The Production and Consumption of Glamour

In a new article (pdf) recently published in MUDOT – the Magazine for Urban Documentation, Opinion and Theory – I describe the concept of glamour as an idealized “working aesthetic” that is produced and consumed in urban space. I do so through an analysis of the many glamours of Los Angeles.

The article begins by questioning the (mis)assumption that LA is "just glamour," defined by Hollywood or somehow more culturally insubstantial than other major cities, but then looks closely at the important role that glamour does play in urban development.

'For Gundle and Castelli (2006: 151), “In all the great cities, it was the rich, the aristocrats of money, who shone most brightly.” Yet in Los Angeles, rather than the poor looking in from the streets at brightly lit shops and amusements, it is the rich who look down from their dark and isolated canyon homes on the billions of lights of the teaming city of the poor.'

In Part I, "Glamour in History and in Hollywood," I build from historical and critical work by Hortense Powdermaker (1950), Ronald Davis (1993), Gundle & Castelli (2006) and others, using the social and spatial history of Hollywood itself as a model for understanding the different phases that the concept and actualization of glamour have gone through in L.A.

'Downtown became a center not only of financial wealth, but glamorous entertainment and culture, and sparkling architectural landmarks hosting museums and performing arts. The allure of urbanity and bohemia stretched into Downtown too, as well as the hipster meccas of Echo Park and other ‘Eastside’ neighborhoods to the northeast. And in Hollywood, a massive revitalization effort saw a decline in vice and the Disneyfication of the area’s glamorous landmarks, culminating with the massive Hollywood and Highland development, an architectural ode to Hollywood glamour, mass transit, and rampant consumption all at once.'

Part 2, "The Many Glamours of the Postmetropolis," then looks at the ways that the idea and the aesthetics of different types of glamour are actively produced and consumed as part of the city's culture, politics, architecture, and industry. I propose three ideal-typical categories of glamour as heuristics: the "Status as Glamour" of Bunker Hill, fine art, and wealth, the "Glitz as Glamour" of Hollywood plasticity, cars, and showbiz, and (à la Richard Lloyd) the "Grit as Glamour" of Eastside gentrification and downtown art scenes.

'The many diverse glamours to be found in Los Angeles today: from the film industry to finance, the allure of haute cuisine to the chrome of Latino car culture, the manufactured spectacle of absurdist architecture to the hippest loft conversion.'

It is clear that to even begin to fully appreciate the role of glamour in 21st Century Los Angeles, as both cultural meme and economic engine, one must look well beyond Hollywood and the traditional power structures that shaped the city during the 20th.

To take another example discussed in the paper, while Latinos were historically "hardly thought to be the height of glamour" in Hollywood (Wood, 2002), the real glamour of Latino L.A. is found in the varied popular aesthetics of this diverse group, from quinceañera celebrations and the spiritual iconography (drawn from Catholicism and Chicano legend alike) visible in votive candles and artwork, to contemporary fashion, murals, performance spectacles, and of course cars. (What could be more glamorous than sexy, attention-grabbing low-riders souped up with loud ‘cherry bomb’ mufflers and dramatic paint jobs?) And one cannot forget the role played by thousands of Latinos in the physical production of glamor commodities, from garment manufacturing and entertainment-related service work to performance, design, production etc. in the culture industries.

'The potential is staggering for different cultural conceptions of glamour. In a city as diverse and disconnected as Los Angeles today, we should not expect to find anything less than hundreds of definitions.'

I focus not only on how these different glamours play with cultural identities and the urban landscape, but how they are integrally tied to the production of capital and scenes of consumption.

I demonstrate throughout how culture becomes commodity in the city. The three ideal-typical glamours, and their physical manifestations in the city, are valuable tools for understanding this potentially powerful concept, and all suggest the direct link betweenglamour and consumption. Whether seeing the philharmonic or a Lakers game, coming home from a punk show to a newly-converted loft, or going to see a movie at the Chinese Theater (or a theater in China), glamour is commoditized.

“Any theory of glamour,” write Gundle and Castelli (2006: 8-9), “would have to take account of its imaginative appeal, seductiveness and artificiality. It would also need to refer to persistent class divisions, the alienation of modern capitalism and the frustrations of consumer culture.” But, as Paul Willis (1990: 21) explains, “human consumption does not simply repeat the relations of production – and whatever cynical motives lie behind them. Interpretation, symbolic action and creativity are part of consumption.” Perhaps it is this aspect of glamour production and consumption that really makes L.A. so glamorous today.

To read the full article (including references for citations above), visit http://www.monu.org/mudot2/GDG_whatis.pdf. Douglas, Gordon C. C. "What is Glamour? The Production & Consumption of a Working Aesthetic," MU-DOT: the Magazine for Urban Documentation Opinion and Theory, no. 2, Aug. 2009. 44-63