These are really great fics I really enjoyed them. I have to say though, I'm confused as to what you mean by 'queer hetslash' because that seems to be a bit of an oxymoron. I noticed you mention it in the AN of Come What Might, but I don't understand how two cishet characters in a relationship with each other is in any way queer.
The "QueerHetslash" thing is a bit of a joke and a bit not; I elaborated on it some in this comment thread on part one, and turned it into a tag on this final fic because it seemed fitting. I think of it as heterosexual pairings that aren't heteronormative, that bring a queer sensibility to them. Obviously, your mileage may vary.
I saw that too. Idk, I just don't get how they are queer. Your comment to literatiwannabe "Even when I was picturing being in a primary relationship with a man, the only way I could picture it working was queering it somehow" is fine and understandable. You're bisexual, its completely reasonable for you to consider any relationship you're in to be a queer one if that's a word you identify with. I know I do, I'm bi as well, and prefer to use the word queer to identify myself. What I don't understand is how you think that reflects in anyway on Phryne and Jack when they are heterosexual, heteroromantic, and cisgender. I mean they're might be considered a little different for the times, him being divorced and her a bit of a spinster, but that doesn't make it queer.
Heteronormative doesn't mean a het relationship where the people express their gender and relationship roles in a "normal" way, it means (and this is the definition google gave me) "denoting or relating to a world view that promotes heterosexuality as the normal or preferred sexual orientation."
Sorry, I'm not trying to have a go at you I promise. And this is really such a great fic so this isnt a reflection on that. It's just that tag, it just feels gross -and upsetting- to see a label for LGBTIA being used to describe a cishet couple. Unless you're trying to express that Jack or Phryne are actually bi, in which case I think I can understand the desire for the tag. But you didn't make it clear (imo) if that was the intention.
I appreciate your reply, tisziny, and I don't feel you're having "a go at" me. I do, though, think we might have different operational definitions of queerness and/or identity that may just mean we approach the language and how it applies to this situation differently.
I think about human sexual variety in a pretty fluid way. I value identity labels as both deeply personal markers and also sociopolitical markers. On the question of whether Phryne and/or Jack identify as something other than heterosexual, I hadn't given that much thought. I think Phryne indicates, at one point in the series, that she's experienced sexual intimacy with women -- though don't quote me on that. I tend to be agnostic on the sexual histories of people who haven't articulated them -- Jack has been married to a woman, yes. He was also in the military, and may have had a variety of sexual experiences there; we don't know. Neither he nor Phryne articulate sexual identities in the series in the modern-day political sense -- nor would they, as that would be a bit anachronistic.
Given the open question, then, of personal identities, we could look to the unconventional household that Phryne has created, and invites Jack into, and argue it stands in a long tradition of bohemian subcultures in which sexual ambiguities and curiosities are welcomed, even celebrated. I agree that one could understand these traditions in strictly heterosexual terms -- as, if you will, intra-hetero disputes over morality, etc. -- but that runs the risk of erasing the borderlands of sexual desire that refuse neat categorization.
You write that the notion of "queerhetslash" is "gross-and upsetting," and I think that is where our notions of the terminology, historical and political, diverge. If I read you correctly, you're worried about appropriation --that is, it's okay for me, as a bi woman, to frame my relationships (even if cross-sex) as "queer," but unless a character identifies as such you see the use as appropriative. Whereas I am using the current-day language of queer to make both a playful and political point: That queer sexuality, in the sense of deviating from the norm, takes different shapes in different eras -- and also that we shouldn't assume a cis man in a relationship with a cis woman is necessarily non-queer in that overarching umbrella sense of the word.
I think both of our uses are somewhat strategic, and can be used concurrently -- it's an important conversation to have. In this specific case, with my own story, I do stand by my reading of the characters as queering the sexual and gender narratives of their era -- and my writing of their relationship was certainly informed by my own queer lens.
Thanks for such a thoughtful reply. It's good to be able to get more of an understanding of where you're coming from so yeah, thank you. And I think I see you point. If looking at their relationship in the context of the times, then yes they were deviating from what was standard or expected -especially Phryne- and they, or others, probably would have then used the word queer to describe it. Thank you for taking the time to explain your reasoning, I really appreciate it.
Your story -stories I suppose- really are awesome by the way.
Comment on So Deep You’re Really a Part of Me
tisziny Mon 16 Feb 2015 01:06AM UTC
Comment Actions
elizajane Mon 16 Feb 2015 02:15AM UTC
Comment Actions
tisziny Mon 16 Feb 2015 03:07AM UTC
Comment Actions
elizajane Mon 16 Feb 2015 05:07AM UTC
Comment Actions
tisziny Mon 16 Feb 2015 05:45AM UTC
Comment Actions
elizajane Mon 16 Feb 2015 02:00PM UTC
Comment Actions