|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 1:34 pm
Here's something worth getting out of the way.
We're here to talk about LGBT literature. But, y'know, what is that exactly?
It might seem that the answer's an obvious "Literature with LGBT characters or themes", but for a couple of reasons that won't do.
Firstly, it would include "Literature with LGBT characters or themes" that was explictly homophobic. Would we really want to include Anthony Burgess's The Wanting Seed as part of 'our' literature.
So you might amend the definition of LGBT fiction to be that which "treats LGBT characters or themes in a positive way." And then you'd really be in trouble because of what you'd be excluding. Books like The Well of Loneliness have (Sorry, ladies) a very negative view of the sexualities they describe. 'Sexual inversion' in Well is a tragic and horrible affliction. There's no way to read it as a positive treatment of Lesbianism but it is, for better or for worse, a key text in Lesbian literature.
It gets more complicated. As there are of course, important LGBT texts that don't mention LGBT themes at all, but have been vital to the formation of various forms of queer conciousness. The stereotypical gay male of the Twentieth Century was pretty much a hundred years worth of people impersonating Oscar Wilde.
If something can be read as an LGBT text becuase of its cultural importance then obviously that should be as separate from the sexuality and gender identity of the author as it is when we're considering the placement of a text based on it's intrinstic themes. I don't know the sexuality of anyone involved in the Wizard of Oz film, and it takes oppositional reading to derive queer meanings from the text itself. But decades of the term 'Friends of Dorothy' and, above all, the Stonewall riots cement its place as an essential gay text.
So what defines LGBT literature?
It can't be because it contains LGBT themes. It can't be how it presents those themes. It can't be based on the idenity of the author.
So what is it?
(I've got some ideas, but I'll save them for later)
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 1:55 pm
LGBTQ literature is definitely not easy to define, so perhaps it's not a matter of meeting one set of criteria but being one of a few.
A text that:
* deals with LGBTQ theme(s) or character(s)-- conceptions of queer sexualities, positive portrayals, and more
* and/or is by an LGBTQ author
* and/or is generally embraced by LGBTQ readers (ex. Oz books/films/players)
* and/or has contributed to the understanding of queer sexualities
It isn't based on any one thing necessarily, and it depends on who's defining it. Some might say that Wizard of Oz isn't part of LGBTQ lit because it doesn't have LGBTQ characters; others might say it is because it's widely embraced by LGBTQ audiences. There is no one definition that will satisfy everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 1:34 am
... Did we blow their minds or what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 8:22 am
pinderpanda So you might amend the definition of LGBT fiction to be that which "treats LGBT characters or themes in a positive way." And then you'd really be in trouble because of what you'd be excluding. Books like The Well of Loneliness have (Sorry, ladies) a very negative view of the sexualities they describe. 'Sexual inversion' in Well is a tragic and horrible affliction. There's no way to read it as a positive treatment of Lesbianism but it is, for better or for worse, a key text in Lesbian literature. I agree about The Well of Loneliness, though I didn't exactly dislike it, it just saddened me. I'm just glad I was pretty ok with my sexuality before I read it. I do normally think of LGBT literature as literature with LGBT central characters or themes, though that always seems insufficient. Literature by LGBT authors isn't enough - one of my local libraries has Sexing the Cherry by Jeanette Winterson in it's LGBT section - all the characters in it are straight and LGBT themes aren't discussed rolleyes I think I'll have to go away and think about it, and come back when I have a better answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 10:51 am
I've never read The Well of Loneliness, but I'm highly intrigued now. surprised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 9:28 am
I think GLBT literaturte is simply literature that is considered in any way important to the community, whether positively or negatively. Which would mean that it would deal with GLBT themes and/or characrters, at least most of the time
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:05 am
Mrs. Coulter I've never read The Well of Loneliness, but I'm highly intrigued now. surprised You should read it, it's such a classic, just don't expect it to be cheerful. Koori - I like your definition, that does seem to fit most litereature I'd want to class as LGBT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:46 pm
koori kokoro I think GLBT literaturte is simply literature that is considered in any way important to the community, whether positively or negatively. Which would mean that it would deal with GLBT themes and/or characrters, at least most of the time That makes a lot of sense, actually. You can't have something representative of something without showing all angles of it. Like it would be hugely wrong for all LGBTQ books to be like Boy Meets Boy by David Levithan, in which everybody accepts LGBTQ people like they would anybody else. That would totally miss the mark. I think both the good and bad are necessary to represent something and give the complete picture... I still don't quite understand why a book by an author that's LGBTQ would be considered part of the genre if it doesn't have any LGBTQ themes in it. =|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 1:57 am
my_asylum I still don't quite understand why a book by an author that's LGBTQ would be considered part of the genre if it doesn't have any LGBTQ themes in it. =| I don't think it necessarily should - unless it's something like The Picture of Dorian Gray, which doesn't say anything explicit about the relationships between the characters, but I find it totally believeable that the main characters are gay, and it is in part a celebration of male beauty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:40 pm
Defining any type of literature is difficult. What makes anything a certain type of literature? Most works, if not all, can fit into at least three categories. Sooo, to answer your question...I don't know. I should ask a queer theorist, or go study up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 2:35 pm
I think LGBT literature is composed of books that are 'adopted' by the LGBT community because they offer something of value to the LGBT community specifically, such as perspectives on homosexuality or homophobia. These books weren't necessarily written with this in mind, hence why the community has 'adopted' these books.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:41 pm
My definition is anything that has GLBT main characters and focuses on GLBT themes.
Because including authors in a definition wouldn't work. Lauren Myracle is heterosexual, but she wrote Kissing Kate, a lesbian novel. Same with Maureen Johnson, who wrote Bermudez Triangle. And also because some GLBT authors write books outside of GLBT characters, like David Levithan with Are We There Yet?, and Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist, which he co-wrote with Rachel Cohn; Brent Hartinger has written a few non-GLBT books, like Dreamquest, Last Chance Texaco, and Grand & Humble.
But as long as it's told from a GLBT perspective, then it's GLBT literature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
