Class Blog

 

Our Flag Means Death is a show in which two worlds collide. It follows the life of the protagonist Stede Bonnet, an upper class gentleman who leaves his life and family behind to pursue his life’s goal, to become a pirate. Alas, Stede is not used to the life of a pirate and quickly realizes the dangers of his new life. But, he’s determined to be a pirate, no matter what. As his journey progresses, Stede meets Blackbeard, the king of pirates. Blackbeard is known for his dangerous exploits, and yet Stede falls in love with him. Surprisingly, Blackbeard falls in love with him as well. The rest of the show follows their relationship as it progresses.

 

Our Flag Means Death means many things to me. It has taught me to pursue what makes me happy, regardless of obstacles in my path. It has shown me that being queer does not mean the loss of a family. Of course as Eve Sedgwick states, some parents will wish their child’s death over their queerness, but blood connection does not define family. Stede meets his chosen family throughout his journey as a pirate. His crew became his family and they stood by each other, even during fights and through many disagreements, regardless of sexual orientation.

 

Identity and sexual fluidity are two key themes in Our Flag Means Death. Stede hasn’t completely found his identity yet, but he’s tried many throughout his journey. As previously mentioned, Stede was raised as an English nobleman. He had extreme wealth and a peaceful life, but he never identified with his life as an English nobleman. When he left his life behind, Stede began exploring his identity. He no longer identified as a nobleman, but as a pirate. He didn’t identify with the traditional pirate life, so he decided to become a “gentleman” pirate in an attempt to mesh his personality with his new identity. Stede also explored his sexual identity.

 

Sexuality is fluid, it can change over time. Stede was a husband to a woman of similar social status. He never loved her. Stede hadn’t explored his sexuality until Blackbeard. In the beginning, Stede was hesitant to love a man because of old social expectations. However, the sea did not care who was in love with who, the life of a pirate meant freedom, especially sexually. Once he realized this, Stede allowed himself to embrace the concept of loving Blackbeard. Although he remains unlabeled in the show, Stede’s sexual identity can no longer be considered heterosexual exclusively.

 

I relate this concept of sexual fluidity to “Growing up Gay”. In “Growing up Gay”, an individual of Hispanic descent spoke of exploring his sexuality in secret. His family was strict in their decision that they would only accept his relationships if they were heterosexual. His family restricted his ability to be free and to explore his sexuality. This can be connected to Stede as he was forced into a loveless heterosexual marriage and he didn’t explore his sexuality until he was a pirate out at sea.

I also connect the theme of identity being complex to Eve Sedgwick’s definition of queer that states that queer could not be made to signify monolithically. Even though he is unlabeled, Stede still falls under the umbrella term of queer. In Our Flag Means Death, Stede explores many facets of his identity and still isn’t completely sure but his identity is, and that’s okay. Being queer allows one to explore the many facets of their identity without feeling constrained to a label. I feel that the storyline of the show truly portrays the complexity and intersectionality in regards to being queer.

The movie Pride, by Matthew Warchus, is based on a true story about the unlikely support and cooperation of a queer activist group in London and a rural mining community. A member of the queer activist group sees what is happening to these mining communities and unions that are striking and suffering from lack of money, support, and resources and, after much convincing, starts the formation of LGSM (Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners) with the other members in the group. Their support was not taken too enthusiastically by the mining community at first, with much of them seeming to be homophobic. However, they later grow tight bonds with them, even leading one of the lead miner house organizers later coming out as gay as a result of the love and support received during this experience no doubt. In the end, some of the people from the mining community surprise the LGSM group by showing up to the pride parade to walk with them and show their support, coming full circle. 

I absolutely loved this movie and it was extremely heart warming because it was so real about the reluctance to support a community that you (thought you) knew would not support you in the first place. However, it showed that those who are struggling together, even about things that seem completely unrelated to each other, can show their support in numerous ways. I also thought it was so important how it showed the development of the miner community going from seeing the queer activist group as “those” people to later people they respect and can call close friends they can fight for. These unlikely identities coming together reminded me of Eli Clare’s battle with the seemingly contradictory identities as “redneck” but also queer. Through this movie, we saw that these identities do not have to be mutually exclusive or contradictory, which is not only important when coming to terms with our own identities, but also when looking in at social issues and our own prejudices we have, consciously or not, about our in-groups and out-groups. It relates to the constant framing and battle of the us vs them mentality but shows how that can be overcome, though obviously not always smoothly or immediately.

The most revolutionary show in the history of American television, Glee, employs several devices and themes that we have examined in the context of this class. In and of itself, the show’s use of camp as a mechanism of relaying important themes parallels that of Susan Sontag’s “Notes on ‘Camp.'” In doing so, the show represents queer issues with both the gravity and celebration queerness deserves.

The premise of Glee revolves around a group of high school students in suburban Ohio who are brought together through show choir, despite their diverse social and interpersonal backgrounds. Show choir is camp on its own, involving synchronized song and dance routines that students compete against one another with. The characters perform on stage at various show choir competitions, but a bulk of the show’s musical numbers occur in more casual settings like during their rehearsals and walking down the halls. Sporadically bursting into fully choreographed musical numbers in a random Ohio high school speaks to one of the elements Susan Sontag posits as definitional of camp, “[…] Camp is either completely naive or else wholly conscious” (Sontag, 6). Additionally, “Notes on ‘Camp'” describes the idea of camp as “art that proposes itself seriously, but cannot be taken altogether seriously because it is ‘too much’ (Sontag, 7). Clearly, Glee‘s writers and producers intended on creating a musical show, which implies such theatricality is a conscious artistic choice. The characters, however, often perform these musical numbers as asides. They will often burst into song mid-conversation, as seen in this number and many others, suggesting they do so in a completely random, non-premeditated, and naive way.

These spontaneous performances in Glee are seldom completely random (though occasionally, they are… which is camp) — these characters break into song and dance as a reaction to the otherwise serious issues they are facing in their personal lives. Take this aforementioned scene as an example. Santana, one of the main protagonists, is being pestered by a guy on the rugby team to go out with him. Given she has recently come out as a lesbian, she declines, and the rugby player proceeds to make homophobic/invalidating remarks. Her female friends from the Glee Club gather around her with support, and together they perform a rendition of “I Kissed a Girl” by Katy Perry. Through this interaction coupled with the song choice, Glee addresses several themes: the prevalence of casual homophobia, the hostile propensity of high schoolers, how unconditional friendship buffers against the isolating effects of interpersonal hostility, and most importantly, that queerness is valid and the right people will accept, support, and love you for your sexual identity. The use of “I Kissed a Girl,” a popular song about queer experimentation, serves to connect Santana’s fictional push-back against homophobia to the gradual normalization of queerness in real-life. Both “I Kissed a Girl” on its own and this Glee performance attempt to popularize and destigmatize queerness by conflating homosexuality, something often seen as divisive, with music, an art form considered to be largely unifying and accessible to all. Both address such serious constructs in a fun, lighthearted way, which “Notes on ‘Camp'” describes as a hallmark of campness. Sontag asserts that camp is “[…] the sensibility of failed seriousness, of the theatricalization of experience. Camp refuses both the harmonies of traditional seriousness, and the risks of fully identifying with extreme states of feeling” (Sontag, 10). It is clear that these contrasting elements within camp work in tandem to foster empathy from the general public. Glee’s campification of queerness brings self-expression and social support into the national discourse around homosexuality.

It is important for queerness to be represented as both serious and theatrical — both worth defending and worth having fun with. Homophobia is inherently very serious; throughout American history and into the present day, queer people have been berated, tormented, and even murdered for their sexuality. Addressing how commonly and pervasively homophobia affects the LGBTQ+ population is integral to fighting against this robust stigma that can cost people their lives. Integrating peer-supported queer joy in the plight against homonegativity works to deconstruct the “phobia” element of anti-queer hate: it demonstrates that all people can share excitement and enjoyment and community, especially through culturally accepted and enjoyed entertainment like music. There are a lot of other aspects of Glee I could connect to camp and across other texts from our class (and I would do so happily but I am already way over the word count), but it is clear that its general campness can speak for itself.

Eli Clare’s Exile and Pride was difficult to read but necessary. Writing subjects such as racism, sexual violence and homophobia, Clare reveals the dark but real side of being apart of the LGBTQ community as a person of color. Although we tend to focus on the good sides of being queer, there are many perspectives that do not get heard from people of different race, gender, disability, etc. Clare’s literature brought to light the dark reality of many queer people who are not accepted by the world around them. He explains the overlap between queerness, disability and race. He says that by begging on the street for money, “is how some of us (disabled persons) survive,” (Claire, 81). According to his race also he says that African men and women were, “made freaks, socially constructed for the purposes of entertainment and profit,” (Claire, 89). By doing so, he describes intersectionality and its affects on identity. In contrast, Schitt’s creek is a sitcom centered on a small town in which homophobia does not exist. Rare for many small towns in America, this sitcom provided a safe environment for those in the LGBTQ community. By having one of the protagonists, David, be an openly gay man and slaying, it sends the message that being gay is okay. In a world where you have to live up to societal standards in every aspect, seeing this in every episode all 6 seasons was a necessary change of pace. However, one does not hold more significance over the other. As everything in life, there needs to be a balance of the good and bad. Although the most ideal world would be no homophobia for LGBTQ people, that’s sadly not the case. Both texts offer their audiences an insight into their perspectives- the light and dark realities of LGBTQ persons in America. 

Dungeons & Dragons is a table-top roleplaying game first published in 1974. Spanning over five major editions and with 23 published adventures for the most recent edition, there is no doubt that Dungeons & Dragons has had a massive impact on pop culture.

But what is often overlooked is the inherent queerness of Dunegons & Dragons, and TTRPGS more broadly. Since its publication, D&D has mostly been associated with cishet white men. Yet the mere concept of roleplaying as a character different from yourself is a vessel for sexuality and gender expression.

When I think of the queer aspects of D&D, I think of three major categories: fluidity, community, and mythmaking. All of which can be connected to The Legend of Auntie Poe by Shing Yin Khor. 

Continue reading Your Turn to Roll: Dungeons & Dragons and Auntie Poe

After Mr. Anderson gets fired, Bee asks Mei how she’s feeling (Kohr, 113). Mei is frustrated and explains that her father “spent weeks on a boat to come here [to the logging camp]. He said my life will be better than his. He said we are a people that endure.” Mei and Bee have come from different backgrounds, ‘people.’ Even though Bee and Mei are friends (with some romantic tension as well) there is a clear power imbalance between them since Mei’s dad worked under Bee’s dad, who fired him for not being white. Even though a part of Bee and Mei’s identities is centered around their relationship, layers of their identity relating to race and class are more prevalent when people make judgements about them, as individuals. Mei finally asks Bee, “does your family have to endure too, or is it just us?” While Bee can empathize with her friend and her family, she does not share the same experiences as Mei. When Bee doesn’t respond, this gives Mei a newfound perspective about Bee’s life experience and identity (it is not remotely like hers) which makes her feel very isolated because this is her only friend. 

Bee and Mei’s relationship reminds me of Bette and Tina’s relationship from the L word. When Bette and Tina were talking about sperm donors, Tina was confused why Bette wanted an African American sperm donor. Bette was hurt because her partner, Tina, forgot a very important part of her identity. Even though Bette is biracial and might not present as ‘black’ to some people, including her own partner, her identity as a black woman is valid, and has always existed. Even though Bee never questioned her friendship with Mei because she was Chinese, as other people in the logging community might, Mei’s Chinese identity has always existed too. Mei and Bee will never share the same identity, no matter how much time they spend together and that it is an essential part of their coming to age story.

In this post I would like to use Angels in America as a lens to look at this brief fragment of Money Heist. In both, the play and the TV show, we encounter figures that personalize the toxic masculinity. On the one hand, we need to pay special attention to Roy M. Cohn and particularly the scene 9 of Act One in which he is told by his doctor Henry that he has AIDS and that it may have been caused by the intercourse he had without protection with other men, from what Roy reacts defiantly and in a passive-aggressive and defensively tone: “No, say it. I mean it. Say: “Roy Cohn, you are a homosexual”. And I will proceed, systematically, to destroy your reputation and your practice and your career in New York State, Henry. Which you know I can do” (Kushner 45). His speech about being “an heterosexual man who fucks around with guys”, is the representation of his denial about his own identity, portrayed by Kushner as a way of highlighting how heteronormative social conventions and the discrimination against the queer community could make Roy deny his own sexual orientation so fiercely.

This confrontation between Roy and Henry resonated with the one existing between the characters Palermo and Nairobi in Money Heist. Palermo would be the equivalent to Roy in terms of toxic masculinity since he is the one that brags about using men as sexual objects and ghosting them afterwards without any kind of romantic perspective, calling this behaviour of him “Boom boom ciao”. This is probably how the authors of the screenplay show that this mask Palermo creates is another way of denial, he avoids to show his true emotions because vulnerability and sentivity in men are frown upon by society. Nairobi confronts him and says that “to love, you need  courage”.

In this sense, another interpretation can be drawn from this comparison: there could be even a parallelism between a coming-out and a declaration of love since in both situations you are being honest with yourself and the other person. In a coming-out you are declaring your love about who you are, your love for yourself. That special moment in which you decide that society and conventions do not have a say in how you should be or feel. In both cases, and as Nairobi states, “to love, you need courage”, and toxic masculinity is the opposite of bravery: cowardice in its purest form.

(English subtitles can be selected in the settings)

 

In the play, “Angels in America,” by Tony Kushner, Joe Pitt is used by Kushner as a device to represent the closeted homosexual experience during the AIDS epidemic. Joe Pitt is an aspiring lawyer who is mentored by Roy Cohn, who is one of the main characters and is a staunch conservative lawyer. Joe is a man married to a woman named Harper, however he comes to the realization that he is homosexual. This realization, which had been suppressed by internalized homophobia, completely uproots his life. His wife leaves him, and his mom completely invalidates his feelings when he comes out to her. Within their discussion, Joe laughs at himself and apologizes for making things awkward, despite just telling his mom that he is homosexual (Kushner 77). His mother then tells Joe that he is being ridiculous, a response that resonates with homosexual individuals that struggle for acceptance.

This conversation with his mother is also representative of the homosexual struggle with religion, whether it be one’s own religion or someone else’s. Kushner uses religion as a common theme throughout the play, and this scene is no different. Homosexuality, especially during the AIDS epidemic, is characterized as being rejected by religion and sometimes weaponized by these religions. Joe and his family are Jewish, and his mother uses this religion as a way to berate Joe within their phone call. She states, “Within their conversation, his mother states, “No more talk. Tonight. This… (suddenly very angry) Drinking is a sin! A sin! I raised you better than that” (Kushner 79). Kushner uses their religion as a symbol of homophobia in this scene, with Joe’s mother as well as Joe’s internalized homophobia both playing a role. Overall, Joe Pitt is a character that Kushner uses to represent the homosexual experience in the AIDS epidemic.

In Act 1, Scene 9 of Angels in America, Roy Cohn is diagnosed with AIDS but he rejects it. Henry, his doctor, has just taken samples of lesions for a biopsy which he believes to be Kaposi’s sarcoma, an early indicator of HIV. Roy is angry at his diagnosis, stating, “It afflicts mostly homosexuals and drug addicts,” (44) and attempts to goad his doctor into calling him a homosexual so he can “…destroy [his] reputation and [his] practice and [his] career in New York State…” (45). This threat and Roy’s following monologue, is what interests me. His attempt to wield his political power over his diagnosis shows the importance of identity during the AIDS crisis, and the attitudes of the heterosexual majority toward HIV.

Roy Cohn is a powerful man. This is not a revelation. When we are introduced to Roy in Act 1, Scene 2, we find him at his desk in a flurry of conversations and phone calls. He exudes power and confidence (perhaps a bit too much of both) by putting clients and his in-person meeting with Joe on hold, swearing on and off hold to his clients, and making dinner plans while working. The next time we see him is in Scene 9 in Henry’s office.

Henry knows there is something queer about Roy’s sexual behaviors. He notes that he has treated Roy, “[f]rom syphilis to venerial warts. In [his] rectum,” (45), but he hesitates to call him a homosexual out of fear. He instead concludes that Roy has had sex with men and diagnosis him with AIDS. Roy claims Henry believes too strongly in labels and believes label only describe where one sits in the pecking order. He does not identify as a homosexual because “[h]omosexuals are men who know nobody and who nobody knows, “(46). To Roy, homosexuality is a statement of inability; an inability to shape the world around their own self-interest like Roy can. He does not deny to Henry his sexual interactions with men. He denys his diagnosis because, “AIDS is what homosexuals have. [He has] liver cancer,” (47). This attitude mirrors the attitudes of the heterosexual majority. For years, people were convinced they were safe from the “gay cancer” and it wasn’t until heterosexual people contracted it that anything was done to combat it.

In the end, Roy’s political power fails to defeat his diagnosis, but even in his final moments, he attempts one last time to take control. He dies the way we were introduced to him, by attempting to put a hold on his own mortality.

Whether it is denial about sickness, sexuality, or reality itself; nearly every character in Angels in America experiences denial at some point during the play. In the first act of Millennium Approaches, we see Joe in denial about his sexuality, claiming that as long as he doesn’t act on his homosexuality it wont be a problem in the eyes of the Mormon church. Joe’s denial about his sexuality, though he addresses it in later scenes, is brought to the surface by both his wife Harper and Prior, a man he has never met. Although Harper is also Mormon, she doesn’t seem to have the same moral problems with her husband being gay but it does aid in showing the audience her denial about reality. Harper has constant thoughts about leaving for Antarctica where she believes she can have a new life. She eventually gets to experience this in what is a reality for her only to realize she had never left New York. We see Harper’s denial be challenged in ways she has not experienced before, just as we did Joe’s. 

Louis has a different experience with denial, he believes his boyfriend is dying and rather than face what is happening he is in denial about his emotions. He attempts to cover these fears by leaving Prior and finding solace in others. Towards the end of the reading we have done so far, Louis realizes that he wants to be back with Prior, but it has taken him so long to get over the denial of his emotions around Prior’s sickness that there has been significant change in both circumstances. Prior’s denial is closer to that of Harpers, he questions his sanity because of his visits from the angel. He is not sure if what he sees and hears is real or if it is his sickness getting to his head and creating delusions. The development of each character in either the progression or overturning of their denial brings their stories closer, giving the audience a way of connecting each storyline and personality.