Jo answered a question I had rolling around in my head since having read Horrible Prettiness by Robert Allen, and I'm a little chagrined not to have thought of it myself. I was having a bit of existential crisis to a degree about the burlesque of old and the burlesque of the Golden Age, and how much admiration we should have for it given that it had become marginalized by society. So Jo points out (pg. 227):
During an interview I did with Robert C. Allen, he said, and I agreed, that celebrating the women who performed during the golden age of burlesque and were sexualized serves an important function. The comedians and variety performers, mostly male, were able to move on to careers outside of burlesque, and many became hugely successful in radio, television, and film. The female dances and striptease artists, however, were largely ignored or left behind, and with rare exceptions like Gypsy Rose Lee were essentially unable to achieve any kind of recognition other than notoriety that faded quickly into obscurity. We are recognizing what they had to offer, not honoring their era of oppression. The fact that they were oppressed is the very reason we want to show how talented they were and how unique and valuable their art form was.So perhaps I was getting a little lost and couldn't see the forest for the trees, or vice-versa, perhaps. There were amazing performers and women in burlesque, we can certainly recognize their talent and celebrate their talent, and marvel at their stories. Maybe they didn't have the impact on society that the predecessors did, but they still worked hard for what they loved to do.
