Certainly, we know language to be a powerful tool. The words we use can easily uplift those around us as it can be inflicted to hurt people. The infliction of this pain can take up many different forms as it isolates, eats, and destroys you from inside out. In reading Eli Clare, his words are chosen carefully and openly explained to describe their unique experience as a person intertwined with many identities. In the chapter of stones in my pockets, stones in my heart – it bubbles with the emotions in which words can interact with the way he experiences them. Especially as disabled queer person, “All too often, the thieves plant their lies, and our bodies absorb them as the only truth. Is it any surprise that sometimes my heart fills with small gray stones, which never warm to my body heat?” (152). While it is clear to see Clare’s commentary on the way that people’s actions and words have negatively affected his life, the use of the word “thieves” poses a more insidious imagery. A thief, someone who takes something without asking, insisting that Clare’s thieves robbed him of his own identity. This idea of stealing and reclaiming makes me think about how some words in the queer community are in the process of being reclaimed. Words like “faggot” that have far too long been used as weapons pointed at queer people to deminish their queerness. By using it, steals power from those who carry its title like a target. In turn Clare says we give these “lies” much too power for them to hold.
In reading Ecofeminists perspectives with how climate change is inherently connected with queer studies, it is interesting that the words he uses like “plant”, “absorb”, and “stone” have associations with nature and the environment. This I see as not a coincidence, as much of Clare’s life is also defined by nature and childhood in Port Orford. These moments with nature gives us a glimpse of Clare’s thinking in the perspective of how he views the world around him. There is also something to be said about the ways that bodies are inherently plants as well requiring the necessities of food, air, and water. These foils also exist as Clare talks about “gray stones…never warm[ing to] body heat” – when plants aren’t provided with the necessities to function, it inhibits their survival. Therefore, just as the gray stones inhibit the bodies’ ability to function properly and to “warm”. This is layered with the idea that the words inflicted on Clare’s body stole his ability to function.
Thinking bigger, Clare’s experience dealing with the dynamic power struggles of those who have torn him down asks us to consider why we allow the power of words and language get the best of us. In a way, thinking of Michael Warner’s, Trouble with Normal, we are also asked to embrace the ways that have been deemed abnormal and different. Why do we insist on sticking to patriarchy and the heteronormative standards? When the words have no longer served its purpose then they have no use.
The idea of reclaiming words used to harm us is a powerful one and I agree that it has immense healing potential. I do wonder if there is some merit in fearing or rejecting certain words, though, because they could be associated with very real violence. As articulated in Carmine “Red” Zingiber’s post, it is hard to reason with people whose words and beliefs support that whole demographics are not worthy of existence. Oftentimes, they are willing to act on those words, hence the violence we see toward minorities. Where is the balance, then? I agree that we shouldn’t let words have power over us, but if we ignore them entirely, does that open up the possibility of physical harm?
I loved the way Eli Clare explained the words he uses in such detail with so many layers. I think the reclaiming of slurs is a powerful tool, but it has to be done right. I think histories of certain words are important to understand, as well as their connotations, both good and bad. The words that Eli Clare describes are used to hurt people and cause shame, and that’s not something that can easily be reversed. Especially since everyone is usually introduced to words in their own way, they mean different things to everyone and they aren’t universal.
I loved your connections between texts here, it adds to the layers of meaning for your writing, much like Clare’s layered meaning for speech. Touching on your last paragraph, I would argue that Clare would embrace deviating from the heteronormative and patriarchal pattern that our language is primarily used, and embrace reclaiming language. I would love to hear more about the weaponization of language and how that maybe ties into connotation, something that is inherent in language. I loved your analysis into Clare’s background as well relating it to the stones in the reading.
Your Favorite Crime,
Jay Walker <3
, appreciated how deeply you analyzed the metaphors Clare used in this chapter to talk about his identity as a disabled queer person, and how you tied them back to Michael Warner’s text. I also feel these texts have a lot in common with how they used words to talk about differences in identity. I feel we can learn a lot from these metaphors and how people write about their own identities and the identities of people that are considered “different” and “abnormal.”