Advertisement

Ellen Degenarrated: Breaking the Heteronormative Narrative Contract

  • Dirk Schulz

Abstract

‘You’re about to watch adult content. Discretion is advised.’ This warning, accompanied by an extradiegetic voice-over, preceded several episodes of the final season of Ellen, a sitcom which until that point had been a mainstream international hit. How did one of the most successful American TV series get to the point of needing to overtly ‘warn’ its audience about its content? How did Ellen (DeGeneres) become so degenerated, or rather degenarrated? The recent popularity and growing number of gay and lesbian characters on television has led to the widespread assumption that the love that once dared not speak its name can now finally be narrated and celebrated on screen. However, if one looks at the narrative conventions by which the issue of homosexuality is presented, it becomes evident that this seeming liberation might be only a new strategic disguise for preventing and excluding the subversive potential of gender and sexual confusion, thereby affirming a heteronormative value system. To illustrate this, I will focus on a TV series that was accompanied by an enormous tabloid frenzy and public outcry, first and foremost in its country of origin, the United States.

Keywords

Hotel Room Semantic Field Public Outcry Ellen DeGeneres Story World 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bal, M. (1985) Narratology. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bordwell, D. (1985) Narration in the Fiction Film. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brooks, P. (1984) Reading for the Plot. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. ——(1991) ‘Imitation and Gender Insubordination’. In D. Fuss (ed.), inside/out: Lesbian Theories, Gay Theories. New York: Routledge, 13–32.Google Scholar
  6. ——(1993) Bodies That Matter. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. DeGeneres, E. (1998) Interview with Larry King. Larry King Live. CNN, 12 May 1998.Google Scholar
  8. De Lauretis, T. (1984) Alice Doesn’t: Feminism, Semiotics, Cinema. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Derrida, J. (1988) ‘The Purveyor of Truth’. In J. P. Muller and W. J. Richardson (eds), The Purloined Poe: Lacan, Derrida, and Psychoanalytic Reading. Baltimore/ London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 173–213.Google Scholar
  10. Edelmann, L. (1993) Homographesis: Essays in Gay Literature and Cultural Theory. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Gore, A. (1997) ‘Interview with The Hollywood Radio and Television Society’. 16 October 1997.Google Scholar
  12. Lotman, J. (1977) The Structure of the Artistic Text. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  13. ——(1990) Universe of the Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Sedgwick, E. K. (1990) Epistemology of the Closet. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  15. Walker, C. (2000) ‘A Funny Business: Producing Situation Comedy’. In E. Voigts-Virchow (ed.), Mediated Drama, Dramatized Media. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, 95–100.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dirk Schulz 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dirk Schulz

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations