Hypervisibility vs. Invisibility

Posted on by
Reply

What is interesting about Professor Shakhsari’s piece Cyberspace, the War on Terror and the Hypervisible Iranian Queer is that in the discussion of the politics of visibility, there are examples where the Iranian queer subject is not just made hypervisible, but can also be made invisible. It is necessary when constructing a hegemonic narrative to quell those stories and views that challenge and diversify that narrative. Thus we see how the tensions between representing the various situations, opinions, and desires of the queer members of the Iranian diaspora and representing a narrative stripped of complexity are acted out. This seems to end up a diversity of voices being subjugated in favor of a narrative like Parsi’s who “repeats the usual narrative of escape from a home of oppression in Iran to freedom in the ‘West'”; many voices are made invisible.

Parsi’s effective use of the tools of Weblogistan to disseminate his message has immense power to shape the larger narrative. At first I was surprised at the ease with which this hegemonic narrative of the queer Iranian experience was able to be created because you would think that the web would actually be the perfect platform to highlight a variety of opinions and experiences on the matter. However Shakhsari also discusses the barriers of access to the world of Weblogistan for some people to disseminate their opposing views. Furthermore, we can’t forget that those stories, video clips, and articles which were picked up and circulated most widely after 9/11 were those that operated to serve the geopolitical project of otherizing and demonizing Iran. Anything that served that larger project was made highly visible. This happened often, Shakhsari writes, to the detriment of safety for many queer Iranian subjects. Shakhsari piece aims to warn us against the tendency to separate the politics of Weblogistan from the politics of real bodies moving through the world and to keep in mind the consequences for the narratives that Weblogistan helps construct and perpetuate. Who are we making invisible? Who are we making hypervisible and why?

As a side note I would be really interested to put this article in conversation with something like Hillary Clinton’s most recent video about marriage equality. What is the political project of the Secretary of State in this video. Who is she making hypervisible? Who is she making invisible in this plea? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6HBExa6LAY

Posted on by
Reply

Before reading “From Homoerotics Of Exile
To Homopolitics Of Diaspora” by Sima Shakhsari I was not familiar with queer politics in the context of Iran. I appreciated that the article allowed me to delve into thinking critically about a complex issues by framing the topic in an easily understandable fashion. The part of the article focused on the hanging of Ayaz Marhouni and Mohamad Asgari, two men assumed to be gay and rapists of a young man. I was especially intrigued by how the iconography of these two young men’s images were used to make political statements on both sides of the fence. Shakhsari argued Iranian governement represents itself as a “gran prison for queers”, in Iran the images of Marhouni and Asgari were used for the purposes cautionary propaganda. However, in Washington D.C. the images were used for purposes of protesting against the murdering of Marhouni and Asagri. I am looking forward to lecture and hearing more about Shakshari’s choice to protest against the protesters in D.C. I am a little confused by her choice and would like to her firsthand about that particular experience.

Hiding Prejudice Behind Virtual Walls

Posted on by
Reply

Shakhsari: Sima Shakhsari unmasks the role that hegemonic and heteronormative imaginations play in shaping the neoliberal tolerance policies that have become popularized through virtual media with regards to Iranian Queers living within and beyond the nation’s borders.

Reading this article brings up my personal apprehension with the validity given to campaigns for equality based on tolerance as opposed to acceptance. Sima Shakhsari’s piece on the apparent shift from denial of the existence of the Iranian Queer community to the sudden “chic” and tolerance of queerness exposes the utility behind the queer aesthetic in advancing the nation-state’s flawed reputation as an antiquated and repressive place. As spelled out in Shakhsari’s article, fighting for women and gay rights is commonly seen as a sign of democracy, modernity, and compassionate civility. Using cyberspace as a medium to promote this seemingly tolerant policy allows for supposed opposition groups to advocate for gay rights on solely a topical level. If I were a blogger, re-posting an article about the “gay-hangings” in Iran without positing my own commentary on the heteronormative discourses that support a homophobic atmosphere would be a convenient way for me to touch on the issue of gay rights with a metaphorical 10-foot pole, i.e.from a safe distance.

It is unsettling to find that cyberspace, a virtual world that offers the opportunity for us to challenge and reassess the ways of the “real world,” can be manipulated to replicate the same power dynamics that exist in reality. Though the internet has offered many marginalized minorities a safe-space to empower themselves and build community, this article has helped me realize the way in which this medium can simultaneously be used to exploit these same populations. Shakhsasri illustrates how the heteronormative imagination that dominates our “real world” can ultimately saturate the borderless territory of the world wide web, disciplining and denouncing the humanity of the very populations that seek liberation.

 

 

 

Capitalizing on Iranian Queers

Posted on by
Reply

In “From Homoerotics of Exile to Homopolitics of Diaspora”, Sima Shakhsari discusses the ways in which organizations, governments, and diasporic Iranian queers have used the political position of Iranian queers as a popular way of defending their interventions.

In the words of of Shakhsari, supporting and even celebrating the rights of queers in Iran has become “chic” with the widespread use of the Internet. The media and other organizations focus on Iranian queers as a way of justifying intervention, criticism, and the liberating agenda of Iran. Furthermore, those living in the Iranian diaspora (the world wide community of exiled Iranians and their family) have used the issue of Iranian queers to generate funding and interest in their agendas. However, Shakhsari highlights that only certain kinds of queers appear in the celebratory narratives of Iranian queers.

Posted on by
Reply

Taylor: Taylor addresses the rising interest in cross-cultural and ‘foreign’ references, artists and iconographies within the Western mainstream art dialogue in the 1960s and 1970s by analyzing—as well as critiquing—the varied performance and permanent works.

Shaksari: Shaksari analyzes the so-called ‘hypervisibility’ of queer culture in Iran in the last decade and the role of the internet and social media within simultaneous processes of acceptance and rejection by mainstream Middle Eastern culture.

 

Professor Sima Shaksari’s analysis of queer hypervisibility in Iran—in addition to studies of exile—rightly shows the varied processes at work in the increasingly modern social capital of the internet and social media. By considering the trends of activism and media attention, it becomes evident that the wide-reaching scope of the internet romanticizes diasporic and queer narratives; Shaksari specifically highlights the ways in which language contributes to the public perception of these subjects. In terms of this language, the tendency to romanticize (eg through the usage of ‘diaspora’ instead of ‘exile, etc.) has the capacity to undermine the inherent struggles of global forced migration. (Shaksari, 26) Shaksari argues that the “cosmopolitanism, tolerance, and increased mobility of the Iranian diaspora” cannot be removed from their context and, as such, the use of ‘diaspora’ within queer theories and the trend toward this term (and its romantic qualities) have the power to reduce and decontextualize the powerful experience of exile. (Shaksari, 25) By problematizing the term, Shaksari draws upon Anne-Marie Fortier (2000) to illustrate that terminology can facilitate an “easy acceptance of multi-locationality, hybridity, border crossing, and multiplicity” while also replacing the authentic experience of exile with a romanticized version that simplifies its multilateral nature.

Que(e)rying Queer Discourse

Posted on by
Reply

Taylor: Contemporary artists outside of the West have used a variety of media to grapple with the oppressions they face in a post-colonial context.

Shakhsari: Despite the fact that the new inclusion and the visibility of the Iranian queer in cyberspace is positive, one must be extremely wary of the nature of this “acceptance” and critique the hegemonic and homonationalist discourses to which this “tolerance” adheres.

Shakhsari deftly tackles the subject of the Iranian queer, suddenly made hypervisible through the powers of cyberspace. Naturally, queer visibility and a move towards the acceptance and even celebration of queer people is a positive thing… But is it so thoroughly positive? Much of the Iranian diaspora, it seems, embraces a pseudo-inclusive mind-set, a bizarre sort of homophobic non-homophobia that seems all too familiar for queers anywhere. It’s the sort of irritating “I’m fine with gays, as long as they don’t hit on me” mentality, the “not in my backyard” thinking that feigns acceptance and really only whitewashes the homophobia just beneath the surface. Queerness, like “diaspora”, has become chic in the blogosphere, a trendy way of positioning yourself against the Iranian state, now with queers added! More disturbing than this “add queers and stir” method that Shakhsari identifies, in my mind, is the homonationalist discourse that dominates the queer Iranian blogosphere. While queer activists like Parsi are instrumental and have certainly done a lot for gay and lesbian Iranians, they have also left many of their queer siblings behind. When queer became chic, only the homonormative became chic, only certain Iranian queers were deemed “representable subjects” in this strategic inclusion. Much like the queer community in a national or even international perspective, it is the most privileged or most “normative” members of the community who are made visible, who are accepted, who are given agency. As Fraser has shown us (us here being ARTH/AFR 316, of course!), we must critique even the structures that give us (limited) power, we occasionally have to bite the proverbial hand that feeds if we wish to seek more satisfying sustenance later on. Shakhsari understands this, and chooses not to comply with homonormative and homonationalist discourses, instead remaining skeptical and attempting to queer the dominant queer discourse in a quest for an even better future.

Significance of the Iranian Queer

Posted on by
Reply

Shakhsari: The Iranian queer community became a hyper-visible political contender after 9/11 through internet blogs and transnational publications.

Taylor: Post colonial migration, capitalism, and political change allowed contemporary artists to critique hegemonic structures and create art that was individualistic.

I thought Shakhsari’s From Homoerotics of Exile to Homopolitics of Diaspora: Cyberspace, the War on Terror, and the Hypervisibile Iranian Queer should be applauded for giving insight into the queer community as an academic subject and its transnational political contender and social influence. However, the article didn’t prove there was a shift in the representation of the Iranian queer community, since they are still marginalized within Iran due to religious and social norms, and did not offer a significant source that the Iranian queer community became visible or “hypervisible” in an international arena or instilled in a international public knowledge. This could stem from the perceived notions of blogs as a non-academic form of publication that is largely drawing from personal opinion.

Parsi, head of the Iranian Queer Railroad, has seemingly become a figurehead for the group of Iranian queers, appearing to be the sole representative basing his organization in Canada for queer refugees. I wonder if there are more outlets for the queer community besides Parsi, and if there are issues or beliefs in the Iranian queer community that Shakhsari could not represent. For example, why did the Iranian queer become an issue of importance at American university commencement speeches and use 9/11 as a significant demarcation of visible change? Did the Iranian queer community feel misrepresented during the heightened political turmoil of the War on Terror, and wasn’t receiving any address by the government? How has their representation changed post 9/11, and why was this an important issue that needed to be addressed? Shakhsari notes that “the shift to the homopolitics of diaspora does not suggest that Iranian queers have only become political subjects after the war on terror, but that they have been recognized for their political usefulness in liberatory missions” (33). Are Iranian queers only applauded for their liberatory missions or actually have a larger political usefulness in social and political change? True, the Iranian cyberspace may be a new frontier for challenging heteronormativity, but I did not see how their importance and visibility began in the wake of 9/11.

 

The fallacies of cyberspace in representations of queer Iranians

Posted on by
Reply

Sentence

Shakhsari: In From Homoerotics of Exile to Homopolitics of Diaspora: Cyberspace, The War on Terror and the Hypervisible Iranian Queer, Shakhsari suggests that the Internet presence of Iranian queer people and the discourse around these individuals represents a younger more tolerant segment of the Iranian diaspora, who have been able to mobilize due to the shift from exile to diaspora as well as the media representations of the war on terror.

Response

Sima Shakhsari presents an analysis of the discourse about queer people in Iran and their presence on the Internet specifically through the use of blogs. The analysis of the discourse Shakhsari provides is quite interesting because of the way it the author’s argument is structure. For example, much of the article discuses how generations of young Iranians all over the world are becoming more technologically savvy and with that they have become more tolerant of various spectrums of sexuality as opposed to older generations of Iranians who may not be as technologically sound or educated which has impact that demographics view of homosexuality. Interestingly, toward the end of the article and the conclusion Shakhsari suggests that despite this tolerance, many people still view the world in a heternormative way. I thought this was important because I saw the article from the beginning explaining how representations of queer Iranians are improving because of the internet, however in the end it seems like this presence has become somewhat stagnant due to the tolerance that still defines queer Iranians as “other.” One thing that I would be interested to know more about is censoring in Iran and elsewhere (specifically Turkey) where Shakhsari explained many queer Iranians fled. I wonder if this sort of censoring controls the information on the blogs that Shakhsari criticizes in this article.

Visibility through Cyberspace

Posted on by
Reply

Summary: In “From Homoerotics of Exile to Homopolitics of Diaspora,” Sima Shakhsari adequately argues that while cyberspace creates hypervisibility through mobilizations induced by Internet communication, it also provides political and entrepreneurial opportunities for Iranian diasporic queers.

Cyberspace provides visibility to the queer Iranian community, both within Iran and in the Iranian diaspora, while constructing a “perverted” identity of the West and an innocent identity of Iran within the Iranian exilic discourse. This reference to the West as being perverted is interesting because it places blame on the West for exposing Iranian queers to homosexuality, instead of accepting homosexuality as a natural identity. I was pleased at the fact that attitudes towards queer Iranians in exile shifted away from this discourse due to the introduction and expansion of cyberspace, which offers Iranian queers a safe, legitimate space to participate in dialogue and reach support from members abroad. However, I wonder how Iranian immigrants who do not have access to the internet are able to engage in conversation and receive information related to their identifiable community?

Also, similar to the ability of photographs to negotiate identity and produce images to promote acceptance, the internet possesses the power to do the same as a medium that has the capacity to reach a broad audience. I would assume that Internet blogs, videos, and articles are not as easy of targets to censorship as print media and publications. Is this true? If not, how are queer Iranians that are living in Iran able to interact with the queer diasporic Iranians? What are the censorship penalties (in Iran) of participating in internet conversation about queer identity?

Fraser: Bridging the Gaps

Posted on by
Reply

The Museum Highlights selections really opened my eyes to the art world and its boundaries.  Many people, myself included, fail to realize how divisive the arts have become at the hand of professionalism and academia.  This is extremely important to note and I believe that groups like Kontext Kunst and artists like Andrea Fraser that dedicate themselves to bridging the gaps between writing, thinking, and making presented in the art world are admirable.  Fraser is able to do this through the interconnectedness of her writing, and performances.

One thing that stood out to me about Frasers project art is the way in which it critiques aspects of the culture of art oftentimes simply through representation.  Understanding these cultural tendencies is something that I came to learn through Fraser’s work.  For example, while reading chapter 9 of a performance where Jane Castleton leads a tour group through the Philadelphia Museum of Art, it became undoubtedly apparent to me who and what the Museum deemed important, as well as what type of people the Museum preferred and catered to.  Fraser sums up this notion beautifully in her description of Jane in the end notes where she states:

“as a volunteer, she expresses the possession of a quantity of the leisure and the economic and cultural capital that defines a museum’s patron class.  It is only a small quantity – indicating rather than bridging the class gap that compels her to volunteer her services in the absence of capital…yet it is enough to position her in identification with the museum’s board of trustees and as the museum’s exemplary viewer” (Fraser, 110)

Fraser:  Through the interconnectedness of her writing and performances, Fraser attempts to bridge the division between ‘writing’, ‘thinking’, and ‘making’ that the professionalization of the artist and intellectual created.

Taylor:  Taylor outlines the history of performance art and highlights artists significant to the genre including Abramovic, and Scheemann.