Popular Culture Review Vol. 25, No. 1, Winter 2014 | Page 87

Shady Beasts: Animal Transgression and Identity in Byron, Woody Allen, and Eminem In all their disparate iterations, recent works on creature concerns tend to consider human/animal relationships, the slippery boundaries between creatures, and the spaces which we inhabit together with the common purpose of interring disease and fixing a stable place to understand ourselves and those creatures with whom we live. Discourse on taboo tends toward considering these same problems. Though there are a variety of complementary understandings of criticism surrounding taboo and transgression, they can be read together as a critique of identity, both as markers of present identity and, paradoxically, its absence. Stefan Horlacher, considering the variety of literary critical perspectives on taboo, connects taboo to its social context: The interdependent, overlapping discourses surrounding taboo—such as transgression and repression, innovation and conservatism, punishment and pleasure, or sadism and masochism, to name but a few—can be understood as an arena of contestation in which a society negotiates not only its values and beliefs . . . but also its borders and power structures. (13) For Byron, Eminem, and Woody Allen, engaging taboo—violating social expectations—occurs at the point of animal contact during moments when civilization itself is in contest. These men are exemplary figures in their cultural moments, representing an avant-garde that is both set apart from and circumscribes a social ideal: each is a celebrity paragon who is a member of a respective social milieu and yet distinct from it as a leading figure (they are simply peerless). Byron is the first real celebrity in the modem sense; Eminem is a mainstream rap artist, winning more Grammy awards than any other rapper (with 13); writer/director/comedian Woody Allen holds the record for the most Academy Award nominations for best original screenplay (with 15), among other awards. All three have earned reputations as anti-establishment celebrities.' Each is in an ideal position to engage taboo, which similarly functions within a particular social context, and specifically by violating central social expectations. Taboo in this context attacks the borders of what we consider the human and the