never never         archive     message     rss

m. used to study art history in northampton, now she watches film in anchorage.

If queer collectivity is defined as an alliance based not on identity but rather on a deeply felt opposition to patriarchal norms and on the urgent need for lived alternatives to heteronormative ways of relating, it would seem impossible to devise any one image to represent the multitude of queer subjectivities. Is queerness at odds with representation?

There is a link between representation, stereotype, and cliché. Cliché seems to be the uncomfortable destination of gay visibility, like an ill-fitting garment supposed to fit all bodies. But maybe cliché also constitutes a potential space of transformation because it is where one confronts one’s own internalized homophobia to its fullest? I’m thinking of seeing one’s self reflected in the larger social mirror, of Googling “lesbian” and being confronted with all these images of happy couples. So that’s who we are? And this is what we want? In any case, it is not enough.

— Ulrike Müller

Last Post      Next Post

  1. metiens posted this
s.t.