Celeste Oon - Core Response #4

I was intrigued by Sweeney’s discussion of Elvis fandom as containing quasi-religious and ‘cult’-like practices. Sweeney states that “[t]he veneration of Elvis includes elements of Southern Pentecostal and ecstatic religious practices, as well as the collecting of relics… the display of icons and images… pilgrimages to Elvis sites… and the special phenomenon of Elvis impersonation” (p. 261). Of course, this is not unique to Elvis fandom (nor is it unique to Pentecostalism or Christianity), as many types of global fandoms engage with these practices, and fandom studies has long explored the connections between fandom and religion. (See: pop idol worship, anime pilgrimage, etc.) As a side note, if this is of interest to anyone, I would recommend looking into literature about fandom and Islam—fascinating cases about how people negotiate their religious selves and fan selves.

Returning to Elvis, I was contemplating the prevalence of Elvis impersonation. (Which is also popular in relation to other megastars such as Michael Jackson, Marilyn Monroe, etc.) What are people trying to invoke when they impersonate Elvis, besides the man as an idiosyncratic individual? What types of ideas are they trying to communicate, if any? I suppose what I am attempting to work out is whether the practice is entirely about channeling Elvis’ persona and stardom (which is what I believed prior to reading this chapter), or if it further involves evoking the larger ideas that he was associated with. Sweeney says that “Elvis is variously described by his biographers, critics, and fans as poor white, country boy, hillbilly, redneck, good ole boy” (p. 251). If Elvis is the epitome of White Trash Culture, is the impersonation of his character also an embodiment of White Trash? Is it a continued reclamation of White Trash, a celebration of it? Or, have we perhaps been distanced from these ideas over time, so that his legacy is stored in his actions, speech, and gestures as they stand, isolated from their significance within the sociocultural context he lived in?

I come to these questions because some of my own research deals with tourism and the ways in which fans evoke specific memories, ideas, and affective ties when they travel and embody people or characters who have been there before. The practice of dressing as someone, posing in the same way they do, and parroting their phrases and gestures is often about more than physically replicating their presence out of love—it is about re-remembering their own feelings about the object, strengthening their own subjective memories that they associate with it. Though I have never met an Elvis impersonator before, I would assume that most of them are fans or supporters (even casually) of Elvis, and engaging in impersonation is one way they express their fanhood. It may get more complicated, however, in considering their temporal relationship to him. How many of these impersonators were actually alive during Elvis’ peak and overall fame, before his death in 1977? Though 1977 was not too long ago in the grand scheme of things, and there are certainly older Elvis impersonators who were able to witness the man’s charm in real time, there are also plenty of younger impersonators who did not. Thus, these younger impersonators are evoking a particular cultural memory of Elvis, from a time that they themselves have not experienced. Through the process of embodiment, they have the ability to move through temporalities.

Circling back to the core of Sweeney’s chapter, I am left wondering about the weight of White Trash culture in Elvis’ star image today. The chapter cites Elvis and Dolly Parton as prime examples of White Trash, and though this may have been the dominant discourse during their peaks—and likely continues to be for those who are truly knowledgeable about their stardom—this seems to have been lost among the general understanding of their character. I admit my assessment could be in part from my own ignorance of their stardom, but as an example, Dolly’s general reception on social media centers on her being a kind, humble Southern woman, though this does not carry the same class connotations as White Trash. And Elvis’ image is often about his charm, as Doss mentions. I feel as if perhaps Elvis and Dolly’s star powers outshined their circumstances; they ascended into stardom despite their ‘trashiness.’ And although this does not mean that they have disowned the title entirely—as evidenced by Dolly and many other country artists’ reclamation of the term—it does bring to light the tricky relations between race and class, made especially interesting by the condition of whiteness.