voice their opinions compared to other types of critics, creating the false impression that everyone thinks as they do. Nothing could be further from the truth. Lastly, I do not reach the conclusion that "camp is good" because I contributed to a section of the article where "camp" as an academic concept is criticized. If Hyacinth doesn't agree, he should at least allow that other writers are entitled to express their opinions, without being understood equivocally and without having their writings peremptorily deleted. (NOTE: I could also cite some of the comment on this discussion page. See the discussion of intentional and unintentional camp above.) -- The Author

It doesn't matter if other areas lack citations, you still need to cite sources, that's wikipedia policy. This may be a free-access encyclopedia, but there are standards for what you can write. I agree with the deleter, this whole section is simply POV and unverifiable. I'm not challenging the validity of what you wrote, but this is not a place to "right wrongs". I am deleting this section, please only restore it if you are able to rewrite it in a neutral and properly sourced manner. --Smilingman 00:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Zebomb, kindly justify it on the talk page before reverting. I explained my reasons for the deletion. --Smilingman 00:51, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

First Para(graph)

Well, I went the this article to help me define "camp" in a conversation. My conversational "OTHER" was not sure what "Camp" meant, so I said, lets look on wikipedia...
So we look at the page, and, well... the first paragraph is more confusing than the definition that I proposed (will not relay here as it is WAY TOO difficult to follow). The first paragraph need to be a much more precise and direct explaination of this topic. Unless one is in the "in" on this, it's totally unhelpful. Bone in thigh 21:18, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I don't get camp at all. I'm so inclined to believe it doesn't even exist....even in a dictionary. A pic would help to prove it's existance in my mind.

Please sign your posts on talk pages per Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks! Hyacinth 04:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup: Sources

This article used to have cited information (for example http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Camp_%28style%29&oldid=36622196). One major goal of any cleanup should be to readd the current source and the removed information (and then finding more sources). Hyacinth 05:03, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Archiving of talk pages needed

Would an editor familiar with the article please archive this talk page so it's a bit more user friendly? Benjiboi 10:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

High and low camp

Hi, I was actually searching for high camp but only found this article. Has that information been deleted or never added? Benjiboi 10:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

We have here a mess....

An "anti-academic defense..."? The only people who talk like that are... academics, no?

The first two paragraphs seem to give conflicting origins for the meaning of the word.

"camp came to popularity in the 1980s" Popular with whom? It already had a long history of popularity among gay men in the 60s. The popularity of camp-type performances among straight audiences has often been naive - and if you don't get it, it's not camp, and I don't care what someone once wrote.

Terms like "clearly marginalized forms" is jargon at it's worst. It may be the mother's milk of some academic sub-fields, but it's jargon none the less, and just plain bad writing.

There's a constant effort to capture kitsch under the camp umbrella. They are not the same - an inability to differentiate is not a recommended quality for writers of encyclopedic articles.

Headed sections should not be one sentence.

As with kitsch, all bad taste is not camp re: South of the Border.

Carvel ice cream is campy? My head explodes.

If I cared enough, I'd dump much of this article, and cut down the entry to about three paragraphs. Not desiring an Undo war, I won't.

MarkinBoston 04:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Burn it down

Can we delete this article and start over? Preferably with "camp (gay culture)" and "camp (critical term)" as separate articles? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.72.219.104 (talk) 03:58, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't seem like a great idea to me but for those interested in the idea what would the "camp (critical term)" article be about? What I'm hearing is that this article needs improving to address both the gay cultural references as well as allow for whatever "camp (critical term)" is. My hunch is that they shoul dremain together and show how one has is is evolving into both. Benjiboi 22:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

outrageous

my recollection of the british theatre/entertainment industry scene in the 1960's is that most of the terms listed here were in use and had been so for a long time. some additions: professionally senior 'girls' or 'queens' (male homosexuals) would address the junior ones as 'daughter'. the ultimate derision or vulgarity or kitsch was 'naaf' this came from the military services canteens 'naafi' (navy, army air force institute) and was very insulting because the canteens were the ultimate in poor taste and crude services. an exclamation indicating disapproval and disdain was to say 'sonny tufts!! (somehow connected with the late hollywood 'b' movie actor in a sailors uniform). the use of the word 'outrageous' or 'outrageous daughter' was a serious message of disapproval and would be used with reference to such serious professional crimes such as being 'in flagrente' and discovered to the audience during a scene change. Bruce Condell 07:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

check out Polari. Benjiboi 22:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Uncited list of names removed

Under the UK section, a list of unrelated names was given as examples of "camp personages". As this list was not sourced, includes several names of people who are still alive, and also included several names to whom applying the "camp" label is not only disputable but possibly libellous, I have removed this list and substituted generic wording per the Wikipedia policy WP:BLP. 23skidoo 19:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense. This article isn't about people who kick puppies or steal candy from babies, it's about camp style and they were added as folks who stylistically are campy. Hard to believe anyone would consider suing because someone suggests they have been, are or can be seen as camp. Benjiboi 19:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Any chance we could get a picture?

For those of us that were born too late to ever see it. Klosterdev 17:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Image from Wicked

This article contains an image from the Broadway musical Wicked, presumably as an example of the camp style. However, no mention is made anywhere in the article of this musical, and the image caption does nothing to explain its presence here. It appears to me that either some descriptive text should be added to the image caption (or the article itself) or the image should be removed. Also, wouldn't it be better to have an image a bit more evocative of camp? Sriram1729 (talk) 23:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Baltimore Camp - Honfest

I wondered what you thought about adding a section -- or at least some mention -- of one of the campiest things I can think of, which is the Honfest in Baltimore. I wrote a blog entry about it here that describes the campiness better and before I just rudely inserted some info on the event, I thought I should note it here. What are your opinions? --Seinberg (talk) 02:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Second paragraph of "Humor and Allusion" section

This paragraph isn't very encyclopedic and doesn't really fit with the rest of the article. It contained one sentence (which I've removed) that used the word "myself" to describe the author, clearly bad tone. The paragraph also doesn't cite any references or sources and puts forward a definition of the word "camp" that directly disagrees with the rest of the article - it suggests that the source is a journalist comparing a self-referencing show's quality with a production formed on some kind of camping trip, whereas the rest of the article suggests it comes from the French 'se camper'.

I didn't want to delete this section simply because it's unsourced, but someone who knows more about this topic might want to do so. 91.111.48.17 (talk) 21:57, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Can some TV classics from the 80's be consideres as camp?

Like Knigh Rider & such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Virtudcivica (talk • contribs) 07:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Moved comments from article

Without citations, this section [Humor] is dangerously adopting the public perception of wikipedia. That it avoids controversy and plays to Political Correctness. It is imperative that this article segment be reviewed. If "camp" behaviour really is ALWAYS intentionally humorous, then this fact should be easy to support through citation of recognised publications.

It is also not through word structures such as "very accurate analysis" that we should proceed when writing articles for this website. A "very accurate analysis" is clearly an observer's opinion, and should be left to the observer to form. We are an information site, not a conglomeration of public consensus or opinions. Neither is citing the reason for a show's success as "kids liked it anyway and adults found it funny" particularly informative.

I accept that there are people who portray camp characteristics due to their perception that it is humorous. I do not accept that this is valid information to include in an encyclopaedia.

I will review this article one week from now and, if no action has been taken, I will remove this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.252.167 (talk • contribs)

Wiktionary

Does this deserve an article at all? Surely all that is needed is a definition in Wiktionary, which I'm sure there already is. 86.145.40.155 (talk) 05:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

We have many many articles that could be mere definitions but move well beyond that. This article needs work but is way beyond just a definition. -- Banjeboi 10:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

The term 'camp follower' does not come from female impersonators who serviced soldiers' sexual needs at army facilities. The phrase's original meaning is pretty much what the words say - camp followers. European armies ( and sometimes but more rarely navies ) in the gunpowder era often permitted a certain number of soldier's wives , women and children to be carried on the strength of the regiment/battalion . In return for this sinecure the women often worked unofficially as laundresses, cooks, nurses etc. Armies of this time on campaign , indeed often in barracks, had logistical difficulties. Micro-economies consisting of sutlers, vendors, etc. developed to provide goods and services to the troops. Gamblers, prostitutes, thieves, alcohol purveyors also grouped around military sites to provide a service or to separate a trooper from his pay. When the army moved, the wives, women, sutlers, prostitutes etc. moved also. They followed the camp. Hence, camp followers. Not 'camp - homosexual' followers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zwiczeski (talk • contribs) 18:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Gloria Swanson

Camp's source is the deadly seriousness of an older woman bent on seduction (and unaware that her attempts look absurd to everyone else). The perfect example would be someone like Gloria Swanson in Sunset Boulevard. Camp is pretending, ironically, to be Gloria Swanson. That is why it appeals so much to gay men: fear of female seduction and a way of turning the fear into the comic. All the typical props come from the same scenario. Tsinfandel (talk) 21:47, 27 September 2009 (UTC)