Queering Nationalism and nationalising the queer- An observation from Political Pride Manchester

The last weekend was busy Manchester Pride and Political Pride were both running at the same time not to mention the numerous events around the city. It is lovely to see everyone making the most of the last of summer.

While Manchester Pride was the centre of the city Political Pride was more restrained and certainly focused on the LGBTQIA community. A month before Manchester Pride shops had rainbow flags everywhere. The very same organisations that have have been pulled up in recent years for mistreatment of workers of all sexualities. This alignment with a fringe movement would seem contradictory but it is not. As one friend remarked Pride has become a family event full of rainbows where you can take your children to wave at gay people who will wave back. We have forgotten how this is a same community that was going to unleash the destruction of the family and morality. Rainbows are bright, cheerful and non-threatening. You can pick up a bag of British carrots and potatoes in a shop full of rainbow flags.

This is where the change lies the community that was once dangerous has now been domesticated. It has been given the same moral institutions that heterosexual individuals are expected to enter into- marriage. Marriage is the one institution that carries with it not only a gendered patriarchal expectation but also a nationalistic one. Gay weddings are not only good for business but also good for the national image. Gay marriage is now seen as one of the last bastions of liberation. It plays on the idea that by offering the LGBTQIA community the same ‘privileges’ as heterosexual couples equality has been achieved. It plays into the idea it is so much better out here than anywhere else where gay people are murdered.

The problem with this comparison is that it puts across a crude idea of queer liberation through the framework of national identity. Isn’t that how the right plays the immigration debate, eroding British values, their liberalism interfering with our liberal society. Needless to say we won’t be seeing a black liberation march meet such acceptance anytime soon. Pride events have come to pit one issue against another. Homosexuality is pitted against race and immigration. The apparent liberation of the LGBTQIA community is seen as a benchmark of civilisation. Is it any surprise then that this argument is used in the LGBTQIA community. In the few years I have lived here I have been told to be grateful, or asked why my country or community are homophobic. Some even going as far to say well black people have been through so much why are they so homophobic? Then of course is the other side of this propaganda black people and immigrants have it so good however being LGBTQIA is still looked down upon.

Queerness has acquired nationality in its fight for liberation. It is both a mark of liberation and national degradation. However this is not an idea that is alien to nationalism. Anne McClintock claims that all nationalisms are gendered and dangerous. Taking this argument forward it would be appropriate to say nationalism is gendered and heterosexual. Since the link between women as reproducers of culture symbolically and literally signifies the strength of the nation its obvious sexuality must also be mentioned. Given the strong connection family plays in nationalism is it any surprise that heterosexual women who fail in this expectation are immediately classified as lesbians. Similar fears exist around feminists of all sexualities whose claims are often thought of as damaging family life.  

While Britain is going through a phase where gay rights are more accepted the same cannot be said for other nations that have recriminalised homosexuality. I will stress on the word recriminalised here because it is often imagined that the history of homosexuality in the global south has been a monolith since Independence.  Recriminalising homosexuality has much to do with nationalism, as it has to do with the resurgence of religious and political extremism. Take for example Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code  which became an issue in the general election of 2014. Both sides of the debate focused very little on the present but went back to the glorious past. The liberal side arguing that our history has had a liberal interpretation of sexual identity which has only just been destroyed through colonisation. The counter argument that is put forward is that Indian values have been eroded in the recent colonial past and sexual morality must be restored. Both sides harp on the past and both do little for the LGBTQIA community in the present.

It is the liberal side of the argument that is picked up by LGBTQIA activists in the west Britain included. While the role of colonialism cannot be negated to insist that the former colonial subject is still reeling under cultural trauma denies agency and panders to homophobia. Recriminalising homosexuality in this moment of time comes as no surprise, at a time when censorship and violent opposition to anything perceived as non-Indian exist homosexuality is one of the many casualties.

History is used as a political tool to justify social exclusion. Indian history in particular has a way of making inroads into political, scientific, cultural discussion. We are both a liberal and conservative nation at the same time when it suits us. Nationality plays a role in how we view all kinds of issues. What I mean by this is that history is invoked to justify the problems of the present. Take for instance the homosexuality debate where a few random moments and exceptions in history are used as an argument. Invoking history does little for a community that lives precariously on the margins. However it is not all bad as there is still space for gay marriage in India, while homosexual activity is criminalised the law does not ban gay marriages, loophole that came under scrutiny in recent months. As in the west this was met with exhilaration, however it was short lived.  The gentleman in question and his mother put out a matrimonial advert which like the millions of adverts in Indian newspapers demanded ‘a boy of an upper caste background’.  As in the west this did not challenge the status quo but affirmed it.

The most exhilarating thing queerness can do in light of these changes is to queer gendered heterosexualised notions of the society it lives in. While it is wonderful that the law now accepts gay marriage it should not turn into the end of the discussion.  Queerness at the heart of it has the potential to challenge troubling ideas of nationality, gender, sexuality, race and class.

Why representation matters in popular media.

The issue of representation is important in popular media yet it is problematic, divided on the basis that media does not affect real life decisions which makes the issue seem irrelevant. It has often been pointed out that on screen violence is not enacted out despite viewing numerous films portraying destruction of life and property. The commonsensical appeal of this claim might seem obvious yet representation is not an issue of imitation nor is it of mere inclusion.

Fictional worlds created by mass media are often thought of as unreal and devoid of the social context in which they are created. This claim often makes the issue of representation seem absurd. If popular media is only a means of entertainment then accurate portrayals are seen as hindering the plot. This could not be further from the truth creating fictional characters is a deliberate act on the part of the creators it is far from accidental.

The challenge to create fair and ethical representation comes from feminist, postcolonial, queer, disability rights theorists demanding the same right to a be treated with dignity. The influence representation has on our understanding of the world should not be underestimated. Chimamanda Ngozi Adiche in her now famous speech cautions us against the ‘danger of a single story’, as an African woman studying in the west being constantly thought of as a starving African of charity advertisements brought to light how the entire continent was viewed. Similarly other individuals of minority groups have encountered negative stereotyping through their representation. In light of this evidence it would be futile to argue that representation does not matter or have an influence.   

A large section of popular media plays into easy tropes, black men dying first, stalking a woman till she says yes, LGBTQ people looking and behaving in an awkward promiscuous manner. These aren’t part of a few exceptional films or comics this the majority of mainstream media. While the entertainment value of these stories is not being questioned the intention and underlying prejudice is. Theorists such as bell hooks and Stuart Hall question the intent of the fantasy being portrayed. Questioning representation and the fantasy they are meant to convey is at the heart of the issue. To bell hooks choices made by directors, artists, writers and photographers are important. Choice which has been reduced to the personal is (re)politicised by hooks who claims choice are not made in isolation but are a product of racial political, historic and economic forces.  Neoliberal ideology would have us think otherwise. The physical screen then takes on the projection of our fantasies which as hooks points out fulfil our desires. Sexual, racial and economic exploitation on screen are indicative of how we are limited in our imaginations. A good example of this would be the show sense8, which has been critiqued on the grounds that it does injustice to minority characters. Similarly comic books take on a similar trope a white, able bodied man with a past trauma saves the world. The appeal of the genre must not be underestimated. These are popular and even cultural landmarks to dismantle the assumptions on which they stand on would seem counterproductive. We are used to a certain narrative one in which there are heroes and villains, damsels in distress, where the guy gets the girl. The comfort found in popular narratives in indicative of why alternative cinema is still a small-scale industry.

Restoring the order of things a popular narrative does not challenge preconceived notions of society around us. Prejudices and violence in our everyday life are projected onto the screen and vice versa. The process works both ways. Take James Bond for instance a fictional spy whose is often seen as unprofessional to people who work in this field. Bond is British, upper class, well-spoken, intelligent, heterosexual cisgender. His life is glamorous he kills foreign villains who threaten the British way of life and manages to find women who are attracted to him. Bond represents a strong heterosexual male desire. His actions are a glamourised version of foreign policy which has systematically destroyed lives. When contextualised the same characters seem disturbing and almost villainous.

Popular media is rooted in trade, economic forces that govern its production and propagation must not be forgotten.

An urgent economy slices through   protocols of entertainment and opens onto a critique of ‘trade’ and of commercial imperatives that drive the Culture Industry. Where frequency of representation cannot annul the complicity of critics, the self declared impresarios of distraction, the purveyors of content, the advocates of lyrical and sonic seduction and the facilitators of fabulous ‘flavours of transnational capital’, all owe a great deal to the multicultural trick that sells exotica as race relations and visibility as redress. John Hutnyk

Producing commercially viable entertainment is a priority which had lead to either ignoring ‘alternative stories’ or adapting them in such a manner that they scarcely resemble their origins. 

In her now iconic graphic novel Dykes to Watch Out For Alison Bechdel has two unnamed characters talk about the kind of films they would like to watch. The strip titled ‘The Rule’ has now come to be known as the Bechdel Test. Consisting of three rules

1 It has to have at least two women in it,

2 Who talk to each other and,

3 About something besides a man.

While this test was never meant to be a serious commentary on representation, nevertheless when used a lot of Hollywood films failed to pass these criteria. Other minority groups to monitor the treatment they receive on screen have adapted the test accordingly.

Representation is not just the mere inclusion of minority characters, a vague understanding of political correctness it is an ethical stance to treat fictional characters with dignity. 

Footnote: The Rule aka Bechdel Test

(Fair use for educational purposes image retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dykes_to_Watch_Out_For_%28Bechdel_test_origin%29.jpg )

The full strip is available online from Bechdel’s personal Flickr stream (Bechdel, 1985). 

Reference:

Adichie, C.N.(2009) The Danger of  a single story.  http://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story?language=en

hooks, b. (2014) Are You Still a Slave?. Universities & Education Event Tue May, 6 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJk0hNROvz

hooks, b. 1996. Reel to reel: Race, sex, and class at the movies, New York: Routledge

Hutnyk , J .(2000). Critique of exotica: music, politics, and the culture industry. London : Pluto Press.

Wainaina, B  How to Write about Africa http://granta.com/how-to-write-about-africa/

A little bit of summer

Anachronism and the film

Rey Chow’s work has inspired me to watch Chinese cinema. The issues she brings up about the presentation of gender and history. Mainstream Chinese films are enjoyable, they are shot aesthetically and feature lovely costumes and actors. However there is a problem of representation in these films. As someone who watches films to substantiate academic arguments representation becomes a vital issue in understanding the mindset of the director and also of the audience.

Mainstream films are enjoyable primarily because they pander to our expectations.  Take for instance Red Cliff released in 200 by Director John Woo who openly acknowledged he took liberties with historical accounts to make the story appeal to a modern audience. This film is one of many historical dramas to misrepresent history. While the artist does have a choice in the production of their art it is important to understand which choices they make and why. China has a long history, one which it is very proud of yet watching these films is gives the viewer very little information about history but appeals to their expectations. Perhaps this obsession with presenting a comfortable view of history is tied to what Rachel Dwyer has to say about Indian cinemas use of history in film.

“Hindi cinema interprets Indian history, telling stories about the nation – whether under threat or victorious; about sexuality and gender, looking at great figures of the past, implying a contrast with the present; and other such themes, rather than trying to represent accurately the given historical moment. The past is used then as a heterotopia, or another place, more often than a heterochronia, or different time. It is then used to tell us more about the present than the present itself can.”

Both Indian and Chinese cinema seem to present history in a manner that is convenient to telling truths about the present. This is a deliberate attempt to domesticate history to tame it to our convenience. 

Postscript: While I have critiqued Asian cinema for its use of anachronism I do not exempt Hollywood for its deliberate omission of minority characters

Reference:

Dwyer, R. (2010) ‘Bollywood’s India: Hindi cinema as a guide to modern India.’

Asian Affairs, 41(3) pp. 381-398.

Inspired by Persian art

The floral patterns of these vases and tiles have inspired me to paint in  the bright blues and greens.