In both, gender is a major theme. The characters to be used in this essay are Paul D and Baby Suggs.
Most introductory guides devote at least a chapter to each; as such, I have divided this into two parts: Gender and Feminism and Gender and Queer Theory. They should, however, be considered partner pieces.
Many of the theorists referred to in these sections straddle both camps; many that do not will nevertheless work within the framework of the other. Nevertheless, both sides of the debate challenge the heterocentrism, or heteronormativity, of societal perceptions of sexuality and gender: Sedgwick, xvi The bias of compulsory heterosexuality [means that] lesbian experience is perceived on a scale ranging from deviant to abhorrent, or simply rendered invisible.
Although broad categorizations are never perfect, these two quotations do loosely encapsulate the difference between the two approaches. According to Lillian Faderman: Michel Foucault foreshadowed Faderman, famously observing that the late nineteenth century invented the figure of the homosexual: Identity politics obviously had ramifications for gender.
Heterosexuality in this context dictates gender and a quick look at any recent rom-com will prove thisso much so that Monique Wittig could deliberately claim that: In relation to the relative stability of identity politics, queer is a set of practices that can be dipped in and out of.
As David Halperin puts it: Queer is by definition whatever is at odds with the normal, the legitimate, the dominant.
There is nothing in particular to which it necessarily refers. It is an identity without an essence. Halperin, 62 In other words, queer will be the opposite of whatever dominates. Queer is innately transgressive, challenging, and subversive. There is no essence — it is not located in the body.
Helperin is not alone in his refusal to define queer.
An analysis of heterocentrism, for example, and the attendant stable gender binaries, is almost always found.
Queer readings are deconstructive, and post-structuralist:Front elevation, longitudinal & transverse section including plan as published in The Building News, December 16th Feb 13, · According to Bennett and Royle, they write “the nature of the literary monument and the way in which the writings of living authors are posthumously transformed into monuments to those authors’ lives and work” (Page 44).
Buy An Introduction to Literature, Criticism and Theory by Andrew Bennett, Nicholas Royle from Waterstones today! Click and Collect from your local Waterstones . As Andrew Bennett and Nicholas Royle point out, the very survival of the species relies on hybridised or mutated forms ().
Prent’s sculpture, “Unnatural History” () deconstructs the act of categorisation through his creation of such a hybrid monster. Bennett and Royle argue that whether we like it or not, this new field of study (still wilfully ignored by many literature departments despite its pervasiveness) is a ‘discipline changing’ and ‘potentially disruptive activity’ (pp.
, ). It is irreplaceable' """Richard Rand, University of Alabama"(Bennett and Royle have) cracked the problem of how to be introductory and sophisticated, accessible but not patronising.' "Peter Buse, English Subject Centre Newsletter""An Introduction to Literature, Criticism and Theory"provides a completely fresh and original introduction to 4/5(4).