Does authenticity beg/demand a discussion of the body? I am not sure if i am confusing authenticity with authorship.
One claim for my paper is that Chabon wants to break the identification of gay men writing "gay content". after all, who says a straight author cant write about "gay" characters with an "authentic" experience.
In addition, because he disrupts this binary, he is able to win both straight and gay readers -- moving in and out of this binary structure. this mobility is positive for post- structuralist and deconstructors, but for a queer project -- is this enough? does this produce social change?
but before reaching that finale of crossover appeal, must one explain how an assumption like a "gendered" or named as "gay" under a sign is tied to a "body"?
which is something like an assumption that a woman, whose body under the sign of a "lesbian" produces an "authentic" lesbian experienc? does that make sense at all? Is this a discussion of authenticity? and authorship is based on the writer and the book, right? ie. gay author with gay characters and themes. Right?
more later.
No comments:
Post a Comment