Pink♡

A very cis-white-male line up, certainly, but not unintentionally. 1. This time period was, very generally, dominated by wealthier white men. This is also the time period in which gothic literature was really taking off and being established. 2. It's no secret wealthy white male writers have, historically, been taken more seriously than most and therefore have more criticisms written about their works. 2/3 of these books were taught on the curriculum, even! This wasn't my thesis, I wasn't looking to reinvent the wheel nor was I particularly encouraged to have my own opinion. I could - and did - read a more interesting and diverse range of authors in my own time. And 3. It made it quite simple to draw equivalencies between their works as they were on a fairly level playing field.

Dorian Gray portrays a range of queer characters who all express sexuality differently. Basil is a bit of an everyman, sweet, reserved, romantic, tragic. When he's killed it's not a victory for heterosexual society, it's heartbreaking. Dorian is messy, confused, corrupted - a villain perhaps, but still a well-rounded character and, notably, not evil because he's queer. And Lord Henry, who to a contemporary audience could be interpreted as an adulterous heterosexual or a closeted queer man, and to a modern audience may be seen as bisexual or aromantic (albeit a poor representation of either). Although another villain of the piece, ultimately he ends up as quite a pitiable figure.

In Dracula, the Count's advances on Jonathan are seen as lecherous and unwanted, even if, as illustrated via the vampire women, there is some repressed desire there. Jonathan fulfils the role of the gothic heroin, saved by the wit and fortitude of his partner. Renfield's relationship with the Count, while not explicitly sexual, is degrading, unstable, forced. All sexuality in Dracula is portrayed as untoward, unwanted, and/or a little to a lot predatory.

In Jekyll and Hyde it's strongly implied that one of the reasons Jekyll wanted Hyde was to have sexual encounters with men. This, like everything Jekyll used Hyde's face for, was obviously something wrong, improper for polite society. However, repressing that desire is, ultimately, what killed Jekyll as his death is portrayed as a mournful tragedy.

From there I went onto say how early gothic exploration of "taboos" in literature paved the way for the gothic to become an attractive and safe genre for queer authors - Shirley Jackson, Rivers Solomon, Jonathan Sims. As well as for well-intentioned straight authors to explore emerging queer topics - Iain Banks' The Wasp Factory.

I was supposed to write a paragraph or so on American Psycho - I was pretty confident in my ability to spin it into a modern gothic - but when I looked up Bret Easton Ellis' other works I realised it wasn't that American Psycho was kind of gothic, it was that this guy had literally cornered the market for daylight gothic. Only to look that up and find out no one else seemed to think what I thought. And I didn't have the word count to argue with that, so ultimately I wrote nothing about American Psycho.

My conclusion was that openly queer authors are more likely to portray a well-rounded cast of queer characters than to rely on stereotypes and fear-mongering. Like I said, wasn't looking to re-invent the wheel.

Had to take matters into my own hands when I realised not a single adaptation or depiction I could find was actually accurate to how this freak of a man is actually described, in all his offending blondeness and overt homosexuality.

My most ambitious figure to date perhaps. Thank you slow dry medium what would I do without you. "Why didn't you do this in oils" SCARED AND IMPATIENT