mattbaume patreon

Bonus Vid! The incredible bravery of The Real World's Norman Korpi

🕑 Added 2025-01-12 17:00:13 +0000 UTC

Comments

Trevor MacIsaac

I was barely a pre-teen in 1992, so I don't have much first hand perspective of what Queer media was at that time. However, as I came of age in the mid to late 90s, I can say that any Queer representation I saw was an "event" because it seemed so few and far between, positive representation seemed rarer still, and representation geared towards young people was practically non-existent. There were definitely out Queer people around, as well as docs and movies if you knew where to look, but in the pre- mass internet age, I would hazard to say that many of us didn't know where to seek it out. I guess that's why examples like Norm would stand out. This was a very widely seen show, marketed specifically to a younger audience, and there was Norm, living an openly Queer life. If I had seen that as a young teen, that really would have been something. Also, I think that Herzog was referring as losers to other directors who were adhering to the "fly on a wall" method of documentary filming. Herzog seemed to be suggesting that can't really exist, so he just says fuck it, and doesn't hesitate to prod his subjects into giving him the exact sequences he wants for his films.

jarabaa

You're very kind to Norm and all the others. But don't skew the historical perspective. We're talking about the early 90s via your understandably positive assessment of Norm's "incredible bravery" in 1992. There were plenty of LGBT people leading out, publicly visible lives long before then. Speaking for myself, familiar with both London and New York at the time (going back to the late 70s), I don't recall it as being an exceptionally "dangerous" era. And there were plenty of documentary representations of queer lives long before Norm in The Real World in 1992. Just think of the 26 people who spoke to camera in Word Is Out in the late 70s. And you yourself mention Lance Loud, whose celluloid outness was even earlier. So of course I know that the Matt Baume "grasp of historical perspective" is vastly more skilled and comprehensive than my own awareness of such things. That's why you are so creative and knowledgeable, and I remain but a humble and admiring consumer. Still, I sort of sensed your enthusiasm for old Norm gets the better of you here. Just a little bit. But where it's very welcome and apposite is in your tender and sympathetic handling of the tough times which Norm has had to contend with more recently and which he chose, indeed bravely, to be open about on the screen. So many of us, in all walks of life, have been pole-axed by debt, the cost of living, elder care responsibilities, by The Pandemic, obviously - and by afflictions such as severe back pain. Thank you, Matt, and thank you, Norm, for dismissing the terrorism of "celebrity" glitz and letting us have a glimpse in the 2020s of ... the real world. (PS. So what on earth does Werner Herzog mean by "losers"? Sorry, that did not sit well with me. Who's he talking to, referring to? Matt, please explain 😊)

Trevor MacIsaac

Hey Matt. I'm glad that you're getting good results from the treatment for your back issues. I know from personal experience how rocky the road to recovery from back issues can be, so it's good to hear that your path might be getting somewhat smoother. I had never heard about Norm before, so it was great hearing a bit of his story. It definitely does put a spotlight on the larger Queer's community's historical bigotry against bisexuals and bisexuality (even though that's doesn't seem to be how Norm himself ever really identified). I know from my own experience that there has been a historical distrust there, an idea that bisexuals are just gay people who have not fully jumped over the fence yet, or who are gay people who are trying to cling to a vestige of heterosexuality. I think it's predicated on the fact that in my generation of gay men, a lot of them did first come out as bisexual first, as a "first step" in their coming out process, so I suppose it's easy for a lot of them to see it as a "phase" instead of an actual sexuality. Today though, I don't see those same attitudes as prevalent. There are a lot more high profile people who are comfortable in, and open about, their bisexuality, and there's very visible characters who are open too, like in Heartstopper. Also, I think today that the higher profile of bisexuality gives more credence to the Ideas of fluidity in sexuality in general, leaving it open for people, old and young, to be more open to attractions to/from people of all or no genders. In short, I think that the greater acceptance of bi and pansexuality from people within and outside the queer community opens up the definitions of where love can be found for all of us, and how can that not be a good thing?