Queering the history
Well now that’s something I realized I needed to know more about.
The world’s only, eh? Ok then. Goldsmiths QH MA:
Why study MA Queer History at Goldsmiths
This is the world’s first postgraduate programme in Queer History. It engages with histories of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and other (LGBTQ+) people, identities and communities. It is innovative, creative, free-thinking, stimulating, diverse and challenging – everything that is distinctive about history at Goldsmiths.
And other LGBTQ+ people, identities and communities – so what does that mean? You’ve already got the +, so what does the “and other” mean? It’s about LGBTQ people and + people and other LGBTQ people – so what does that mean?
‘Queer’ is an inclusive term, encompassing the complex experiences of sexuality and gender diversity across history. In the past, ‘queer’ has been used as a term of derision, but many today have reclaimed the term to capture the complexity of gender and sexuality.
Is that part of the + and the “and other”? We get + and the other and queer? Each with its own distinctive meaning which we don’t know what it is?
I ask because normally the goal with this kind of thing is clarity and specificity, not vagueness and infinitude.
Maybe it’s part of queering the MA, or the academy, or knowledge, or all of the above + more + more + more.
- Adopting the Department’s thematic and interdisciplinary approach, the course explores the queer past across period, region, and theme from the early modern period to the present.
- You’ll develop your research skills and understanding of key debates and methods used by historians of the queer past.
- You will learn to interrogate past understandings of queer identity and experience. You will question binaries between heterosexual and homosexual, male and female and will learn about the contexts of queerness and issues of intersectionality.
- You will develop your own specific subject interests through a range of option courses, primary research, and a dissertation on a theme of personal interest.
You will have so much fun, and by the end you will know how to swim.
The ‘and others’ is especially silly given the + was already redundant – queer was already the general purpose catch-all for everyone not already neatly defined. But I suppose that was in the bad old days, before Q itself became its own idenininy.
Its own totally meaningless idenniny.
As so much of genderism depends upon retooling and hijacking – sorry- I mean QUEERING language, I wonder if “free thinking” here means “unconstrained by reality,” or “unhampered by the standards and practices of conventional scholarship”?
There you go with your hegemonic, white, colonial, cisheteronormative demands for precision and coherence! WE DEMAND OUR RIGHTS TO VAGUENESS AND INFINITUDE! YOU’RE GENOCIDING US!
They left out the part about naval-gazing, own-reflection viewing, and special-feeling. If they were serious about it, you could just take a history degree and specialize in queer history. I imagine there are profs who would be more than willing to champion that, if you can find enough data.
I’m intrigued about the ‘methods used by historians of the queer past’ and how they differ from the methods used by historians.
Is the “queer past” like the project of “queering” all things? Is the “queer past” the past that was noted as “queer” at the time, noted as “queer” now by modern standards, or nominated as “queer” by the student (as in Joan of Arc was “queer”, Kurt Cobain was “queer” etc)?
Everybody is queer! Which of course means no one is.