** Kittie's Essays & Musings

A History of British Burlesque

First Published (as edited version ‘The Real Burlesque’) : 8th July 2008 in Bizarre Magazine. Dennis Publishing.
Please be sure to credit Kittie Klaw and www.kittieklaw.com if referencing. Contact Kittie for permission to use.

‘TICKLE MY FANCY’
Traditional British Burlesque - Funny Ha-Ha or Funny Peculiar?

Amidst the renaissance of the showgirl-striptease, the art of traditional (or ‘classical’) burlesquing is in danger of becoming totally removed from it’s own genre. This article is an attempt to draw attention away from the fleeting frenzy of all things frilly; unravel the misconceptions and cast a spotlight upon the magnificence of what classical burlesquing really was – and still is.

Firstly, it must be understood that there is a problem with the ‘b word’ itself. The meaning is currently undergoing change and adaption according to current popular trends - but all too often ‘burlesque’ is merely a misplaced buzz word and, does no justice to the stars of then or now.

The term ‘burlesque’ literally means to ‘satarise, send up or make mockery of’ and it refers in theatrical terms, to a kind of ‘Spectacular Satire’ or a ‘high brow pantomime’. It does not by it’s nature, involve stripping of any kind. The lexical problem has come through an early 20th century marketing gimmick where the term was borrowed by the American adult industry and then glamorised over time.

The true story of classical burlesque in Britain is one of social commentary, taboo breaking and genuine female empowerment through the Arts. To fully appreciate the importance and significance of classical burlesquing in British entertainment, and why it is now so misunderstood, we must thoroughly examine it’s roots, it’s history and it’s misadventures in language and time.

‘To burlesque’, literally means to send-up, satirise or make mockery of. This has not changed. Burlesques are deliberate and purposeful send ups. They are devised, planned and written to affect change in opinion or provoke a reaction. They are performed to tease – to make fun of.  The form has migrated across the globe and advanced according to different social demands. In terms of a theatrical spectacle, it was the British theatre that reached it’s apogee during the 18^th and 19^th century. It’s resulting endurance and influence in popular culture both here and abroad has been as rich and puissant as Victoria’s Empire itself.

Largely unchanged in 500 years, the British tradition of burlesquing exemplifies the very essence of what makes British humour so peculiar to Brits. We laugh best when we are ‘not supposed to’.

So what is it about the British sense of humour that makes burlesque such a peculiarity? We rib, jest, pun and make fun given any opportunity. We are a nation of self-effacers and eye pokers with a repressed penchant for guilty pleasures.  It therefore comes as no surprise that we just love to dress up, act out and get bawdy - and the bigger the taboo, the bigger the laugh. British humour has always been bawdy and burlesque was certainly no different – in fact it seized the bawdy bullock by the hornies.

Myths and Misadventure

British burlesquing has a rich and impressive history but it is now subject to selective or even revised histories. Many of the misconceptions about this quintessential British form comes through a kind of retrospective prejudice from some, but through rose-tinted retro-spectacles on others.

Low Brow: Many assertions state that burlesque was ‘low brow’ or aimed at ‘low-brow’ audiences. But this is an odd conclusion given that burlesques were ‘spoofs’ of known operas and literary works, meaning that to get the jokes, the burlesque audiences would have had to be au fait with the originals. Furthermore, the evidence shows that burlesques of 18^th and early 19^th centuries were written by and performed for Middle Class audiences. Later, with the advancement of working class Music Halls, burlesques were performed there too.  It is often assumed that the working class audiences would not have understood anything beyond the low brow - and therefore the form itself must have aimed ‘low’.

Having always been a popular culture entertainment, born out of middle class writers, the form although full of double-entendre (and a nudge, nudge, wink, wink) did not necessarily contain anything of an adult-only nature. British burlesque was always performed by men and women alike and typically involved song, dance and physical comedy. Evolving from the pens of journalists, satirists and poets, burlesques were always considered witty, intellectual and high brow. They were in fact, supported by top Oxford scholars and critics. It was subversive, creative and boundary breaking - and it still is.

Sex Industry: The only links between the concept of ‘burlesque’ and the sex industry, is it’s application to American strip shows in the early 20^th century which bloomed during the Depression and lasted until the 1960s.  It appears that much of the glamorous image of this era is only visible through rose-tinted retro-spectacles. Evidence suggests that many of the women performing in these shows had no alternatives and were further involved in drugs and vice. Very few had the glamorous lifestyle we have come to think of in association with these dancers. What was performed in these clubs is a distinct style of it’s own and is probably best described as hybrid form of stripping and burlesque characterisation – ‘burlesque-striptease’.

Female Empowerment: According to cultural reinterpretation and continental drifts, current trends would have you believe that burlesque is about ‘female empowerment through sexual confidence’ - quite specifically. This assertion may be one of celebration and a wonderful thing in itself, but it certainly detracts from the actual point of burlesque. In burlesquing, a person is empowered - to express an idea. Ironically, classical burlesque with some historical peculiarity, seems to have been an industry in which the women, quite literally wore the trousers as will be shortly discussed.

British Burlesque – The Classical Tradition

In terms of what we mean by the British tradition of ‘classical burlesque theatre’, we are talking about a form which evolved out of a soupy cocktail of social politics, entrepreneurialism and a national obsession with puns where British burlesquing enjoyed it’s ‘golden era’ in the 18^th/19^th centuries.

Traditionally, a burlesque show was a cheeky satire of a known opera, play or historical event. It had a plot, a cast, a witty musical score, detailed historically accurate costumes, elaborate sets, clever dialogue - and a sharp point to it all. In a country where Italian operas and theatre plays were often a privilege for the few, it’s not hard to see why the Italian word for ‘mockery’ would at this time become an English turn of phrase in theatre and a verb meaning to ‘to mock (Italian opera)’. 

Bored of the sober-serious nature of operas, writers developed laugh-out-loud spoofs packed full of political puns and social shtick. So here, the ‘burlesque theatre’ was christened - in name and personality, subverting the need for respect and making a mockery of it’s deeply established roots. The audible yawns became roaring laughter. Burlesque was thus, a wayward offspring cut from the same cloth as it’s classical parent; but instead of following suit (pun intended), it turned on it’s heel and presented a well bred, delicately gloved middle finger to it’s critics and audiences alike.

It’s power to make bold political, religious and social commentary was also not overlooked. Considering that laughter is a reaction - not an emotion as many assume – we can appreciate that humour has always allowed us to explore even the most taboo of subjects. Therefore, the power to burlesque something is the power to have it frankly discussed - in public and as a spectacle. Wrapped in costume and characterised by theatre, a taboo is sugar-coated. It is a seductively provoking, eye-wateringly costumed, historically detailed display of an idea - an idea often disregarding of political correctness and coupled with musical ingenuity. All this, sprinkled with the incessant use of the immortal ‘pun’ makes up the backbone of the traditional British (or classical) burlesque.

The act of burlesquing is an act entirely based on caricature-characterisation, lampooning society trends and issues. Through it’s own history on stage, burlesque theatre has already transcended demographics and poked fun at everything and everyone with equal fervour.

Threading the Sequins Together

But where did it all begin? And where did it’s lexical misadventure begin? No doubt, for arguments sake, burlesquing originally began when the first man (probably a woman really) decided to take the pee-pee out of his cave-neighbour’s haircut by fashioning a dead stoat on his head and mincing around for the amusement of others, but flippant speculation aside, the British form has an exceptionally vast history which has transcended continents and centuries of cultural difference.

The form was first notably refined through the poetry of Hipponax of Ephesus in 6th Century and no doubt through many unsung others peculiar to their own loci and eras of influence. One could even argue that some religious doctrines are in fact burlesques of others. Besides, who ever said that God didn’t have a sense of dry irony? Perhaps one day a cult of Ironic Fundamentalism will sweep the globe?

Similarly as the Greeks, in Britain our fixation with poetic burlesquing can be seen in the 14th century verse and prose ‘The Canterbury Tales’ by Geoffrey Chaucer. In further understanding Britain’s bawdy burlesque backdrop, we need to examine where it began to take shape as a genre in it’s own right. The form took shape in the 18th century through caricaturists, satirists and the ‘burletta’ playwrights O’Hara and O’Keefe. The form gained popularity and distinct style in the 19th century through elaborate stage craft and high production values and as a result, it’s punchy attitude has endured in our arts, media and tabloid headlines ever since.

It was easily the late 18th and early 19th century burlesques of the great operas (i.e. Moncreiff’s ‘Giovanni in London’ - a burlesque of ‘Don Giovanni’) that started a cultural revolution of all singing and dancing, slapstick, gender-bending, toe-tapping Travesties.

It may surprise many female empowerment protagonists to learn that in burlesque, the real unsung heroes and heroines were undoubtedly found backstage as well as on stage. The pioneers of the old satirical form are truly inspirational. For example, in 1817, opera singer Eliza Vestris became arguably, the first burlesque star when she played Don Giovanni in Moncreiff’s famous burlesque. In 1831 Eliza also became the first woman in Britain to control her own theatre – one which she dedicated to burlesque (The Olympic Theatre, Wych Street).

In her employ, Eliza commissioned the best. She commissioned Mr. James Robinson Planché (a satirical writer for Punch magazine) to write burlesques for her theatre. Planché also pioneered the art of historical accuracy in costuming in British theatre and his wife too, went on to write shows for Eliza’s theatre.

Subverting the gender-roles and norms even further Madame Vestris continued to tread the boards herself, dressed as a ‘principal boy’ clad in figure-hugging ankle worthy breeches. Her legs are reputed to have inspired many poems and plaster replicas that gentleman could keep at home, although the casts stopped (for decency’s sake) ‘just above the knee’. So here we have Eliza - a star, a male impersonator, an entrepreneur, a producer, a manager and a woman. Now that’s ‘girl power’.

The early 19th century works (i.e. Planché’s ‘Olympic Revels’ and his ‘Baron Factotum - The Great Grand Lord Everything’) were also the inspiration behind much of the subsequent work of Gilbert and Sullivan. Burlesque therefore, is often regarded as the roots of Musical Theatre itself. Gilbert and Sullivan were practical jokers and damnable proud of their own burlesquing. For example, in ‘Iolanthe’, Queen Victoria is cheekily portrayed as the Queen of Fairies chasing after her magical lover (John Brown).

In the 1860s, British burlesque star, Lydia Thompson took burlesque to the USA and landed in favour with the wealthy New York set – those equivalent to the British middle class. Having exhausted her stardom in Britain (and having tired of the European continent), she had set sail for the USA with an all girl troupe known as the ‘British Blondes’. Legend has it, however, that none of these women were actually blond and so became the first peroxide blondes. Lydia and co adapted the jokes for American trends and enjoyed rave success with their shows including their Greek style burlesque of ‘Ixion’ in which, like their contemporaries back home, they ‘quite incidentally’ displayed their shapely curves by cross dressing in scanty boyish attire.

As the first to introduce burlesque to America, Lydia and co were intrepid adventurers, but their form was short lived. As is the case with most British comedy exports, the satire was largely lost in translation and here the genre developed a rather wayward and more provocative sister genre.

Aside on the US Burlesque Story: Over time and continental drift, American burlesque evolved to take on a more risqué focus, eventually becoming a new and distinct form altogether, one which was unwelcome in theatreland and even the Vaudeville circuit. In the early 20th Century, the term ‘burlesque’ was adopted by the US adult-industry to refer to the comic revues in which the strippers would perform. Borrowing from the style of burlesquers, the strippers adopted ‘gimmicks’ or stock characters and often included comedic skits or repartee in their routines. Thus, the ‘burlesque-striptease’ was born. It is a hybrid of burlesque and strip-tease and the purpose built shows were notoriously linked with Mafia drugs and vice, where many women saw no alternative and only the very few actually enjoyed a glamorous lifestyle. Here in the USA, the word ‘burlesque’ had ceased being a term used in the theatre industry and was seen as a euphemism for strip-shows.

Looking back at the British history, it’s also important to point out that although a showbiz star and a trailblazer in many respects, Lydia eventually came back to the UK penniless and died a pauper in 1908. She now lies, 100 years on in a forgotten, unmarked grave in Kensal Green, London.

During the mid 19th Century, entertainment in Britain was becoming more accessible to people of the poorer social classes and it appeared in the form of the ‘free and easy’ - or ‘music rooms’. These rooms were where pub patrons could each take a ‘turn’ and entertain one another after a few drinks. In order to capitalise on the popularity of this new social escapism and to circumnavigate the licensing laws, proprietors designed and commissioned purpose built theatres for the drinking masses of the working classes - The Music Halls. These halls provided everything – affordable booze, orchestra and a theatre show (with one notorious Hall in Glasgow stretching the limits of science by also cramming in a wax-works, a freak-show and an exotic zoo, no less!).

In these new establishments, the burlesque acts found a new source of work and their craft evolved to fit the variety bills of the Music Halls as well as the theatre shows. Instead of full length stage shows, the acts became akin to short characterised sketches and ‘turns’ with each designed to subvert the establishment, cause breeches of the peace (pun intended) and to send up the toffs. Much to the applause of their new socially repressed audiences.

Of course, where there is a party there must be a pooper.

The more hilarity the acts provoked, the more upset the moral authorities became.  Anything so arousing or titillating was deemed improper – especially when coupled with a cross-dressing cast of women in tights. Declaring acts as “the very suburbs of hell itself” the self appointed ‘Vigilance Society’ who, in fear of public moral health, sought to shut down the Music Halls. But, despite their efforts, the entertainer’s power to influence ensured the place\of burlesque and bawdy variety in the next century where another trailblazer took a leap forward in social history.

Here is where Edwardian favourite, Vesta Tilley (another ‘boy’ impersonator) made another first – she went on to perform by Royal Command in 1912. Famous for her songs, her attitude and her artistic credibility where she actually padded her curves to appear more manly in order to achieve believable male characters, Vesta has remained a symbol of female independence ever since.

Moving beyond the musical halls and theatre, British burlesque was still going from strength to strength in the early 20^th century. From the 1920s to 1950s, the Western Brothers entertained as mock ‘cads’ and aristocratic ‘silly asses’ to huge appeal. They were a lyrically sophisticated burlesque duo who specifically lampooned the upper classes. They were so successful that by 1937 they were BBC Radio stars and in 1953, they were in fact the faces used to ‘usher in the era of television’. Ironically, it was TV that killed their career.

Curtains?

The decline of burlesque in Britian is a curious story. The physical theatrical form played victim to the same events as all other kinds of live entertainment. At the dawn of WWI and then WWII, many of the halls and theatres closed with many being requisitioned for home-front purposes and were never re-opened. At the same time, the invention of and rise in popularity of early cinema, saw preference for the new comfortable and inexpensive movie theatres over the cramped halls and bills of the Music Halls. Gradually, the remaining halls closed.

However, the actual death of burlesque’ is merely a macabre myth. It didn’t depart, but it did channel a new medium (pun intended). It lived on and still lives today. Looking at British entertainment, we can see that burlesque has always been at the forefront of cutting edge comedy and how it easily adapted to accommodate the changing times and new mediums of show-business – i.e. film and television.

For over fifty years now, the TV sketch show has often been host to burlesques. When the variety theatres closed, we started tuning in to comedy shows like ‘Morecambe and Wise’ (who in my opinion do the best burlesque routine to David Rose’s ‘The Stripper’!).

Archetypal British comedy films are based on burlesque principals. Think ‘Carry On’. Think ‘Monty Python’. They are caricature based send ups full of puns, silly songs, innuendo and exiguous costumes which ‘right on cue’ would burst off setting us up for well timed bawdy gags, knob jokes and bosoms a plenty.

In fact, according to numerous independent polls, Monty Python’s ‘The Life of Brian’ has been voted the funniest film ever made. This is quite a finding because it proves the endurance of the burlesque form.  This film is arguably the pinnacle of a Western culture burlesque – it is a bawdy satire of the life of Jesus Christ.  Thanks to Eric Idle, it even comes complete with it’s own iconic, ironic theme song - and no doubt holy ring tone.

The acts are too numerous to mention but 1980s comedienne, Pamela Stephenson surely deserves a mention for her celebrity spoofs. Most recently we can see the craft of burlesquing in the award winning antics of master character actor, Sasha Baron-Cohen as ‘Ali G’ and ‘Borat’, all be it with less of a musical focus. Think too of comedy duo Mitchell and Webb in their razor sharp sketches and similarly (and with musical effect) impressionist comedian, Peter Serafinowicz.  Even every sketch in Little Britain is an elaborate caricature, satire-based send up of some aspect of Modern Britain.

In each case the performers are, like their forerunners, invoking satire, parody and humour and using the devices of costume, caricature, wordplay and music according to their styles of delivery.

Beyond the Breeches of Time  

Since it’s not-so humble beginnings in British theatre, the form has been subject to much cultural reinterpretation in different countries, across centuries and continents but yet it still permeates our culture today as always has done.

In addition to those few classical burlesque performers today who perform across the live cabaret, burlesque-striptease and comedy circuits, we have more and more west end theatre also taking stock of both the classic and reinterpreted burlesque forms. True to it’s roots, the new musical ‘Spamalot’ (based on Monty Python’s ‘Holy Grail’) rightly declares itself ‘a buoyant burlesque of musical cliché’.  And so the theatrical tradition clearly lives on in the modern era of television.

The form is alive and well but it is also now experiencing a ‘circle of life’ moment. The exportation of burlesquing to America in the 1860s meant that it was to be re-interpreted and eventually brought back over as new form – and it has. We must be careful to celebrate but not confuse the two.

In stating that one is a Traditional British or Classical Burlesque performer, one is implying that she or he is torch bearer for the ‘Power of Bygone Breeches’ – a specific craft with an important past.

As with every generation, the form is undergoing yet further advances in both medium and influence from multi-cultural material to internet sharing – and 21st century burlesque has more power than ever. At ministryofburlesque.com, we aim to bring everyone together to learn about and appreciate each other’s ideas and expressions whilst nurture new generation of burlesquers for an ongoing craft.

So, is Burlesque Funny Ha Ha or Funny Peculiar? I’d wager it’s both. It’s funny by it’s very action but it’s also peculiar to each and every one of us in our own funny ways.

 ”Together We Can Can”