In Gopinath鈥檚 _Impossible Desires_, she uses the discourses of diaspora and queerness in order to trouble the heterosexual/-normative spaces created aIn Gopinath鈥檚 _Impossible Desires_, she uses the discourses of diaspora and queerness in order to trouble the heterosexual/-normative spaces created and mediated by, within the postcolonial nation-state. And unlike books such as Ngai's _Impossible Subjects_ or Lowe's _Immigrant Acts_, Gopinath鈥檚 book takes primary interest in the private/domestic rather than public, legislative arenas. In a sense, her book 鈥減laces鈥� and names the bodies that books like _Coolies and Cane_ and _Impossible Subjects_ circumvent.
_Impossible Desires_ opens up with Kureishi鈥檚 memorable "My Beautiful Laundrette," then heads into the 鈥渄ebased colonial masculinity鈥� as rendered in _A House for Mr. Biswas_ (Naipaul) and the film, "Surviving Sabu." She also includes in her analysis the Western film hits "Bend it Like Beckham" and "Monsoon Wedding," the Bollywood film, "East is East," the remarkable short story 鈥淭he Quilt,鈥� and the more recent (and controversial)film, "Fire" (made by the Indian-Canadian film director, Deepa Mehta, 1996).
Gopinath argues that projects like Naipaul鈥檚 _A House for Mr. Biswas_ repeatedly erases (by ignoring) the possibilities held within queer and feminine spaces by studying colonial/postcolonial identities through the narrow and compulsory lens of (masculine) heterosexual norms. Nair鈥檚 "Monsoon Wedding," on the other hand, conveniently capsulates queer identity into a lone (and minor) male figure, thereby pinning 鈥渜ueer鈥� against feminist/female-occupied spaces (i.e. female queerness is never, simultaneously, held within the same bodies). Gopinath鈥檚 desire, then, is not only to trouble heterosexual norms, but to reimagine domestic spaces through queer female desire: 鈥淸I:]t is precisely from the vantage point of the impossible position of a queer diasporic female subjectivity that we can and must imagine diaspora and nation differently鈥� (130). She then reapproaches the 鈥渋mpossible desire(s)鈥� of female, queer space into a space of very real possibilities.
_Impossible Desires_ rejects modernity鈥檚 conventional notions of 鈥渆scape鈥� into 鈥渇reedom鈥� (immigration from the 鈥渢hird world鈥� to the opportunity-abounding West) by 鈥渞ejecting this progressive narrative of freedom through exile.鈥� Gopinathinnovatively unpacks and studies pain (inclusion/exclusion), nostalgia, and memory as important sites that create valuable experiences. It is in these subtle, less obvious (i.e., not recognized and invisible within the heteronormative/sexual lens) that we might rework notions of 鈥渉ome鈥� and identity against heteronormativity. She calls for, in a sense, a re-negotiation of voices, sights, and experiences "legitimized" within the bedroom:鈥渉ome鈥� is not merely a space that we 鈥渟truggle鈥� or 鈥渋nhabit鈥濃€搃t exists as both, as provocations and difficulties exist alongside (and also inhabit) intimacy, love, and desire.
Loading...
