Rainbow-Tinted Goggles: Proof
I know I say this every other week, but this week's column is not very good. I hope to distract the masses with a shiny shiny graphic. Both are available under the cut.
---
Two men meet. They share some conversation, a smoke, and eventually a bed. In said bed, they play footsie and chat until they fall asleep, and wake up entwined in each other's arms like husband and wife.
Now comes the question: are these men a queer couple?
Normally I would chastise any attempt to determine someone else's sexuality. Gender identity and sexuality are self-defined. But the two men in question cannot give us an answer.
They are Ishmael and Queequeg from Herman Melville's classic novel, "Moby Dick." And they are fictional. Their creator, Melville, is also unavailable for comment, as he has been deceased for quite some time.
So it is up to the reader to determine the meaning of Ishmael and Queequeg's behavior.
Some may argue that any evidence for Queequeg and Ishmael's queerness is circumstantial, and not enough to prove their queerness either way. I would have to agree. In the absence of a statement from either character or the author regarding their sexualities, it is impossible to make a conclusive statement that Ishmael and Queequeg are queer.
It is likewise impossible to conclusively state that they are straight.
As little evidence as there is for Ishmael and Queequeg's homosexual (or bisexual) inclinations, there is even less evidence for their supposed heterosexuality.
This can be partly blamed on the book's general lack of female characters, which gives the men little opportunity to prove their straightness. It could also be the fault of the book's plot, which is more focused on whaling than romance.
And yet, in a non-romance novel, the author still makes time to focus on two men cuddling. To me, that speaks volumes.
Why does it matter if Queequeg and Ishmael are straight or queer? And why does anyone care if some people see them as one and some as the other?
For one, the assumption that Queequeg and Ishmael are straight unless otherwise explicitly stated by the narrative serves only to further the myth that "straight" is the default option for human sexuality. While it would appear to be the most common, it is an error to assume that anyone is "straight until proven gay."
Assuming everyone is straight until they explicitly state otherwise is a major contributor to the invisibility and silencing of queer people the world over. Should we dare to wear rainbow pins or host a parade, we are "forcing our lifestyles into your faces." But if we simply go about our business, we disappear and are taken for granted as part of the straight majority. To be silenced in such a matter is enough to make one want to scream.
For another, the living queer people of today are starving for positive role models in the media. Yes, there are more openly queer characters in books, TV, and movies than there have ever been in the past. But the screens and pages of our society are still dominated by heterosexuality, and most of the few queer characters who do appear in the media suffer through lives of loneliness, heartbreak, violence, and disease as a result of their sexuality and/or gender expression.
To sum up, it's difficult for real queer youth to believe that things will get better when most queer characters spend their lives as victims and meet their end as pulverized corpses.
Keeping that in mind, look again to Queequeg and Ishmael. Though, spoiler alert, one of the two does ultimately meet with a tragic end, it is the result of his career choice, not his sexuality. Until his death, he proves himself a valiant hero.
The best part of Queequeg and Ishmael's relationship is that Melville lets it breathe. The two men exist without the narrative calling undue attention to their potential queerness or condemning them for it. Their potential queerness does not define them as characters; rather, it is simply a notable footnote.
Where there is some small evidence of queerness in fictional characters such as these, is it so wrong to want to claim them as role models for the queer movement?
(Personally, I prefer the black and white version. The picture is heavily based off of this photo.)
---
Two men meet. They share some conversation, a smoke, and eventually a bed. In said bed, they play footsie and chat until they fall asleep, and wake up entwined in each other's arms like husband and wife.
Now comes the question: are these men a queer couple?
Normally I would chastise any attempt to determine someone else's sexuality. Gender identity and sexuality are self-defined. But the two men in question cannot give us an answer.
They are Ishmael and Queequeg from Herman Melville's classic novel, "Moby Dick." And they are fictional. Their creator, Melville, is also unavailable for comment, as he has been deceased for quite some time.
So it is up to the reader to determine the meaning of Ishmael and Queequeg's behavior.
Some may argue that any evidence for Queequeg and Ishmael's queerness is circumstantial, and not enough to prove their queerness either way. I would have to agree. In the absence of a statement from either character or the author regarding their sexualities, it is impossible to make a conclusive statement that Ishmael and Queequeg are queer.
It is likewise impossible to conclusively state that they are straight.
As little evidence as there is for Ishmael and Queequeg's homosexual (or bisexual) inclinations, there is even less evidence for their supposed heterosexuality.
This can be partly blamed on the book's general lack of female characters, which gives the men little opportunity to prove their straightness. It could also be the fault of the book's plot, which is more focused on whaling than romance.
And yet, in a non-romance novel, the author still makes time to focus on two men cuddling. To me, that speaks volumes.
Why does it matter if Queequeg and Ishmael are straight or queer? And why does anyone care if some people see them as one and some as the other?
For one, the assumption that Queequeg and Ishmael are straight unless otherwise explicitly stated by the narrative serves only to further the myth that "straight" is the default option for human sexuality. While it would appear to be the most common, it is an error to assume that anyone is "straight until proven gay."
Assuming everyone is straight until they explicitly state otherwise is a major contributor to the invisibility and silencing of queer people the world over. Should we dare to wear rainbow pins or host a parade, we are "forcing our lifestyles into your faces." But if we simply go about our business, we disappear and are taken for granted as part of the straight majority. To be silenced in such a matter is enough to make one want to scream.
For another, the living queer people of today are starving for positive role models in the media. Yes, there are more openly queer characters in books, TV, and movies than there have ever been in the past. But the screens and pages of our society are still dominated by heterosexuality, and most of the few queer characters who do appear in the media suffer through lives of loneliness, heartbreak, violence, and disease as a result of their sexuality and/or gender expression.
To sum up, it's difficult for real queer youth to believe that things will get better when most queer characters spend their lives as victims and meet their end as pulverized corpses.
Keeping that in mind, look again to Queequeg and Ishmael. Though, spoiler alert, one of the two does ultimately meet with a tragic end, it is the result of his career choice, not his sexuality. Until his death, he proves himself a valiant hero.
The best part of Queequeg and Ishmael's relationship is that Melville lets it breathe. The two men exist without the narrative calling undue attention to their potential queerness or condemning them for it. Their potential queerness does not define them as characters; rather, it is simply a notable footnote.
Where there is some small evidence of queerness in fictional characters such as these, is it so wrong to want to claim them as role models for the queer movement?
(Personally, I prefer the black and white version. The picture is heavily based off of this photo.)
