Queer Disclosures in the 1950s and 1960s

Stephen Smith

Whitney Davis, ""Homosexualism," Gay and Lesbian Studies, and Queer Theory in Art History"
This was written in 1998, so what we now call Queer Studies would have just beginning to be solidified. Davis has a Ph.D. from Harvard in Fine Arts and teaches at Berkley, so it fair to say that his approach to Art History should be within the mainstream of how aesthetics are practiced today. I like that he regards Queer Theory as just another historical method. He lists documentary, iconographic, semiotic, psychoanalytic and others. Notably he leaves out analytic. I find it odd that so many of these scholars in England and America subscribe to "Continental" philosophical ideas such as those of Foucault and Derrida. Berkley does have a regular History department. I doubt Foucault comes up much there.

In Davis' writings he traces the history homosexual studies from 1750 to today, where he claims "homosexualism" is now uncontested. Earlier in the piece he defines Homosexualism as an erotic and political practice, so I'm not exactly sure what he means by how it is uncontested today. Possibly we just accept the reality of homosexuality. Looking back on art of the past it seems foolish not to recognize the homoerotic elements of many works. Davis mentions J.J. Wickelmann's writings about Guido Reni in 1755.


It is interesting Davis also mentions a time of relative openness from 1780s-1830s. Also that there is no overarching theory behind Queer Theory, but it can be applied to a lot of other Disciplines.

Simon Watney, "Queer Andy"
There was a question on the game show Jeopardy where the answer was that Andy Warhol was a virgin. The idea of Warhol as an open homosexual and hero of the gay rights movement seems odd. Even though some of his work, particularly his movies, have some homosexual aspect, that never stuck me as a major theme in his work. Another thing that I found strange in the reading is the idea of "homophobia at work in contemporary [60s] Pop Art criticism." It is hard for me to imagine that the sort of person drawn to write art criticism would not be some sort of bohemian who wouldn't be inclined toward homophobia. Watney uses a psychoanalytic method and it seems that there is a rather undefined relationship between that method and Queer Theory.

Selections from Gavin Butt, "Between You and Me: Queer Disclosures in the New York Art World, 1948-1963"
Gavin Butt teaches at Goldsmiths University of London. That seem to be where all the YBAs come from. Besides Queer Theory he also teaches Performance Theory, which sounds very interesting.



Butt first makes a case for using gossip as a source. I guess sometimes you have no choice. He makes a good case of gossip for use in Queer Theory. Not only is gossip all we have in a lot of cases but homosexuality is certainly the subject of an unusual amount of gossip. Still, it will always have to be somewhat unreliable just by its nature. Beyond gossip he also references gay publications from the 50s and 60s, One magazine and the Mattachine Review. Butt gives himself away as a postmodernist by referring to "so-called official criticism" in his introduction and also later when he writes about Jasper Johns.

The specific story about Jasper Johns and Target with Plaster Casts is very insightful when placed in the historical context of the obscenity trials of the time and the McCarthy hearings. sexuality, and particularly homosexuality, where serious political issues of the time and could have serious consequences. It is interesting how Butt refuses to come to any firm conclusions about Johns' art but notes he stopped making plaster casts after this period. Also he defers Judith Butler and the idea that "gender" is an undefined term.

Question regarding all of these readings:
Are contemporary thinkers adding a layer of meaning to the art of these gay artists that might not have been intended? To what extent do Johns' and Warhol's sexuality affect their work from the 50s and early 60s?