the faggots and their friends between revolutions by larry mitchell
seen from United States
seen from T1
seen from United States
seen from T1

seen from China

seen from France

seen from T1
seen from Ireland
seen from Russia

seen from United States
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from T1
seen from Malaysia

seen from Australia

seen from United States

seen from Japan
seen from China

seen from Germany
the faggots and their friends between revolutions by larry mitchell
literally you ARE mankind, or man's condition... from john gardner's grendel btw
[ID 1: The cultural effort to objectify and later reobjectify African Americans found rich potential in doll play and doll literature, because all stories about sentient dolls reorganize the boundary between human and thing. As Lois Kuznetsk observes, sentient dolls in literature “embody human anxieties about what it means to be ‘real’ — an independent subject or self rather than object or other. Around the time of the American Civil War, books about sentient dolls increased in popularity, and dolls in these books discuss their racial status, their duties to their owners, and even their relationship when enslaved people of African descent. The doll narrator of Julia Charlotte Maitland’s The Doll and Her Friends (published in 1852, the same year as Uncle Tom’s Cabin) describes dolls as “a race of mere dependents; some might even call us slaves.” The narrator pointedly informs the reader, however, that she is “not a negro doll, with wide mouth and woolly hair. In this children’s book and many others, dollness itself is a racial category that denotes servitude. White-authored dolls in literature asserted their race’s natural servitude exactly as abolition and later Emancipation challenged the belief that African Americans were constitutionally enslaveable.
ID 2: This dialogue’s connection between the ownership of sentient dolls and the ownership of human beings is unusual only in its explicitness. From the mid-nineteenth century through the early twentieth, ideas and anxieties about racial slavery flowed as a steady, ominous undercurrent through much doll literature and through the physical properties of specific dolls. Dolls, as signs of childhood and property of many children, create propinquity between the idea of childhood and the racial project of determining who is a person and who is a thing; thus dolls tuck racial politics beneath a cloak of innocence. end ID]
robin bernstein, from racial innocence: performing childhood from slavery to civil rights
[ID: They all know it is there, all the people of Omelas. Some of them have come to see it, others are content merely to know it is there. They all know that it has to be there. Some of them understand why, and some do not, but they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill of their makers, even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weathers of their skies, depend wholly on this child's abominable misery. end ID]
like this isn't even any level of metaphor it's just how the world works. the happiness of the subject acquires its meaning via contrast with the misery and abjectness of the subaltern. the subject is only subject because not-object, because not the one in the cell, because the one holding the key. and in order to continually become subject, one must perpetually make others object; otherwise, the meaning of subject would deteriorate and then where would you be?
oh also looked up this paper bc it was cited in the terrible we and i thought it was worth a read if ur into that sort of thing. interesting (2002) critique of how feminist scholarship mobilizes the figure of the madwoman grounded in a rereading of jane eyre that examines how the novel's investment in physiognomy shapes its portrayal of madness and disability.
alecto blogging. can you even blame me
rereading relevant jane eyre passages for alecto purposes; having a normal one
anyone else haunting the ontological boundaries of what it means to be human