http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxeaARH_jcM
That clip represents only a small number of people in the Trojan marching band, but think about it: Could you tell which of them were boys and which were girls? I doubt it. To me, they all looked like men.
Derridian analysis encourages us to seek out as much as possible the meaning between two opposing subjects. Music, in this case, falls under that medium, along with uniformity, overall quality, and, yes, male domination. I was in marching band for two years, attended numerous competitions and was a part of my high school marching band's family. Our uniforms, similar to the Trojan band members' uniforms, consisted of unisex shoes, pants, suspenders, cummerbunds, ruffles, jackets, and berets. The girls, however, had more instructions in addition to that. No makeup, jewelry, or bangs were allowed. Every girl had to tie back her hair into a tight bun and fold the beret over it.
Essentially, we all looked like the socially accepted form of a man. This was to foster uniformity, which indeed it did, but I always wondered: why did we have to look like a uniform gender? We were all wearing the same clothes and playing our respective instruments, marching "left, right, left, right" in step with each other, and blending together to create a unified sound. So where does the tension between man and woman stem from in marching band? I guess Derrida would have a complicated explanation about the attempt to come to a conclusion to my question, but all I have to say is this: No matter how much the world is in a progressive state, women are always going to be the ones who have to change their "image" to reach a uniform state. Which is funny, because isn't that what the uniform is for?
It would indeed be interesting if all members of the marching band had to feminize themselves to create uniformity. As you suggest, there is something problematic about equating masculinity with uniformity (or "neutral"). Derrida would be interested in exploring how and to what degree this uniformity collapses. What is so disruptive about femininity that it can't be considered uniform? This reminds me of "white noise," or noise that we welcome and that isn't disruptive. Why is it white?
ReplyDeleteI'm a tuba player in the Trojan Marching Band, so this post naturally jumped out at me.
ReplyDeleteYou're absolutely right in saying the TMB (and other bands) is encouraged to be more masculine. The football team and most of the student body see us as an extension of the football team, which is obviously a masculine entity, so that may be why we try to be masculine. The team is the Trojan warriors out to fight the opposition, and we dress to look like Trojan warriors in support of them. I suppose one of our main goals is to show the other schools that USC isn't to be messed with, and so much of what we do is driven by the desire to intimidate.
The masculine theme goes much deeper than just our uniforms, though. Most of our beliefs (I'd hate to say "propaganda") relate to war, which is historically tied to masculinity. We encourage the team to go out and "slaughter" the "enemy." We say other teams, and especially other bands, don't have the "nads" to play as "ballsy" as USC does. You're very right in saying we try to emit masculinity, but short of looking at our connection to the football team, it's hard to say exactly why it is this way. That's pretty much just how it's always been.