SATURDUDES, Pride Month: "A Derper Love."
Show & Tell
Today's Document
noise dept.
Fai_Ryy
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open

Product Placement

roma★
RMH
Monterey Bay Aquarium
One Nice Bug Per Day

No title available
EXPECTATIONS
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸

Love Begins
NASA

pixel skylines

shark vs the universe

tannertan36
Xuebing Du

seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from Germany
seen from United States

seen from Australia
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Argentina
seen from Mexico
seen from United States
seen from Poland

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom

seen from Portugal

seen from United States

seen from France

seen from Türkiye
seen from Singapore
@palephx
SATURDUDES, Pride Month: "A Derper Love."
Unequivocal Vintage Photos, 2110-2119
This might be the only installment for June Pride. I was ill, the week before last, and we're hardly suffering from a lack of male models this month. These, however, are mostly NOT models. Tumblr will invariably slap a meaningless warning on the post, despite appropriate attire and a general lack of carnal context. 🤷🏽
The convoluted relationship between Siegfried Sassoon, Wilfred Owen, and Robert Graves
Sassoon (left), Owen (middle) and Graves (right)
"An interesting creature, overstrung and self-conscious, a defier of convention." (Sassoon about Graves, 1915)
"A very nice chap but his verses, except occasionally, don’t please me very much." (Graves about Sassoon, 1915)
"He wants to travel with me after the war; anywhere — Russia for preference. And whenever I am with him, I want to do wild things, and get right away from the conventional silliness of my old life." (Sassoon about Graves, 1916)
"I had a long talk with Robert Graves, whimsical and queer and human as ever." (Sassoon about Graves, 1916)
"Robert might have been a great poet; he could never become a dull one. In him I thought I had found a lifelong friend to work with." (Sassoon about Graves, 1916)
"There was something of a bitter charm in him, a sort of sallow, victimised, faithful Jester in the storm — quite impossible to describe — queer twisted smile — ungainly lankiness — rather goggling eyes. [...] His rare gaiety was like a young animal hopping in a daisied field." (Sassoon about Graves, 1916)
"He is a very loveable creature." (Sassoon about Owen, 1917)
"A big, rather plain fellow, the last man on earth apparently capable of the extraordinary, delicate fancies in his books." (Owen about Graves, 1917)
"A most extraordinary good man [who] says what means very courageously." (Graves about Sassoon, 1917)
"On Sat. I met Robert Graves... No doubt he thought me a slacker sort of sub. S.S. when they were together showed him my longish war-piece 'Disabled' (you haven't seen it) & it seems Graves was mightily impressed, an considers me a kind of Find!! No thanks, Captain Graves! I'll find myself in due time." (Owen about Graves, 1917)
"The real thing, when we've educate him a trifle more. R.N., S.S. and myself are doing it." (Graves about Owen, 1917)
"SS said of [RG]: he is a man one likes better after he has been with one. So it turns out in my case." (Sassoon and Owen about Graves, 1917)
"And you have fixed my life — however short. You did not light me — I was always a mad comet, but you have fixed me. I spun around you a satellite for a month, but shall swing out soon, a dark star in the orbit where you will blaze." (Owen to Sassoon, 1917)
"We loved each other as no men love for long." (Owen about Sassoon, 1917)
"I don't think RG feels things as deeply as some... with all his egotism." (Sasson about Graves, 1917)
"And I want no limelight, and celebrity is the last infirmity I desire. Fame is the recognition of one's peers. I have already more than their recognition: I have the silent and immortal friendship of Graves and Sassoon and others. Behold are they not already as many Keatses?" (Owen about Sassoon and Graves, 1918)
"Though you do write bloody good poems I’m sorry you’re such an ass." (Graves to Sassoon, 1919)
"I can only affirm that he was a man of absolute integrity of mind." (Sassoon about Owen, 1920)
"There was some vague sexual element lurking in the background of our war-harnessed relationship. There was always some restless passionate nerve-racked quality in my friendship with R.G., although he has been one of my most stimulating companions. He made me self-conscious." (Sassoon about Graves, 1922)
"I felt very affectionate toward him (only second time I’d seen him this year)." (Sassoon about Graves, 1922)
"He is as stimulating as ever, and I take up my talk with him as though we hadn't been apart for months. [...] There is nothing mean or malicious about R.G." (Sassoon about Graves, 1922)
"Have only just realised how impossible it is to connect it with Robert Graves (who will be one of its literary glories, when he is dead)." (Sassoon about Graves, 1925)
"I still get absolutely dithery thinking about the War so I can’t judge Owen fairly: but I say he’s all right and risk it." (Graves about Owen, 1926)
"Siegfried, we’re all fools and blockheads. And you and I have forgiven each other a lot in the last eleven years or so." (Graves to Sassoon, 1927)
"Dear Siegfried is still my dear Siegfried." (Graves about Sassoon, 1929)
"If I had met you a couple of months ago I should probably have tried to knock you down." (Sassoon to Graves, 1930)
"You're a fad-ridden crank." (Sassoon to Graves, 1930)
"I do know that while I was your friend you were never really open with me, or with any other of your then friends and tried to avoid their knowing each other." (Graves to Sassoon, 1933)
"I was being sentimental, imagining back to the time when I knew and liked you — loved you was more like it." (Graves to Sassoon, 1933)
"Owen was a weakling, really; I liked him but there was that passive homosexual streak in him which is even more disgusting than that active one in Auden." (Graves about Owen, 1943)
"He was able to be of high significance for me both as poet and friend." (Sassoon about Owen, 1945)
"I have, more and more, believed that he would have been incalculably valuable to me. His death made a gap in my life which has been there ever since." (Sassoon about Owen, 1948)
"All the years and misunderstandings had melted away." (Sassoon about Graves, 1954)
"Besides his homosexual soul-scar, he has an Enoch Arden complex — or so he once told me — and a lot of self-protective dishonesty." (Graves about Sassoon, 1954)
Frequently referred to (collectively, but not limited to them) as the "war poets," even my university literature classes neglected to mention they were all fucking.
Rolling along
"My eyes are up here."
SATURDUDES, 5/30/26: "Sportsballers" Edit.
Unequivocal Vintage Photos, #2150-2159
unauthorized fucking thing!!!!!!
(warning: loud chirping throughout)
source: hellgate osprey cam
The osprey
When dinner delivers itself.
Frankly, I think the osprey pair are being unusually polite. Starlings aren't nest parasites, but the raptors' eggs haven't hatched.
If this was about a week or so later, they'd be feeding it to their hatchlings.
Buttery roast beef sliders with caramelized onions
I will gladly sacrifice a sibling to whichever deity you require, to make sure this stays on the menu for eternity.
true allyship
Life is unfair?
Unequivocal Vintage Photos, #2150-2159.
SATURDUDES, 5/23/26: "Strictly No Ballroom" Edit.
LARB: A Short, Selective, and Incomplete History of LGBT Publishing
The most famous gay male novels published before 1960 remain Gore Vidal’s The City and the Pillar (1948, E. P. Dutton) and James Baldwin’s Giovanni’s Room (1956, Dial Press). Their authors’ later eminence kept the books in print and available to generations of gay boys furtively searching the stacks of their local libraries for anything about homosexuals. There were, however, a few other books by gay writers, albeit closeted, published between 1940 and 1950 in which homosexuality was either a central theme or which featured major homosexual characters. Most prominent were The Fall of Valor (Rhinehart, 1946) by Charles Jackson, best known as the author of The Lost Weekend; The Gallery (Harper & Brothers, 1947) and Lucifer with a Book (Harper & Brothers, 1949) by John Horne Burns; and James Barr’s Quatrefoil (Greenberg, 1950).
In these midcentury novels, the protagonist awakens to his homosexuality, engages in hopeless and/or unrequited love affairs that serve mostly to emphasize the depravity of his desire, and comes to a bitter end. In The Fall of Valor, the protagonist ends up drenched in his own blood and crawling across the floor after having been beaten by the straight man with whom he has fallen in love; in Quatrefoil, the protagonist survives but his lover dies in a plane crash. The Gallery is a collection of short stories, one of which is set in a gay bar in Italy during the American occupation after the war. The story is little more than a sympathetic vignette Burns snuck in perhaps to test the waters for his second novel, Lucifer with a Book, which catalogs the gay goings-on at a private boy’s school. It was roundly condemned; Catholic World alleged that it was “filled with cynical obscenities.” And, of course, famously the protagonist in The City and the Pillar ends up murdering his boyhood crush after being rejected by him, while the gay affair in Giovanni’s Room terminates with the eponymous Giovanni on the executioner’s scaffold.
What gay men related to in these depressing novels were the glimmers of humanity the gay writers were able to slip into their lead characters, whom they depicted as ordinary men rather than as stereotypes of either the screaming queen or sociopathic fag variety. Also, by identifying gay spaces in the books’ settings they signaled to a couple of generations of lonely, isolated men that such spaces existed. Finally, they recognized that gay men were driven not by simple or predatory lust but by the need to love and to be loved. That they were not allowed to find such fulfillment was, the books hinted, not entirely their fault; perhaps, they tentatively suggested, society, too, must bear some responsibility for these ruined lives because of its treatment of homosexuals.
More than a decade later, the publication of two important novels by gay writers showed marginal progress. The protagonist of John Rechy’s City of Night (Grove Press, 1963) was a moody hustler in the mold of James Dean who roamed the gay underworld of late ’50s and early ’60s America. The single man of Christopher Isherwood’s eponymous novel A Single Man (Simon & Schuster, 1964), was a middle-aged English teacher at a Southern California community college whose younger lover of many years has been killed in a car accident while visiting his family to whom he had remained closeted. Both novels were apparently based on autobiographical material, which seems to be a frequent occurrence in early gay literature as the writers were working in a literary void and so were compelled to draw heavily upon their own experiences.
Publication of these two books presaged a shift in attitude about homosexuality, if not by society, then by gay men themselves who would, within a decade, abandon the role of pathetic victim they played in midcentury gay novels and take up the banner of liberationists. This change would also change how they wrote about themselves.
It was in the ’70s that interest in gay writers (and they were mostly gay men) really picked up steam. The most consequential literary developments of the era took place on the coasts. In San Francisco, Armistead Maupin launched a serialized novel published as Tales of the City (1978, Harper & Row), the first of an enormously popular series that chronicled gay and straight San Francisco with equal sympathy and cheerfulness. A little later in the decade, a group of New York writers that dubbed itself the Violet Quill was much more strenuously literary than Maupin. Its members included Edmund White and Andrew Holleran who achieved mainstream publication of novels, including White’s Nocturnes for the King of Naples (1978, St. Martin’s Press) and Holleran’s Dancer from the Dance (1978, William Morrow & Co.). The house organ of the New York gay writers was Christopher Street (1976–1995), a magazine that covered both politics and culture and featured both nonfiction and fiction. Its co-founder, Michael Denneny, would become the best-known and perhaps most influential gay editor of the 1980s and 1990s. That era would become the Golden Age of gay and lesbian publishing was on the horizon. And the terrible and awesome fuse that lit that fire was AIDS, which left, amid losses we still feel acutely today in the absence of nearly an entire generation of gay men, a wealth of fiction, poetry, and prose that made possible the many forking paths through which we would come to contemporary queer literature.
The phenomenal surge of gay and lesbian literature in the 1980s and 1990s, at small presses and big ones, would not have been possible without a reading audience and distribution channels that brought the books to those readers. Lesbian presses benefited from the existence of women’s bookstores and newspapers that started up in the 1970s. They were joined in the 1980s by a chain of independent gay and lesbian bookstores and the explosive growth of the gay and lesbian presses.
In both large and small cities, these gay and lesbian bookstores functioned not simply as retailers but as informal community centers. They provided forums for readings and meetings, and they kept books on their shelves for much longer than other independent bookstores. Gay editor David Groff noted in a 1993 essay in Poets & Writers that the rate of return from bookstores for lesbian and gay trade paperbacks “can be lower than five percent whereas nongay trade paperbacks have return rates of up to seventy percent.”
As with bookstores, there was also an explosive proliferation of gay and lesbian newspapers across the country and, again, this growth was not limited to major coastal cities. In practical terms, that meant that, while a straight, first-time novelist might receive a handful of reviews, a gay or lesbian debut might get dozens from newspapers across the nation that spoke specifically and directly to the writer’s potential audience.
In his Poets & Writers essay, Groff was upbeat about the gay and lesbian boom among New York publishers during that time, attributing it to the emergence of “an ever-growing audience out there eager for the facts, entertainment, stories, education, and self-definition that gay and lesbian books can provide.” Groff pointed out the unique and crucial role books played in a community that otherwise had few or no representations of itself in other cultural platforms: “We don’t really have movies, television, or music to call our own,” he said. “[M]ostly what we have is books. Gay and lesbian books sell so consistently because we need them so urgently.”
The big gay boom did not last. The big publishers were the first to bail out when gay and lesbian books failed to meet their economic expectations. As early as 1993, Groff was firing warning shots. “For all the brouhaha over lesbian and gay book-publishing triumphs, there is still a low ceiling on that success,” he cautioned. “Few hardcovers can exceed sales of 20,000 copies and few promise to assemble a large enough audience to be a lead title for a mainstream publisher, with the attendant publicity and promotion that could attract new queer and straight readers alike.” In a 2020 email, he parted the curtains and showed what had been going on behind the scenes at the big houses. “At the New York houses we were under great pressure: every single book we published that succeeded or failed became an immediate and weighty metric indicating the viability or futility of the entire LGBTQ category,” he explained. “No other genre of book endured that same reflex of dubiousness and dauntedness.”
Denneny was less circumspect. In a conversation after he’d left publishing, he said that as soon as the New York houses realized queer books weren’t the Golden Calf they’d imagined, publishers, many of whom had held their noses as they published these titles, couldn’t dump them fast enough. By the mid-1990s, contracts were being canceled and, more grimly, writers were dying of AIDS. By 2000, the Golden Age was over.
At the beginning of the 21st century, the big publishers and the literary establishment virtually abandoned books by queer writers after the great outpouring of gay and lesbian literature between 1980 and 1995 failed to deliver bottom-line balloons. This queer equivalent of the Harlem Renaissance owed its existence to a robust network of gay and lesbian media and bookstores as well as the tectonic social and cultural shifts ushered in by the AIDS epidemic, which dramatically brought the gay and lesbian community and its stories of suffering and heroism into public consciousness. By the late 1990s, a new generation of drugs had transformed HIV infection from a death sentence to a chronic, but manageable illness (though not for everyone, of course). Simultaneously, the networks of gay and lesbian media and bookstores began to collapse, displaced by the internet, on the one hand, and by big chain bookstores and Amazon on the other. Many of the most important small presses that had been the backbone of queer publishing also disappeared. The result was that fewer queer books were being published.
The advent of easy self-publication and online distribution via platforms like Amazon’s Kindle Direct Publishing, the emergence of new small queer presses, and a renewed if tokenistic interest in queer writers by the remaining big publishers has opened the floodgates to a fresh stream of LGBTQ books. But more books means greater competition for the attention of an LGBTQ community that also finds itself increasingly represented across other cultural platforms — TV, movies, and most significantly, social media — that to some extent have displaced literature as the community’s main source of self-validation and self-identification. Then, too, there has been a rather striking change in the tone of much queer literature. Historically, queer literature was the literature of the Outsider, a sphere inherently engaged in the political and social questions distinctly associated with homosexuality. Now, with the apparently greater acceptance of queer people, much of the literature being produced — especially by Big Publishing — tends toward the introspective, apolitical, and non-ideological.
As such, the past decade has been both the best and the worst of times for LGBTQ publishing and writers. Authors can now bypass the gatekeeping publishing apparatus completely by producing and marketing professional-looking print copies or ebooks through the self-publishing options available to them on the internet. Many queer writers have taken this option, even as it comes with a number of significant challenges, not least of which is finding a way to stand out amid a crowded marketplace. Between self-publication, publication by the remaining LGBTQ small presses, and publication by the Big Five publishers, it’s probably safe to say there are more LGBTQ books in print at this moment than at any other time in publishing history. This includes a growing body of transgender fiction that encompasses every genre from speculative fiction, literary novels, romance, erotica, and crime fiction.
The sheer volume of all new titles released every year — hundreds of thousands — and the simultaneous balkanization of the reading public to smaller and smaller niches makes it more difficult for queer writers to preach beyond the choir. Preaching to the choir has its advantages of course; it means there is a market of sympathetic and engaged readers. But most writers like to think that, at whatever corner of human experience they begin, there is some universal aspect to their work. In a world of niche markets and marketing, constantly flooded by new titles clamoring for attention, it is harder and harder to break through the noise and reach those readers outside the ambit of a writer’s specific community.
The future of queer publishing, whether from the independent presses or the mainstream publishers, is tied in part to the future of books — are we, as is sometimes said, entering a post-literary world? More crucially, however, the future of queer publishing is inextricably tied to the future of queer self-conception itself. Older gays and lesbians experienced themselves as part of an embattled minority, alternately ignored and demonized by society at large; this was no academic argument — they often bore the stripes to prove it, as well. In the 1950s and 1960s, there were so few cultural accounts of our lives that when we stumbled across a book that provided one, even if it was marred by the obligatory tragic ending, queer readers seized upon it like a Holy Grail, proof that they existed and were not alone. Even later, in the 1980s and 1990s, this enormous need for validation drove gay and lesbian publishing: we needed to tell and to hear stories about and by ourselves, particularly during the AIDS epidemic. Books were not mere escapes, they were manifestos, and writing our lives and experiences was an act of political activism, even if your subject was a gay vampire.
Is this still true? Do younger generations of LGBTQ folk experience themselves as threatened and erased and in need of self-validation? And if they do, will they look for themselves and a better future in books? Or will they find it on their smartphone screens? Or some revolutionary, bio-integrated technology yet to be devised? Or in a shift of cultural consciousness in which gender identity and sexual orientation truly become private and morally neutral aspects of personality? Will writers no longer feel the need to write books with the same polemical passion that drove the writers who created the LGBTQ vast literary culture? Whatever the future brings, one thing is certain: the compulsion to tell stories that arise from the deepest sense of ourselves, however those stories may be told, will not disappear, and foremost among those storytellers will be our queer voices.
Full article: (Part 1) · (Part 2) · (Part 3)
Short!?
The New Yorker (June 1997): "Just Between Cousins"
[Selected letters between Gore Vidal and Louis Auchincloss]
If we were tectonic plates would you grind against me be honest
SUBDUCTION.
SATURDUDES, 5/16/26: "Hiding Their Candy" Edit
Unequivocal Vintage Photos, #2140-2149
SATURDUDES, 5/9/26: "Tumblr Is a Homophobic Piece of Shit" Edit.
To wit, there's no nudity, sexual activity, or adult themes. It's just more than two pictures of men adjacent to each other. This is a slower burn than the purge/putsch of 12/17/2017, but it's still cowardice.