By Jacob Hogue
Special to NKyTribune
The debates currently being waged over drag performances have reached legislatures in every corner of the country. The belief that undergirds the proposed legislation against drag performers — and what has served as an impetus to the increasing number of armed right-wing protests and threats against events featuring them — is that we have gone too far too quickly in regard to LGBTQ liberation. Opponents of drag queens cite Drag Queen Story Time events and family-friendly Drag Brunches as further proof that the America that they once knew is gone.
History proves otherwise. Drag queens have been here since the beginning of entertainment in America. They have always had a precarious place in American entertainment and culture, existing somewhere between the spotlight and the shadow; between hatred and admiration; between clown and beauty queen. The realm of female impersonation has, for a myriad of reasons, attracted people that we would now refer to as LGBTQ+. This is as true in the days of Shakespeare in England as it is today. Throughout history, drag performers have evolved to struggle against misunderstanding.
Female impersonation became prominent in minstrel shows in the United States when George Christy’s Minstrels introduced his “Miss Lucy Long” character to the American public in the mid-19th century (“George Christy,” Cincinnati Enquirer, May 12, 1858). Christy performed at the Wood’s Theater, Smith and Nixon Hall, and Pike’s Opera House in Cincinnati in 1859 and 1860 (“Amusements,” Cincinnati Daily Press, April 29, 1859; “Amusements,” Cincinnati Daily Press, April 12, 1860). Female impersonation, like much of American entertainment at that time, was deeply reliant on explicit racism and was performed in blackface. From the outset, avenues of alternative gender expression (that attracted white homosexuals and gender variant persons) not only excluded African Americans but served to reinforce degrading stereotypes about them.
While some female impersonators continued the blackface tradition well into the 20th Century, the emergence of other artists — such as Patrick Francis Glassey (known by his stage name Only Leon) — marked the beginning of the “primadonna character” in the realm of female impersonation (Ken Padget, “Blackface!” Blackface! – Minstrel Show Female Impersonators. Accessed June 20, 2023. www.black-face.com/minstrel-female-impersonators). While Only Leon also certainly performed blackface, his white-face primadonna character would serve as the foundation from which modern female impersonation was born. This character was vain, obsessed with elaborate makeup and clothing and was over-the-top in every way. Whereas female impersonators had not been the focal point of the act in the early years of minstrelsy, they were now the principal feature of it.
By the time he visited Cincinnati in the late 19th Century, Only Leon had formed his own troupe with his lover, Edwin Kelly, and was already one of the most recognizable people in entertainment (“Only Leon,” Cincinnati Daily Star, April 10, 1877). The couple faced frequent harassment for their relationship despite Leon’s success (Michail Takach, “Francis Leon.” Francis Leon — people in the history of Gay & Lesbian Life, Milwaukee WI. Accessed June 20, 2023,wislgbthistory.com/people/peo-l/leon_francis). The Cincinnati Enquirer alleged that Only Leon made $12,000 weekly in July of 1881 – a staggering, and perhaps inflated sum; but the fact remains that the highest paid minstrel performer of the 19th century was an effeminate man who we would likely refer to as a homosexual if he were alive today (“Haverly’s Mastadons,” Cincinnati Enquirer, July 18, 1881). Only Leon was so feminine that the San Francisco Examiner published an article (which was reprinted in the Cincinnati Enquirer) that said that he “looked so much like a beautiful girl of an uncertain age that he seemed almost out of place in male attire” (“Only Leon,” San Francisco Examiner, February 10, 1889. Reprinted by the Cincinnati Enquirer, February 17, 1889).
Only Leon would inspire scores of other “primadonna” characters in Cincinnati such as William Smith, also known as The Great Roselle, who began their career as a female impersonator at the age of 16. As early as 1870, The Great Roselle entertained crowds in Cincinnati with groups such as the Maysville Kentucky Mcintyre and Heath and other minstrel and theatrical groups for close to a quarter of a century (W. Condee, 2005. Coal and culture. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press). The Great Roselle was alive to see the realm of female impersonation beginning to increasingly become conflated with homosexuality, as sexologists’ findings began to surface in the late 19th Century. This created a precarious situation for the city’s female impersonators who were appearing nightly in a plethora of entertainment venues in Cincinnati — from the seediest concert halls to the most well-respected theaters.
Concert Halls in Cincinnati’s Over-The-Rhine neighborhood featured female impersonators nightly from the 1870s until the end of the Century. There were more drag queens on Vine Street alone than there are today. Drag performers at that time had to sing, dance, act, improvise, and be comedians. Some of the most popular (and convincing) of these entertainers were Pete Shaw, J. Arthur Doty, and a duo of serio-comic singers by the name of Carroll & Lewis whose performances attracted the ire of both moral reformers and police in Cincinnati (“Richard Harlowe,” Cincinnati Post, February 20, 1897). Beginning in the late 1870s, moral reformers in Cincinnati launched attacks on the indecency of female impersonators and were ultimately successful in swaying public opinion to the extent that police in Cincinnati began to raid establishments that featured them. Even when they did not raid these venues, police were frequently present to make sure that the acts did not get out of hand or descend into something considered improper. The only female impersonators who were safe from raids were the ones who performed in the city’s more respectable theaters, such as Richard Harlowe, who performed to widely mixed reviews as Queen Isabella in a production entitled 1492 at Pike’s Opera House in the 1890s (“Must Be Good,” Cincinnati Enquirer, October 08, 1893).
By the early 20th Century, perceptions about homosexuality were no longer possible to ignore. For female impersonators, it was time to evolve yet again. The successful female impersonators of the 20th Century prospered to the extent that they could convey a public image of masculinity and heteronormativity in the press. No one worked harder to foster such a reputation than Julian Eltinge, who is largely considered the greatest and most popular female impersonator of all time.
Eltinge began his career at the age of 10-years-old and, by 1904, was a Vaudeville headliner without an equal. In fact, Eltinge was a bigger draw than Charlie Chaplin himself and won the distinction of being the highest paid actor of the early 20th Century.
Newspapers in Cincinnati raved about Eltinge when he performed at the Orpheum Theater on Fifth Street in 1910. While Eltinge’s cleverness of character and broad range of acting and singing abilities propelled him to an unprecedented (even to this day) level of fame, it was the actions taken by Eltinge, and his press agent, off the stage that truly protected his career.
Eltinge and his press agent worked very hard to foster an aura of masculinity in the press: he smoked cigars, got into bar fights, and lifted weights. When he visited Cincinnati, famed cartoonist Windsor McCoy illustrated Eltinge, showcasing both his artistry as a female impersonator, and his manly interests in baseball. Also while in Cincinnati in 1910, Eltinge arranged a fake exhibition boxing match where he “vanquished” former Heavyweight Boxer “Gentleman” Jim Corbett at Windsor McCoy’s Pen and Pencil Club. Eltinge, who the Cincinnati Enquirer called “a manly man,” was doing what he had to survive and his methods of “blending in” were used by many female impersonators who came after him, including a very unlikely character in Cincinnati history.
Four and a half decades before he became Mayor of Cincinnati, Charlie Taft II attended his Uncle Horace Taft’s all-boys school in Watertown Connecticut. Newspapers across the country were fascinated by President William Howard Taft’s heir, who was often praised as a smart, capable, athletic and fearlessly adventurous teenage boy. In 1908, he was dubbed “An All American Boy” by the Washington Times (“A Real American Boy,” Washington Times, July 25, 1908). A year later, as a boy of just 10-years-old, Charlie was praised for “not being a percy boy” by the Minneapolis Star Tribune, and for being a “vigorous and robust specimen of American youth” by The News Tribune in Tacoma Washington (“Taft On a Vacation,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, September 27, 1908; “Charlie Taft Sorry to Displease Quentin,” Tacoma Washington News Tribune, June 30, 1908). The press followed young Charlie’s every move and, if the reports are to be believed, he was a remarkable young lad. What history books won’t tell you is that he also made a remarkable young woman.
Julian Eltinge at Orpheum,” Cincinnati Post, February 21, 1910.
At the same time that the Raymond Review in Nebraska published an article entitled, ““Young Charlie Taft: New White House Boy Is Manly Lad,” Charlie Taft was rehearsing for what was originally reported as “one of the principal roles” in a local talent play called The Private Secretary (“Young Charlie Taft: New White House Boy Is Manly Lad,” Raymond Nebraska Review, April 17, 1909; “Charlie Taft To Have Role In Local Talent Play,” Buffalo Commercial, March 24, 1909). The Review article, which makes no mention of Charlie’s upcoming stage debut in less than a week, is entirely devoted to reporting on the manliness of Taft. “It is more than possible,” the author suggests, “that something of the manliness is due to that free rein within reasonable limits, which the new president and Mrs. Taft have always allowed for the development of individuality in each of their children” (“Young Charlie Taft: New White House Boy Is Manly Lad,” Raymond Nebraska Review, April 17, 1909).
That individuality would be on display in late April and early May of 1909 when the 11-year-old Taft “surprised his most intimate friends” by donning a brown wig and afternoon gown to perform his role as Eva Webster at Watertown Hall. Charlie apparently did quite well in his performance, “winning applause from the crowd as he capers in skirts,” but it is important to note how little coverage this received from mainstream newspapers (“Charlie Taft in Skirt and Wig,” New York Tribune, May 03, 1909; “President’s Son in Female Role,” Washington Times, May 02, 1909). In fact, newspapers, especially in Cincinnati, reported on Charlie wearing long pants to the White House for the first time on his Winter break from school, significantly more than his wearing skirts a few months prior (“Charlie Taft now Wants Large Pants,” Independence [Kansas] Daily Reporter, December 28, 1909). The trend of newspapers emphasizing the manliness of Charlie continued into the year when Bantamweight boxer Jimmie Walsh was asked to train Charlie in “the manly art” (“Walsh Will Show Charlie Taft Just How To Handle His Dukes,” Seattle Star, October 12, 1909). The trend increased even more in 1910 when Charlie pursued the art of female impersonation yet again.
In February of 1910, the Drama Association at the Taft School put on a play by Arthur Wing Pinero entitled The Amazons which centered around three young girls of the aristocracy who were raised as boys by their father. Charlie Taft played the part of Lady Thomason Bettertet at least two different times that year. At a time when newspapers across the country reported on Taft’s participation in even the most mundane tasks, the news that the son of a sitting president was donning skirts for a theatrical production was suspiciously only reported about a handful of times that year. The reports that can be found stated that he did “splendidly in rehearsal” for the role and “made a great girl indeed,” but the most sensational article about the performance read, “Charles Taft, son of President Taft, who is anything but effeminate as a boy, is to appear as a girl impersonator at a dramatic entertainment given at his school in Watertown Connecticut” (“Charlie did “spendidly” in the first rehearsal of the Amazons at water town town hall,” Boston Globe, February 19, 1910; “Charlie Taft is a Female Impersonator but is Anything but Effeminate,” Chattanooga News, February 25, 1910).
William Howard Taft, who exemplified manhood and Republicanism, must have felt something about his son dressing up as a woman while at a school run by his brother, even if the school were all-boys, and hence, may not have permitted female performers. Is that why newspapers focused so much on his son’s other interests? Whether it was due to “the help of friendly newspaper men,” no one will ever likely know why this has received such little coverage in Cincinnati and the rest of the country (“Charlie Taft is finding it no easy task to live up to the pace set by the Roosevelt boys, but with the help of kindly newspaper men he will doubtless get into the list of juvenile wonders,” Des Moines Tribune, July 17, 1909). Regardless, the story of the son of a United States President performing in female roles while his father was in office should inform the contemporary debate being waged over drag performances.
The arguments being used against drag performers are predicated on a revisionist history that reduces the mainstream culture’s acceptance of drag to the last few decades. If someone tries to tell you that drag is somehow new, tell them that there were more female impersonators performing on Vine Street in the late 19th Century than there are today. If someone tries to tell you drag is unAmerican, tell them that the son of a United States president performed in drag twice while his father was in office. Or tell them that Drag queens in the military performed for the troops during both world wars and for world war veterans in hospitals after both conflicts. If you encounter someone who says that drag is inappropriate for children, tell them that Julian Eltinge was considered family entertainment as he sold out theaters in Cincinnati or that the Kentucky Post in Covington had a female impersonation contest for children in 1926. Drag is as American as baseball or apple pie but is also interwoven into the fabric of queer liberation. Drag queens helped propel the international LGBTQ movement to new heights. It is our turn to respect that forgotten history.
Jacob Hogue is a graduate student in Public History at Northern Kentucky University. He serves on the Board of Directors at Urbanist Media, a non-profit organization focused on uplifting marginalized voices and preserving the places significant to them. In addition, Jacob is a contributor to Queens of Queen City, a website devoted to uncovering significant women and queer people from Cincinnati’s past, and is the founder of the popular Instagram account: Queen_City_Queer_History. Jacob is on cast as a speaker with Stand Up History and is currently under contract to write his debut book: Cincinnati Before Stonewall: The Untold Queer History of the Queen City.
We want to learn more about the history of your business, church, school, or organization in our region (Cincinnati, Northern Kentucky, and along the Ohio River). If you would like to share your rich history with others, please contact the editor of “Our Rich History,” Paul A. Tenkotte, at tenkottep@nku.edu. Paul A. Tenkotte, PhD is Professor of History and Gender Studies at Northern Kentucky University (NKU) and the author of many books and articles.
