Scan barcode
ralowe's review
3.0
i'm not sure what dude's deal is. reading this makes you wonder what kind of a person he actually is. someone who sits around thinking about hitchcock movies and dickens novels i mean. somewhat much as he posits queer fucking as a prophylaxis to future, it is distinctly a western continental futurity he appears concerned with. i guess people have thought about the lively exchange between this and munoz's book, but there is still a lot left open around this notion of what a queer intervention on social reproduction looks like. as munoz makes it clear that it isn't necessarily a challenge to hegemony to kill babies that are lined up for the slaughter in the first place, he doesn't look at the question of if resistance to broader non-white nationalist formations is necessary either. maybe someone else has. this is not to say that edelman's book isn't an enjoyable read, particular all the bird puns in the last chapter about hitchcock's The Birds. most would-be audacious of these is the one he does with birds and the identification of matthew shephard's corpse with a scarecrow by the cyclist who discovered it tied to the fence. hmm.
adammm's review
4.0
This is a very interesting book on queer theory. What is perhaps more interesting are the confused reviews on Goodreads, which truly run the gamut. Some people get what Edelman is doing here; others, uh, very clearly don’t. For a change, I am not totally lost, so that's cool.
There are two particularly important concepts that I’ve gathered from this book. The first comes in Chapter 1: reproductive futurism, and the role that the queer subject plays in it. That is, by not reproducing, there is no future for them – only death. This is, of course, a somewhat dated view (queer kinship and queer families play a significantly larger role in society than when this was published 20 years ago, after all). But this does get at the heart of the matter: if the queer subject cannot contribute to the future of humanity because of their queerness, and if—particularly in the case of the male-identifying homosexual, who has/had the specter of AIDS running through his head—the alienated queer subject is here for now and dead tomorrow, leaving no family behind, then what future does this queer subject really have? This is a distinctly negative perspective that I find rather fascinating to consider. The insanely high mental illness and suicide rates for LGBTQIA+ people and the epidemic of homelessness for LGBTQIA+ youth can all be connected to this conception of queer negativity. This section also touched upon the Child, which so many people read as a real person, but I find to be more of a metaphor for the future or the Self than anything else.
The other concept is connected to that of reproductive futurism: the sinthomosexual, which is a sexual category separate from that of homosexuality. This appears in Chapter 2, and Edelman continues to discuss it throughout the rest of the book. To put it plainly, it is a conception in which the subject has no interest in the future of humanity due to their sexuality. So you can be gay, straight, or even a bird and still be sinthomosexual (which Edelman proves in his discussion of various non-queer-coded media). The sinthomosexual breaks their hold on the future, repudiating all attempts to better the future for, to them, there is no future. And… that’s about where my understanding ends. (I’ll most likely need to reread this sucker to get a deeper understanding.)
A couple other points: Edelman is very witty. This is a very theory-heavy book—not for the faint of heart—but I was laughing out loud at a chain of puns while reading the last chapter. That’s not to say that the whole book is hilarious or anything, but I appreciate Edelman’s attempts at levity. And regarding the lack of discussion of race—Edelman himself addresses this in the text (see page 66). Moreover, I sort of see this book as treating the concepts as sort of broad overviews, which can be broken down and intersectionalized in future research (which they were, perhaps most notably by Muñoz).
Anyways, this is a very fascinating book and I highly recommend giving it a read if you’re cool with reading slightly dated yet highly influential queer theory.
There are two particularly important concepts that I’ve gathered from this book. The first comes in Chapter 1: reproductive futurism, and the role that the queer subject plays in it. That is, by not reproducing, there is no future for them – only death. This is, of course, a somewhat dated view (queer kinship and queer families play a significantly larger role in society than when this was published 20 years ago, after all). But this does get at the heart of the matter: if the queer subject cannot contribute to the future of humanity because of their queerness, and if—particularly in the case of the male-identifying homosexual, who has/had the specter of AIDS running through his head—the alienated queer subject is here for now and dead tomorrow, leaving no family behind, then what future does this queer subject really have? This is a distinctly negative perspective that I find rather fascinating to consider. The insanely high mental illness and suicide rates for LGBTQIA+ people and the epidemic of homelessness for LGBTQIA+ youth can all be connected to this conception of queer negativity. This section also touched upon the Child, which so many people read as a real person, but I find to be more of a metaphor for the future or the Self than anything else.
The other concept is connected to that of reproductive futurism: the sinthomosexual, which is a sexual category separate from that of homosexuality. This appears in Chapter 2, and Edelman continues to discuss it throughout the rest of the book. To put it plainly, it is a conception in which the subject has no interest in the future of humanity due to their sexuality. So you can be gay, straight, or even a bird and still be sinthomosexual (which Edelman proves in his discussion of various non-queer-coded media). The sinthomosexual breaks their hold on the future, repudiating all attempts to better the future for, to them, there is no future. And… that’s about where my understanding ends. (I’ll most likely need to reread this sucker to get a deeper understanding.)
A couple other points: Edelman is very witty. This is a very theory-heavy book—not for the faint of heart—but I was laughing out loud at a chain of puns while reading the last chapter. That’s not to say that the whole book is hilarious or anything, but I appreciate Edelman’s attempts at levity. And regarding the lack of discussion of race—Edelman himself addresses this in the text (see page 66). Moreover, I sort of see this book as treating the concepts as sort of broad overviews, which can be broken down and intersectionalized in future research (which they were, perhaps most notably by Muñoz).
Anyways, this is a very fascinating book and I highly recommend giving it a read if you’re cool with reading slightly dated yet highly influential queer theory.
mmillerb's review
4.0
thorny (lacan). but provocative and good. could have done w/o the onslaught of bird puns in the final section
asher__s's review
challenging
inspiring
fast-paced
4.5
really wonderful work. hard even if you have some Lacan, probably impossible without. half a star off for all the bird puns lol. only “pessimistic” if you didn’t understand it I think, Edelman’s interviews are helpful there