I should state that my prof probably wouldn’t support me posting such a public critique of another academic, but in my prof’s own words..”We are baby academics.”..and as a baby I think I have license to discussing my ever changing ignorant and informed perspective(s)..
Messiness As Queerness? Messgender?
It becomes increasingly difficult to comprehend the diversity of Queer Theory. The comprehension of diversity possibly requires us to specify theories in “..document or legitimizing installment..” (Manalansan 2014) or archival efforts in colonial desperation. Martin F. Manalansan’s “The Stuff of Archives | Mess, Migration, and Queer Lives” offers a possible contemporary contribution to a post-colonial diversity. Even though this “..theoretical and ethnographic explanation” (Manalansan 2014) situates itself in New York City at the brink of the millennium it may not be effortless to justify the “Contestations of citizenship, hygiene, and social order.” (Manalansan 2014) that Manalansan insists. This response essay will cover what is empirical, objective, but subjective about Manalansan’s piece. Is there validity to “positive” and “negative” messes” (Manalansan 2014)? Mess as Queer.
The piece situates itself in a “..gentrifying neighbourhood..” (Manalansan 2014) NYC at the end of the AIDS crisis. Proposes the “The Queer Six” (Manalansan 2014) to state a case for empirical observation. A Filipina trans woman, two South-asian gay men, an Ecuadoran lesbian, and two Colombians, a lesbian and a bisexual..begs the question of appropriate diversity. What is so disheveled about this isolated group of “..minorarian subjects..” (Manalansan 2014)? If “..mess is not limited to bodies, objects..” (Manalansan 2014) then where are bodies of majoritarian? Limited by what Manalansan constitutes “..material culture studies..” (Manalansan 2014). Post-colonial means no-colonial? Empirical is concerned with the verifiable through observation interrogates the absence of neo-cultural Integration.
To vindicate the “..untidy disorganization of bodies, things, emotions..” (Manalansan 2014) as additions to the archive Manalansan sheds light on “..culture of under recognized practices..” (Manalansan 2014). Using examples such as television show What Not to Wear as a “..pathology to normality..” (Manalansan 2014) evidentially and objectively explores reasonings for these under recognized practices and bodies. Objectivity situates itself in neutrality. Words of scientific comedian Emily Levine “The subject subjugating the object” How is Manalansan subjugating the evidence? Indications of “..the idea of a “hotmess” involves less a clear-cut binary than a highly gendered one..” (Manalansan 2014) implicating “..“positive” and “negative” messes..” (Manalansan 2014) curiously invokes us to ask..who are the actual subjects in this alleged Objective commentary.
At further dissection, “The Queer Six” disguises itself as subjects of “..ephemeral evidence..” (Manalansan 2014) at the trenches against “..traditional historiography..” (Manalansan 2014). For the reasoning in Manalansan’s argument give impressions of morality. Unexpectedly, the subject becomes principles of positive and negative as a rationale for Mess as Queerness. Expansion on “..science of systems management..” (Manalansan 2014) could have provided Manalansan with better substantiated claims. Though, the inclusion of Binary Systems offers an acceptable provocation “..of marginalized queers..” (Manalansan 2014) as apposed to “..locating the quotidian..” (Manalansan 2014) in the sensationalized and evidencing irrelavant “..pleasures and fabulousness..” (Manalansan 2014).
Who is the subject subjugating the object?.. in another contemporary effort “..to officialize and further historial knowledge..” (Manalansan 2014)? As briefly analyzed in this responsive essay of Martin F. Manalansan’s “The Stuff of Archives | Mess, Migration, and Queer Lives”; issues of inclusiveness, subjectivity, and evidence come into discourse. What is true substantiated evidence in order to justify a new generation of archival practices? In Manalansan’s own conclusion “..hint at political potential..” (Manalansan 2014) or “..alternative narratives enable an openess to multiple futures..” (Manalansan 2014) claims fanatical optimism with an insignificant glimpse at tangible solutions. Value in the fabrication in conversational literature may provoke changes in theoretical perspectives. A material solution of the subject(s) “..queer immigrant archive..” (Manalansan 2014) or the subject(s) “..traditional historiography..”(Manalansan 2014) subjugating the objects of scientific inquiry in Queer Theory quarrels a different post-human future. Responses whether Mess as Queerness exists as a priority.