DarrenBarefoot.com

once you say the author is gay, you’re suggesting that this piece of information is some type of “key” that will help the students decode the work.

this leads to two serious problems. the first is really dumb takes on smart works.

ie: obviously, the characters in Not Wanted On The Voyage killed the unicorn because they didn’t like the penis it had growing from its head. this is an expression of gay hate.

the second is scarier. if you suggest that there is something special about being gay, something that all gays share and which can be found in their work, you’ve gone and made an “essential” arguement.

gay lit is like this because gays are like this, basically.

here’s the problem: whatever “essential” thing you connect to being gay will be used against that community. just ask women about the same problem.

i once saw an interview with one of the head editors of an encyclopedia of black accomplishment in america. when asked what he had learned about the “black experience,” he said that after looking at everything as a whole, there were obviously as many ways to be black as there were black people.

[Reply]

Next we’ll discuss prefered sexual positions, kinky stuff… little perversions. Wait. Doesn’t Ashley MacIsaac like to pee on young boys?

Sheeeeshhhhhhhhhh. qwiet.

[Reply]

I wonder what the artists themselves (those still alive, of course) think of this. I, personally, would rather be known as a “talented writer” than a “Jewish writer” or even a “short writer”.

There are those, of course, for whom, certain characteristics are part of their public identity, and there are those who would rather let their work speak for itself.

[Reply]

Alex: What was that effect?

[Reply]

Well, there’s always the principle of telling the truth about historical personages. Presumably, homophobic parents don’t want “sexual preferences,” as the heavily-Chinese-accented activist called them on CBC TV last night, to be discussed in curricula. (The accent is relevant: He may need to learn what a constitutional democracy entails.) But if they really mean that, then we cannot discuss Pierre Trudeau’s marriage and children. Poof: Maggie Trudeau disappears from history. Or, when talking about her, Pierre does.

But of course, Darren of Recent Pumpjack/Tranny Notoriety, it is easier to dress this up as a “controversy” engendered (there’s a word!) by “activists.”

You sure talk about queer stuff a lot for a straight guy.

[Reply]

I will concede your point Darren, that the Government could have set this up a bit better. Everybody knows, however, that this is really about homophobia, and not getting all the stakeholders to the table. I was at Forerunners on Fourth to buy a new pair of running shoes on Saturday afternoon, and I ran smack-dab into the demonstration at Gordo’s office. Even though the demonstration was ostensibly about disenfranchised parents, everybody knows what the real agenda is, they just won’t say it straight out. This is the new debate method of the religious right, you see this sort of circumlocution in arguments against gay marriage also. Finally, this demonstration was almost entirely Asian, and I always find it interesting that people are failing to make the connection between multiculturalism and tolerance.

[Reply]

Darren: Turing was forced to go on a hormone regime to “make him not gay”.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing#Prosecution_for_homosexual_acts_and_Turing.27s_death

Basically, the father of Computer Science died when he was 41, by his own hand, because of homosexual persecution. He could have had another 30 years of productivity, even seen the personal computer!

[Reply]

Thanks Todd & Chris!

[Reply]

Even if I couldn’t spell.

[Reply]

I think it comes down to whether you would include the details for someone who was straight, Asian, of colour, etc.

In formal English studies, people are taught to ignore the profile of the author. But I think it still factors in. If we’re going to include details on authors who aren’t gay, then we should include details on authors who are.

[Reply]

I appreciated your post - asking the question “why should it matter” I have felt this way for some time but right now any question like this gets people riled up and labeling the questioner as homophobic.

I just think its not relevant, and by continually stating “a gay artist”, “gay actor” etc it creates a gay ghetto. This makes it easier to persecute.

And takes away from the recognition of the talent of the person. Similar thought to earlier comments in this chain - if every time my accomplishments were proceeded by a descriptor word, regardless of that word, it would take away from the accomplishment.

And frankly I don’t really want to know… just like I’m not going to share with the world what goes on in my bedroom. Its my private life and I’d like it to remain that way - what would compel me to always tell people - I’m black you know, I’m left handed you know, I’m Jewish you know isn’t that amazing!! I’m representin’ all those black lefthanded Jews out their because they need a positive role model. Do they?

Are gay people in special need positive role models? Wouldn’t a human role model be a good choice? (for all of us?) Pick a human being and be inspired by their faith, dedication, commitment, courage, kindness, body of work etc etc.

[Reply]