Dean Jones

DEAN JONES

The Politics of Desire: A Discursive Exploration of Queer Temporality in Art

DOI 10.20933/100001379

Except where otherwise noted, the text in this dissertation is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license.

All images, figures, and other third-party materials included in this dissertation are the copyright of their respective rights holders, unless otherwise stated. Reuse of these materials may require separate permission.

The Politics of Desire:ADiscursive Exploration of Queer Temporalities in Art

FineArt (Hons)

Word count: 7,392

Adissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of a Bachelor ofArts (Hons) degree in FineArt

Duncan of Jordonstone College ofArt and Design

University of Dundee 2025

Abstract

This dissertation assesses the way in which desire, when performed under precarious circumstances, has been used a tool to illustrate the experience of queer temporality in art. This research has utilised critical theory by Judith Butler, Jack Halberstam, and Jennifer Tyburczy, which is then applied to the work of Francis Bacon and Robert Mapplethorpe. The purpose of this dissertation is to examine how the experience of queer temporality intersects with both art history and the contemporary art world. The introduction lays the groundwork by explaining Judith Butler’s theory of gender performativity and Jack Halberstam’s theory of queer temporality, while also providing history on the queer rights movement during each artist’s lifetimes. The first chapter then applies these schools of thought to Francis Bacon’s paintings Two Figures (1953) and TriptychAugust 1972 (1972), focusing on explaining how these works act as visual metaphors for how desire is performed under precarious circumstances. The second chapter covers Robert Mapplethorpe’s Leatherman #1 (1970), Jim and Tom, Sausalito (1978), and Self Portrait (1988), and explores how the rejection of normative timelines visually manifests in art. The final chapter then uses Jennifer Tyburczy’s theory of queer curatorship to dissect how the exhibitions Queer BritishArt, 1861-1967 (2017) andArtAfter Stonewall, 1969-1989 (2019) either uphold or dismantle heteronormative ideals surrounding normative timelines through the exhibition of Bacon and Mapplethorpe’s work posthumously. This dissertation then concludes with a reflection upon the points made and deliberates on how the consideration of queer temporality should be integrated into the contemporary art zeitgeist.

List Of Illustrations

Francis Bacon, ‘Two Figures’(1953), Oil on canvas, 152.5 x 116.5 cm

Image courtesy the Francis Bacon Foundation 1.2. 12

Francis Bacon, ‘TriptychAugust 1972’(1972),

Oil and sand on canvas, triptych, each panel: 198.0 x 147.5 cm,

Image courtesy the Francis Bacon Foundation

2.1. 15

Robert Mapplethorpe, ‘Leatherman #1’(1970),

Mixed media, 37.94 x 47.94 x 2.54 cm

Image courtesy the LosAngeles County Museum ofArt

2.2. 17

Robert Mapplethorpe, ‘Jim and Tom, Sausalito’(1977),

Photograph, gelatine silver print, 19.53 x 19.53 cm

Image courtesy the LosAngeles County Museum ofArt

2.3. 18

Robert Mapplethorpe, ‘Self Portrait’(1988), [Photograph, gelatin silver print, 57.7 x 48.1 cm]

Image courtesy the Scottish National Portrait Gallery

3.1.

Kimberly Archer, Queer BritishArt, 1861-1967, (2017)

Photograph

Available at: https://www.theupcoming.co.uk/2017/04/04/queer-british-art-1861-1967-at-tate-britainexhibition-review/ 3.2.

Loring Knoblauch,ArtAfter Stonewall, 1969-1989, (2019)

Photograph

Available at: https://collectordaily.com/art-after-stonewall-1969-1989-leslie-lohman-museum-andgrey-art-gallery-nyu/

24

3.3.

Loring Knoblauch,ArtAfter Stonewall, 1969-1989, (2019)

Photograph

Available at: https://collectordaily.com/art-after-stonewall-1969-1989-leslie-lohman-museum-andgrey-art-gallery-nyu/ 3.4.

Loring Knoblauch,ArtAfter Stonewall, 1969-1989, (2019)

Photograph

Available at: https://collectordaily.com/art-after-stonewall-1969-1989-leslie-lohman-museum-andgrey-art-gallery-nyu/

25

25

Statement of Positionality

I am a 24-year-old, white, cisgendered, man, born and raised in Scotland. I am currently pursuing a bachelor’s degree in fine art, which has granted me access to research material not widely accessible to others. While my research focuses on the experience of the white, queer, man, I discuss historical forms of oppression and marginalisation that I have not had to endure. My analysis has been largely sculpted from the writings of female, transgender, and gender queer theorists I aim to use these writings as a tool to further understand how queer identity intersects with one’s art practice, but I acknowledge that my interpretations may be influenced by my own bias. I will also be using the term ‘queer’in align with Judith Butler’s essay Critically Queer (Butler, 1993) to refer to the political relationship between language and LGBTQ+ identity, however I recognise that it is a word with a problematic history, and not one that everyone is comfortable being used.

Introduction

This dissertation examines how queer artists, when existing under precarious circumstances, have used desire to disrupt heteronormative temporal structures with their art practices. The analysis will be crafted through the lens of Judith Butler’s (1956) theory of gender performativity and Jack Halberstam’s (1961) writings on queer temporality. Chapter One will examine Francis Bacon (1909-92) and his artworks Two Figures (1953) and Triptych August 1972 (1972), focusing on how desire is performed during times of precarity Chapter Two will investigate Robert Mapplethorpe and his works Leatherman #1 (1970), Jim and Tom, Sausalito (1977), and Self Portrait (1988) to demonstrate how the experiences established in chapter one link to the experience of non-normative time. Chapter Three will inspect the exhibitions, Queer British Art, 1861-1967 (2017) and Art After Stonewall, 1969-89 (2019), using Jennifer Tyburczy’s (1978) theory of queer curatorship to analyse how the experience of queer temporality is reflected in posthumous exhibitions of both artists. Historical context on the queer rights movement will be included to help contextualise the artwork and experiences I am discussing.

Queer Temporality and the Performance of Identity

Developed from the aftermath of theAIDS crisis, Halberstam first explores the concept of queer temporality in his book, In a Queer Time and Place: Transgender Bodies, Subcultural Lives (Halberstam, 2005). In this text, he discusses the notion of time being measured through the experience of life milestones, such as: marriage, reproducing, and growing old. Historically, queer people have not been able to experience these milestones, or at least not at the same rate as their heterosexual counterparts which, according to queer temporality, results in an altered experience of time. This is what I will be referring to when I discuss nonnormative time Judith Butler’s theory of gender performativity was introduced in their book, Gender Troubles: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (Butler, 1990), and is a concept they have continuously built upon since in texts such as: Bodies that Matter; on the Discursive Limits of Sex (Butler, 1993) and Undoing Gender (Butler, 2004). They argue that gender is not something we intrinsically are, but something that is performed through repeated action. In their later writing, they discuss the idea of a ‘life without liveability’, which refers to a life that must fight for societal recognition, and how this experience alters the performance of identity. This is the concept I will focus on, arguing that queer temporality is a direct result of a ‘life without liveability’. Through applying Butler’s theory of

performativity to desire, and analysing it against a temporal framework, such as queer temporality, we can create a tool to further understand the ways in which queer experience impacts artistic practice.

Queer History

Before discussing Bacon or Mapplethorpe, it is vital to first discuss the key moments in the queer rights movement throughout both artist’s careers. Homosexuality was first made punishable by death by the 1533 BuggeryAct (Malcolm, 2023), and remained so until the OffencesAgainst the PersonAct was passed in 1861 (Legislation.Gov.uk, 2011), which changed the punishment to up to 10 years in prison (Legislation.Gov.uk, 2011). It was not until the 1967 when the Sexual OffencesAct was passed that [private] sexual relations between men were decriminalised in England and Wales (UK Parliament, 2024). In the US, homosexuality was first outlawed with the Bill of Rights in 1791 and was not fully legalised throughout the US until a Supreme Court ruling in 2003 (Linkhart, 2005) The 1960s and ‘70s saw a rise in queer visibility, especially following the raiding of the Stonewall Inn in New York in 1969. During this time, it was frequent practice for the police to raid gay bars, however this time the guests, spearheaded by transgender women of colour, retaliated. This resulted in six nights of riots in response to the police brutality faced by queer and transgender people (Stulberg, 2018) As described by (Stulberg, 2018), this was not the first time queer and transgender people fought back against police brutality, however it is often considered a pinnacle turning point for queer liberation. Following the Stonewall riots, queer visibility was on the rise, however the 1980s saw a massive step back when the first case of a disease then referred to as GRID (gay-related immune deficiency) was discovered in 1981 (Institute Pasteur, 2023). One year later, GRID was renamed to AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) (Institute Pasteur, 2023), after it was discovered that it did not only affect queer men. TheAIDS epidemic swept tragedy, almost wiping out an entire generation of [primarily, but not exclusively] queer men In May of 1988, Britain’s Conservative government, led by Margaret Thatcher, passed a law called Section 28 which outlawed the “promotion of homosexuality by local authorities” (The NationalArchives, 2011).

Francis Bacon

Francis Bacon (1909-92) was a visual artist best known for his paintings of violent distortions of the human body Bacon was born in Dublin but relocated to London during the First World War (Brighton, 2001), returning to Ireland after it was finished. His family dynamic was always fraught, but it came to a head in 1926 when Bacon was exiled from his family’s residence after being caught trying on his mother’s undergarments, resulting in the then 16year-old returning to London (Russell, 1993) In 1927, Bacon spent periods in Berlin and Paris where he was exposed to liberal cultures of art, and sexual fluidity for the first time (Brighton, 2001).After returning to London, he began a career as an interior and furniture designer, which is where he met artist Roy de Maistre who introduced him to oil paints for the first-time (Russell, 1993).

At the time, Bacon’s work was received as an observation of a post-war Britain, however from a modern perspective, his portfolio also acts as a documentation of his experience as a gay man during a time of criminalised homosexuality. Simon Ofled validates this by writing, “Francis Bacon’s paintings are often identified as symbols, perhaps symptoms, of a time prior to the 1970s when homosexuality had not yet become a social, political, or public form ” (Ofleld, 2001, p.115). Bacon’s art often explored feelings of nihilism, and his depiction of queer desire is no different, depicting themes of eroticism in tandem with violence and power. In an interview with his close companion, David Sylvester, Bacon described his affiliation with violence as such,

“[…] I was brought to London during the war […] I was made aware of what is called the possibility of danger even at a very young age. Then I went back to Ireland and was brought up during the Sinn Fein movement. […] So I could say, perhaps, I have been accustomed to always living through forms of violence.” (Sylvester, 2007, p.15)

This duel exploration of desire and violence is particularly prevalent in his painting Two Figures (1953) (Fig1.1.), which was the first time he directly confronted his own sexuality. Previously, Bacon explored queer desire through the reoccurring motif of the male nude. However, Two Figures (1953) saw Bacon entering a stage of his career referred to as his “couplings” (Gagosian, 2019). This dissertation will look at two pieces of Bacon’s work, Two Figures (1953) and Triptych August 1972 (1972) as, in the words of David Sylvester, “[…] it seems to me that 1945-53 was one of the two peak periods of Bacon’s career. / The

other, I think, covered the sequence of a dozen big triptychs which he painted between 1970 and 1976 […].” (Sylvester, 1998, p.29)

Two Figures (1953)

Two Figures (1953) (Fig 1.1.) is a painting inspired by Eadweard Muybridge’s photographic series Two Men Wrestling (1887) and features two figures on a bed in a dark room. Bacon purposefully smears and blends the paint of the pair to both mask the identity and blur the boundaries between one and the other. These inconsistencies between where one figure starts and the other ends conveys a sense of physical entanglement which, when considering the setting of the bed, alludes to an act of intercourse. However, the brutal application of paint makes the viewer question whether they are witnessing an act of passion, violence, or both. In their writings on liveability, Butler highlights the role vulnerability plays in experiences of precarity. By painting the figures in their purest forms (naked), Bacon strips them down to their most vulnerable states When considering vulnerability in relation to violence, Bacon is directly drawing a comparison between his own most vulnerable state (open desire) and danger, spotlighting his experience of precarity. This is aided by the lack of warmth in the colour pallet, with sterile blues and whites highlighting the lack of tenderness between the two. The bed itself is fully white, the colour traditionally used to represent purity, which, when considering the idea of normative timelines, ties back to the societal expectation to propagate. However, the figures, who’s genders are notably vague, are dirtying the sheets,

Fig 1.1. Bacon, F (1953) Two Figures [Oil on canvas, 152.5 x 116.5 cm], Image courtesy the Francis Bacon Foundation

implying either a rejection or inability to reproduce. The smeared brushstrokes Bacon used indicate action, thus implying the passage of time. However, the pair appear to be captured in motion which signifies that the pair are stuck in a timeless void, forced only to experience what happens on the bed and nothing more When we consider the fact that homosexuality was still illegal when (Fig 1.1.) was painted, then (Fig 1.1.) acts as a visual representation of the discreet nature of homosexual encounters of the 1950s RinaArya scrutinizes this narrative when discussing (Fig 1.1.), stating, “[…] a more negative reading suggest that he was inadvertently supporting the stereotypical view of homosexual sex- that it was base, anonymous and lacking in any civilised conceptualisation of love.” (Arya, 2012, para.26) As demonstrated byArya, queer people were largely unable to access ‘civilised conceptions of love’ Rather, they were forced to the shadows, only able to explore their desires in secret. While that is not to say queer romantic relationships did not exist, if they did they were in secret. Had queer people had access to the same social recognition as heterosexual people, then the nature of their connections may have been based upon emotional connection rather than sexual desperation.

TriptychAugust 1972 (1972)

Triptych August 1972 (Fig 1.2.) is an oil painting Bacon created a year after his partner George Dyer’s suicide. Created only four years after the partial decriminalisation of homosexuality in England and Wales, this triptych should be telling a story of hope and new beginnings. Instead, Bacon uses (Fig 1.2.) as a memento mori, confronting not only his own mortality, but also that of his loved ones. Bacon uses (Fig 1.2.) to showcase the effects precarity has on the human psyche, as well as the experience of queer temporality, by drawing attention to the then 36 year old’s death (Francis Bacon Estate, no date) This series

Fig 1.2. Bacon, F (1972) Triptych August 1972 [Oil paint and sand on canvas, triptych, each panel: 198.0 x 147.5 cm], Image curtesy the Francis Bacon Foundation.

features two paintings of a man sitting on a chair, and one of a body falling apart on the floor, all in front of a black door. Where previous works such as (Fig 1.1.) used a colour palette to highlight the lack of affection, this one does the opposite. The use of flesh toned pinks and purples, and a soft flowing application of paint conveys a gentleness that was missing from his previous works. The way in which Bacon explores vulnerability also differs from (Fig 1.1.), substituting the physical for the emotional. The fragmentation of the figures creates a visceral depiction of Bacon coming undone by the death of Dyer, illustrated through the body spilling over the chair in the first and last panel. Still sitting upright, Bacon is attempting to hold himself together, and yet he still falls apart. In the middle panel, all that is left is a mass of what may have once been a body. In an interview with MichaelArchimbaud, Bacon stated, “[…] a triptych corresponds more to the idea of a succession of images on film” (Bacon and Archimbaud, 1993, p.165). This indicates that Bacon intended his triptychs to be viewed as a story of three parts. If we understand each panel as a different point in the story, then they can each represent three stages of time, the, past, present, and future However, even if we consider the triptych a documentation of time, the setting stays the same, reflecting Bacon’s experience of non-normative time and a life without liveability. Even as time passes, Bacon remains stagnant, entrapped by the circumstances he was born into. The main connection between all three panels is the large black door. The door is representative of death, an everlooming presence in life, however, it also eerily resembles the black room featured in (Fig.1.1). When considering this parallel, the door implies a return to a period without time, or any ‘conceptualisation of love’(Arya, 2012) Furthermore, the door demonstrates that even when queer people had access to these relationships, experiences of precarity take it away. Had queer people had access to societal recognition, then perhaps Bacon and Dyer’s story would have ended differently.

Robert Mapplethorpe

Robert Mapplethorpe (1946-89) was anAmerican artist best known for his monochromatic, erotic film photography. Mapplethorpe was born in Queens, New York (Morgan, 2018) to a traditional christian household. In 1963, at the age of 16, Mapplethorpe enrolled at Pratt Institute, first majoring in advertising, and later switching to graphic arts in 1965 (Danto, 1996), which allowed the artist to experiment with more artistic mediums, such as collage, sculpture, and drawing. However, it was not until 1970 that the artist engaged with photography as an artistic practice (Danto, 1996). He began using a polaroid camera to capture photos of his friends, and then partner Patti Smith, which featured in his first photography exhibition in 1973 at the Lighthouse Gallery in New York (Danto, 1996). Two years later, he was gifted a Hasselblad 500 camera from art collector and curator, Sam Wagstaff (Chilvers and Smith, 2015), which led to the beginning of Mapplethorpe photographing the New York S&M scene in 1977 (Danto, 1996).

While Mapplethorpe is best known for his erotic photography, he explored a plethora of subject matter throughout his career, including portraits, nudes, and florals. His earlier work drew inspiration from the Pop Art movement, withAndy Warhol being a continuous inspiration, however later works drew on themes closer associated with the Dada and Surrealist movements. Mapplethorpe’s photography, and more specifically the depiction of the body, directly engages with the performative nature of identity. He used his models as something to be posed and played with, little more than dolls to be used for his own artistic practice. This is something that has garnered a lot of controversy, especially regarding his treatment of black men. This is not something I condone, nor is it something I wish to brush over.As Judith Still discusses, Mapplethorpe was a rich white man who photographed poor black men, often in ways that could be considered degrading and feminising. Still continues by stating, “These men are not doing but being- they are feminised in a way that disempowers men who, by virtue of class and race (and indeed sexuality), are already disempowered” (Still, 2003, p.122-23). Before discussing the ways in which Mapplethorpe broke down barriers for queer people, it is imperative to mention how the artist (and his whiteness) contributed to the marginalisation of others, especially people of colour. Regardless, the lucidity with which Mapplethorpe explored queer desire directly confronts traditional heteronormative perceptions, portraying it at something to be admired, even in its most shocking forms. Photography as a medium also defies traditional temporal structures through the act of capturing a moment and allowing it to exist outside the confines of time.

Through depicting specifically queer desire in his photography, Mapplethorpe’s entire practice demonstrates the experience of non-normative time. I will now use three pieces of works to discuss how the themes previously discussed in chapter one result in the experience of queer temporality, focusing on: access to desire, reproduction and mortality.

Leatherman #1

Fig 2.1. Mapplethorpe, R. (1970) Leatherman #1 [Mixed Media, 37.94 x 47.94 x 2.54 cm], Image courtesy the LosAngeles County Museum ofArt

Leatherman #1 (1970) (Fig 2.1.) is one of Mapplethorpe’s earliest works, created a year after leaving Pratt, in which he used clippings from his personal collection of gay pornography magazines. It is a mixed media piece featuring a man in leather gear holding a whip, with a strip of silver tape over his eyes, and a layer of plastic mesh superimposed on top.Ametal five-point star has been placed upon the mesh, which is then mounted on a Victorian style wallpaper. By using a clipping of a man clad in leather gear, Mapplethorpe calls forth conversations surrounding the intersection of sex and power, as well as the relationship between queerness and subcultural aesthetics. The use of S&M imagery directly creates a tie between desire and violence, added to by the inclusion of the bullwhip, an object used to simultaneously inflict pain and pleasure. Framing the man with red conveys lust, furthering the narrative of desire. The use of silver tape over the eyes also ties back to Mapplethorpe’s religious upbringing as, according to Christianity, imagery of the eye represents God’s omnipotence (Taylor, 2003). Through the act of covering the eyes, Mapplethorpe attempts to hide his desires whilst also stripping the ‘leatherman’of his personal identity. This flips the

traditional male subject/female object narrative in art by objectifying the man, demonstrating that what Mapplethorpe desires is not the man himself but the body he inhabits. This narrative is aided by the PopArt influence, with the mesh being used to mimic ben-day dots. PopArt often made use of found images, however the focus tended to be on celebrities. By using an image of a ‘leatherman’, Mapplethorpe is positioning him as an idol of sorts. Themes of idolisation are added to by the inclusion of the five-point star which, in Christianity, often represents the five wounds of Christ (Peters, 2004). By placing the star next to an object of lust, Mapplethorpe draws a correlation between Jesus’crucifixion and his experience of homosexual desire Due to his queerness, Mapplethorpe could not live the traditional life his Christian upbringing taught him to live, to meet a woman, get married and reproduce, thus demonstrating queer temporality The mesh itself also serve as commentary on the political position of homosexuality during the early 1970s. When considering that homosexuality was still illegal in the US when (Fig 2.1.) was created then the mesh acts as a prison This has been done to mirror the punishment Mapplethorpe could have faced for engaging with his desires, thus demonstrating the precarity he experienced at the hands of his sexuality In the book Outlaw Representation: Censorship and Homosexuality in TwentiethCentury American Art, Richard Meyer discusses this point regarding another one of Mapplethorpe’s collages from the same time called Bulls Eye (1970) (Mapplethorpe, 1970), stating,

[…] Mapplethorpe’s Bull’s Eye underscores the ways in which the act of prohibition calls forth the image it outlaws. In setting the figure of a naked man behind bars, Mapplethorpe mimics the punitive authority of the police. Yet the artist also reimagines the authority by making imprisonment a function of pasted papers […] and black plastic netting. (Meyer, 2018, p.176)

As explained by Meyer, Mapplethorpe uses a mesh prison to showcase the lack of social recognition queer people had at the time. The last point I feel is important to mention with regards to (Fig 2.1.) is the inclusion of the wallpaper, which draws back to the concept of the domestic. By positioning an object of his desires atop wallpaper, Mapplethorpe demonstrates a longing for a domestic setting in which he could truly be himself. However, the work is positioned asymmetrically, showcasing how his sexual and domestic desires were unable to co-exist. This is added to by the mesh prison created for the ‘leatherman’, indicating how inaccessible a life of both sexual and domestic bliss felt. By placing the star on top of the mesh, Mapplethorpe is showcasing how his religious upbringing taught him that his desires

were something that he could see but not touch, thus demonstrating how a lack of social recognition results in an experience of non-normative time.

Jim and Tom, Sausalito (1978)

Fig 2.2. Mapplethorpe, R. (1977) Jim and Tom, Sausalito [Photograph, gelatine silver print, 19.53 x 19.53 cm]

Image courtesy the LosAngeles County Museum ofArt

Jim and Tom, Sausalito (Fig 2.2.) is a photograph featured in Mapplethorpe’s controversial X Portfolio (1978). It includes two of Mapplethorpe’s friends, Jim, and Tom, engaging in an act of sexual gratification, with Jim urinating into Tom’s mouth. Jim is clad in a fetish hood, leather trousers, boots, and gloves, once again drawing on the artist’s relationship with S&M culture. Tom is wearing everyday attire while kneeling as if in prayer, linking back to themes of worship and Mapplethorpe’s religious upbringing Alight is cast over the two men, spotlighting the body, penis, urine, and Tom’s face. This draws the viewers’attention to the act of sexual gratification taking place whilst also tying back to the artist’s relationship with religion. Mapplethorpe often used extreme light and dark tones to represent binary perceptions of good and bad. By using light to draw attention to the phallus, urine and mouth, Mapplethorpe is positioning the act as one pleasure, thus disrupting heteronormative perceptions of what sex can and cannot be. This is backed up byArthur C. Danto, who points out that Tom is “drinking” Jim’s urine, “[…] since the act seems wholly voluntary” (Danto, 1996, p.83.). Simply by featuring two men engaging in a sexual act, (Fig 2.2.) separates the association between sexual intercourse and reproduction. This is taken one step further by the

fact that the two are exchanging urine rather than semen, highlighting the importance of sexual pleasure while rejecting traditional views surrounding sex and reproduction. Instead, Jim and Tom engage in sexual pleasure purely for the experience of gratification, hence highlighting the experience of queer temporality. Mapplethorpe confirms this by stating, “The people in those sexual pictures are really involved in them. It’s their thing. If there was somebody that happened to be drinking piss in the photograph, he was, in fact, into drinking piss.” (Mapplethorpe, 1982). When we consider Mapplethorpe’s continuous inspiration from art history (which is discussed in depth in (Germano Celant, 2004)), this photograph acts as a nod to The Creation of Adam (Michelangelo, 1512) and Hypnosis (Schneider, 1904). These historical influences contradict the risqué act Mapplethorpe is depicting. Through drawing a comparison between historical art and queer desire, Mapplethorpe is demonstrating that, even at its most perverse, homosexual intercourse is something to be admired.

Self Portrait (1988) (Fig 2.3.) is a photo that was taken a year before Mapplethorpe passed of AIDS in 1989 (Danto, 1996) Over the course of his career, Mapplethorpe took an abundance of self-portraits, however this one was different. Previously, the artist has used costumes and props to portray himself as different characters, such as a drag performer (Mapplethorpe, 1980) or the devil (Mapplethorpe, 1985). This time, Mapplethorpe dawns no such costume and presents himself as he was. The photograph features his head and hand holding a cane with a skull on it, floating in darkness, insinuating a separation of mind and body While (Fig

Self Portrait (1988)

Fig 2.3. Mapplethorpe, R. (1988) Self Portrait [Photograph, gelatin silver print, 57.7x48.1cm] Image courtesy the Scottish National Portrait Gallery

2.3.) features the extreme light and dark tones often found in Mapplethorpe’s work, his head is slightly out of focus, suggesting that the artist was already fading away. Typically, the artist approached vulnerability through the depiction of sexual encounters, however this time he uses his own physical fragility to highlight the societal neglect faced by queer people during theAIDS epidemic. Despite the blur, Mapplethorpe stares directly down the camera lens, creating a direct confrontation with both the viewer and his own mortality. When discussing the concept of life without liveability in Undoing Gender, Judith Butler raises the question of “who counts as human?” (Butler, 2004, p.17), what lives count as lives? and what makes a life worthy of grief? In Fig (2.3.), Mapplethorpe answers these questions by committing himself, and his condition, to legacy. Keith Hartley points out in (Hartley, 2006) how (Fig 2.3.) mirrors Edvard Munch’s Self-Portrait with Skeleton Arm (Munch, 1895) Germano Celant comments on the relationship between Mapplethorpe’s practice and art history by saying, “The echo of classical art is also a way of looking to beauty and death, because turning one’s gaze to the past and its memories means bringing attention back to the infinite, eternal conditions such as time’s undoing.” (Celant, 2004, p.49). While Celant is discussing classical art specifically, this remains true regarding the similarities between (Fig 2.3.) and (Munch, 1895). By using a print by Edvard Munch as inspiration for (Fig 2.3.), Mapplethorpe disrupts normative timelines even further. If he is going to die young due to the social neglect faced by the queer community during theAIDS epidemic, then he at least his portrait will grow old. The then 41-year-old knew he was dying, however, he also knew his story was not finished. By candidly confronting his own mortality, Mapplethorpe is both acknowledging and defying his own experience with queer temporality in the way he knew best, through his photographs

Queer Curatorship

Queer curatorship is a term coined by feminist professor, Jennifer Tyburczy, in her book Sex Museums: The Politics and Performance of Display (Tyburczy, 2016). The theory aims to unveil the ways in which museums and galleries uphold heteronormative power structures through the exhibition of historical artefacts and artworks. In reference to this dissertation, I will be using queer curatorship to examine the ways galleries either reinforce or dismantle the concept of linear time in reference to queer art history. After discussing how the work of Bacon and Mapplethorpe use themes of desire to challenge heteronormative temporal structures, I will now examine how this has been reflected upon posthumously through applying queer curatorship to two different exhibitions The exhibitions I will be examining are called Queer British Art 1861-1967 (2017), which features Francis Bacon, and Art After Stonewall, 1969-1989 (2019), which features Robert Mapplethorpe. Examining two exhibitions that explore art over a significant period of queer history will allow for a more cohesive lens of analysis through which to consider the impact of queer temporality on the performance of desire.

Queer BritishArt 1861-1967

Queer British Art 1861-1967 (2017) was an exhibition put on by the Tate London to celebrate a century since the [partial] legalisation of homosexuality in England and Wales (UK Parliament, 2019). The timeline of the exhibition begins in 1861 when it was declared that homosexual encounters should no longer be punishable by death (Legislation.Gov.uk, 2011), (though still illegal) and ends with the passing of the 1967 Sexual OffencesAct (UK Parliament, 2019) According to the exhibition director,Alex Farquharson, Queer British Art, “[…] is more than an exhibition; it is a celebration of a social and legal turning point, and also over 100 years of queer creativity.” (Farquharson, 2017, p.7) Rather than exhibiting the art works in chronological order, the Tate used eight room in which the work was separated by themes. These rooms were titled: Coded Desires, Public Indecency, Theatrical Types, Bloomsbury and Beyond, Defying Convention, Arcadia and Soho, Public/Private Lives and Francis Bacon and David Hockney (Tate, 2017). For this dissertation, I will be focusing on Bacon’s involvement in room eight, Francis Bacon and David Hockney

Art After Stonewall, 1969-1989

Art after Stonewall, 1969-1989 (2019), was an exhibition put on to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall uprisings. It was organised by the Columbus Museum of Art (COMA) and was co-curated by Johnathan Weinberg alongside Taylor Cann and Drew Sawyer (COMA, 2019) It was originally held between two venues in New York, the New York University’s Grey Art Gallery (Grey Gallery) and the Leslie Lohman Museum of Gay and Lesbian Art (LL Museum), form the April 24th to July 20th, 2019 (COMA, 2019)

According to the COMA website, “The exhibition encompasses the two crucial decades after the Stonewall riots of June 1969, exploring the many ways artists across the United States including those who identified as straight responded to the movement’s call for queer visibility and self-expression.” (COMA, 2019, para.1). Similarly to Queer British Art, Art

After Stonewall also separated the work by themes, which included: Coming Out, Sexual Outlaws, Use of the Erotic, Gender Play, Things are Queer, AIDS and Activism and We’re Here (COMA, 2019). The two galleries each focused on separate decades, with the LL Museum primarily displaying art from the 1960s and 1970s within the first four themes, and the Grey Gallery showcasing the 1980s with the final three.

Comparative analysis

Both Queer British Art and Art After Stonewall set out to do the same thing, provide visibility to marginalised artists during pinnacle moments of queer history They both focus on specific periods, 1861-1967 and 1969-89, respectively, and explore how a plethora of artists used their practices to respond to the political ongoings regarding the queer rights movement. While focusing on specific time frames, each exhibition separated the works by themes, which acknowledges the experience of queer temporality. However, in terms of Art After Stonewall, this appears to be vain, with the show (and themes) still being split by decade between two separate venues. Nicholas C. Morgan and Ksenia M. Soboleva discuss this choice in their review of the show, saying, “Having written a lot about queer temporalities, which go against dominant linear conceptions and structures of time, it seems so strange to me that this queer show is so rigid with timelines” (Soboleva et al, 2019, p.196).

Contrastingly, Queer British Art completely rejects the concept of linear timelines through focusing solely on the themes of the work. This is particularly apparent in room eight, which displays the work of Francis Bacon and David Hockney alongside each other. While the timelines of their careers overlap, their work (and experiences) both characterise different

eras of art history Jeffery Weeks discusses the impact of this by saying, “This means there is no single narrative of the evolution, chronology, nature, form, style or substance of queer art” (Weeks, 2018, p.313). As Weeks describes, by dissolving the expectation of a linear narrative in queer art history, the viewer can further understand the full scope of how queer experience manifests in art. When considering queer curatorship, by separating the work into a semichronological system, Art After Stonewall inadvertently upholds the heteronormative concept of linear time. On the other hand, Queer British Art dissolves these narratives by focusing exclusively on the themes explored in the work, rather than when it was made. By doing this, the Tate recognises the importance of freeing queer history from the confines of traditional temporal structures. This acknowledgement is aided by the inclusion of an essay written by Jack Halberstam in the exhibition’s catalogue (Barlow, 2017), titled, Framing Queer British Art. In this essay, Halberstam praises the exhibition for its engagement with “multiple histories of queer art making” while still maintaining a “temporal frame of 100 years” (Halberstam, 2017, p.19), demonstrating how even specific periods of queer history can be examined outside of a heteronormative perception of time. Halberstam does, however, go on to critique the show for its focus on white and upper and middle-class artists If the show claims to “explore connections between art and a whole range of sexualities and gender identities” (Tate, 2017, para.1) as the exhibition guide suggests, then more of an effort should have been made to consider the role intersectionality (especially regarding class and race) plays in fostering the experience of queer identity. Intersectionality is also something that Art After Stonewall seemed to struggle with as well, particularly when it came to lesbian representation.According to Soboleva and Morgan, the LL Museum appeared to have made a marginal effort to include the work of lesbian artist, however the same cannot be said for the Grey Gallery, which focused on work centred on theAIDS epidemic during the 1980s.As Soboleva describes, this inadvertently creates the narrative that “lesbians were immune to HIV/AIDS […]” (Soboleva, 2019, p.193) This once again demonstrates how integrating the perception of heteronormative timelines negatively effects the perception of queer artwork, as well as the importance of intersectionality.

One continuous point of critique for Queer British Art is that) it was “rather tame” (Potvin and Gint, 2017, p.418), a viewpoint that was often echoed in numerous reviews. On the other hand, (Martin, 2017) explains how the lack of sexual content gives way to conversations surrounding the importance of queer friendship and community. While it is important to see queer identity portrayed beyond just sexual desire, sex (and the erotic more specifically) has

played a prominent role throughout queer history When Tyburczy discusses queer curatorship, she says a major way in which galleries uphold heteronormative powerstructures is through the eradication of erotic narratives in homosexual work. When considering this, by glossing over sexual themes in the included works, the Tate reinforces the heteronormative standards of ‘good and bad sex’through the implication of queer sex being indecent for public exhibition. Simply put, one cannot discuss queer history without also discussing the erotic. Art After Stonewall, however, was praised for it’s celebration of sex positivity, particularly present in the room Use of the Erotic.

This brings us to the exhibition of Bacon and Mapplethorpe specifically. Bacon and Mapplethorpe are two vastly different artists whose work is hard to compare Therefore, in this section I will be discussing how the selected works by each artist, and how they have been displayed, reflect the experience of non-normative time through the lens of queer curatorship.

Queer British Art exhibited two pieces of Bacon’s work, Seated Figure (Bacon, 1961) and Two Figures in a Landscape (Bacon, 1956), as shown in (Fig 3.1.). The two paintings were showcased alongside other works by other artists that also explored the connection between the homoerotic and wrestling imagery, such as: Keith Vaughn, Christopher Wood, and

Fig 3.1.Archer, K (2017) [Photograph]. (Souter andArcher, 2017)

Wilhelm van Gloeden, as well as Muybridge’s Two Wrestlers (1887). The room also included vintage men’s health magazines and discussed how they were used in place of gay pornography before it was legal (Tate, 2017). This all helped to contextualise the work, ensuring the viewer understands not only why Bacon depicted queer desire the way he did, but also why his paintings played such a huge role in providing visibility. Through displaying items from different times alongside Bacon’s work, Muybridge’s photographs being taken in 1887 for example, the Tate further dismantles the expectation of a chronological narrative. This is furthered when we examine the order Bacon’s work was exhibited. According to the exhibition guide, which lists the work labels “clockwise from wall text” (Tate, 2017, p.172), Seated Figure (1961) was displayed first, then Two Figures in a Landscape (1956). David Hockney was also featured at either side of Bacon’s work, further disrupting chronological timelines.

Fig 3.2. Knobluach, L (2019), [Photograph] (Knoblauch, 2019)

Fig 3.3 Knobluach, L (2019), [Photograph] (Knoblauch, 2019)

As for Art After Stonewall, Mapplethorpe was included in two separate sections, with Bull’s Eye (1970) and Joe (1978) being displayed alongside his X Portfolio (1978) in ‘Use of the Erotic’ (Fig 3.2.) and (Fig 3.3.), and Self Portrait with Whip (1978) in ‘We’re Here’ (Fig 3.4.).

(Fig 3.4.). Knobluach, L (2019), [Photograph] (Knoblauch, 2019)

While the show appeared to have a problem with giving too much power to linear timelines, it appears that this was not the case when it came to the display of Mapplethorpe’s work

specifically Although it may seem an odd choice to separate the artist’s work, by focusing more on how the he engaged with the chosen themes, COMA acknowledges the role queer temporality plays in art history, at least in the case of Mapplethorpe. This is particularly prevalent in (Fig 3.3.) where we can see Bulls Eye (1970) displayed alongside Joe (1978) and his X Portfolio (1978). However, from what I can gather, these are the only pieces of Mapplethorpe’s that are exhibited, all created in the 1970s, and featured in the LL Museum, which once again focused on artist’s responses to the Stonewall uprisings. While I think these are all important pieces, only including Mapplethorpe’s erotic work inadvertently positions him as a single-discipline artist. The involvement of work such as the aforementioned Self Portrait (1988) would have contributed a lot to the Grey Gallery and its conversations surrounding the AIDS epidemic and especially when considering its cause effect relationship with queer temporality.

Both Queer British Art, 1861-1967 and Art After Stonewall, 1969-1989 demonstrate the growing understanding of queer temporalities in the contemporary art world, even when examining specific periods of queer art history. However, the inconsistencies between both exhibition’s interactions with non-normative time, as well as intersectionality and sex positivity, showcase how the concept is yet to be considered canonical in the art history zeitgeist. While genuine efforts seemed to be made from both events, a greater consciousness needs to be achieved before queer art history is freed from the shackles of normative timelines.

Conclusion

This dissertation aimed to discuss how the depiction of queer desire, when performed under experiences of precarity, disrupts heteronormative concepts of time. The analysis of Two Figures (1953) and Triptych August 1972 (1972) by Francis Bacon showcased how experiences of precarity intersect with the public performance of desire, through the depictions of themes such as power, sex, and mortality. The examination of Leatherman #1 (1970), Jim and Tom, Sausalito (1977), and Self Portrait (1988) by Robert Mapplethorpe demonstrated how these reoccurring themes imply a shared experience between queer artists

While both Bacon and Mapplethorpe depicted desire under different experiences of marginalisation, the commonality between themes explored in their work showcases a link between the performance of desire during different times of precarity. Furthermore, analysing these themes against the concept of queer temporality also reveals how desire, when performed under precarious circumstances, has been used to disrupt heteronormative perceptions of time. Using queer curatorship to dissect Queer British Art, 1861-1967 and Art

After Stonewall, 1969-1989 allowed for a discussion surrounding the ways in which galleries uphold heteronormative perceptions of queer art history. While both exhibitions made attempts to acknowledge the existence of queer temporalities, Queer British Art appears to had made more of an effort to fully dissolve the expectation of linear timelines. However, they both lacked intersectionality with regards to the artists included which, as discussed by (Soboleva, 2019), results in an altered (and harmful) understanding of queer history. While this may not uphold heteronormative perceptions of normative time, it does portray the cisgendered, white man as the biggest victim in queer history. This narrative also ignores how the intersection of gender, race and class plays a part in the marginalisation of queer people. This topic is something I plan on continuing with postgraduate study, aiming to explore the intersection of queer temporality and art on a deeper level. It could be particularly interesting to focusing on how sexual fluidity ties in with the experience of non-normative time. If identity is fluid, as Butler suggests, then at what point on the Kinsey Scale does the experience of non-normative time come into play? The analysis of work by other artists, especially from different time periods, would also be highly valuable in forming a more robust understanding of how the experience of queer temporality has developed alongside art history. As previously mentioned, I am a white, queer man, and so my research has been focused on this experience. There is still ample research needing done on how the experience of queer temporality, especially with how it intersects with other marginalised experiences of

precarity such as gender, race, class and disability However, I feel my place is not to spearhead this investigation, but rather use my privilege to uplift the research of people within these marginalised groups.

To conclude, while there seems to be a growing comprehension of queer temporalities, there appears to be a inconsistent understanding as to how the concept can, and should interact, with queer art history. While this dissertation does not have all the answers, hopefully the points made can be used as a building block in the reevaluation of what it means to be a queer artist, past or present.

Bibliography

Ann Lee Morgan (2018) ‘Mapplethorpe, Robert (1946–89)’, The Oxford Dictionary of American Art and Artists. 2nd edn. Oxford University Press.

Archer, K. (2017). Available at: Queer British Art: 1861-1967 at Tate Britain | Exhibition review – The Upcoming (Accessed: December 17th, 2024).

Arya, R. (2012) ‘Constructions of Homosexuality in the Art of Francis Bacon’, Journal for Cultural Research, 16(1), pp. 43–61. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14797585.2011.633836.

Bacon, F. (1956) Figures on a Landscape [Oil on canvas, 150x107.5cm].

Bacon, F. (1961) Seated Figure [Oil on canvas, 165x142cm].

Bacon, F. and Archimbaud, M. (1993) Francis Bacon in conversation with Michel Archimbaud. Phaidon.

Barlow, C. (2017) Queer British Art 1861-1967 Exhibition held at Tate Britain, London, April 5 - October 1, 2017 [Exhibition catalogue]. London: Tate Publishing.

Brighton, A. (2001) Tate British Artists: Francis Bacon. London, UK: Tate Gallery Publishing.

Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Taylor and Francis.

Butler, J. (1993a) Bodies That Matter: on the Discursive Limits of Sex. New York: Routledge.

Butler, J. (1993b) ‘Critically Queer’, GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 1(1), pp. 17–32. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-1-1-17.

Butler, J. (2004) Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge.

Celant, G. (2004) ‘Mapplethorpe as Neoclassicist’, in Robert Mapplethorpe and the Classical Tradition. New York, USA: Guggenheim Museum Publication, pp. 36–51.

Christophe Domino (1997) Francis Bacon : ‘taking reality by surprise’. London: London Thames And Hudson.

COMA (2019) Art after Stonewall, 1969-1989, Columbus Museum of Art. Available at: https://www.columbusmuseum.org/art-after-stonewall/ (Accessed: 2 January 2025).

Cooper, E. (1994) The sexual perspective : homosexuality and art in the last 100 years in the West. 2nd edn. London ; New York: Routledge.

Danto, A.C. (1996) Playing with the edge : the photographic achievement of Robert Mapplethorpe. Berkeley ; University of California Press.

De Block, A. and Adriaens, P.R. (2013) ‘Pathologizing Sexual Deviance: A History’, The Journal of Sex Research, 50(3/4), pp. 276–298. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42002060.

Desai, D. (2003) ‘Multicultural Art Education and the Heterosexual Imagination: A Question of Culture on JSTOR’, Studies in Art Education, 44(2), pp. 147–161. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1321057 (Accessed: 4 October 2024).

Doan, L. (2018) ‘British Queer history: New Approaches and Perspectives’, in B. Lewis (ed.) Jstor.org. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, pp. 87–108. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt18mbf2j.10 (Accessed: 19 December 2024).

Drutt, M. (no date) Robert Mapplethorpe: Self Portrait, The Guggenheim Museums and Foundation. Available at: https://www.guggenheim.org/artwork/2695 (Accessed: 17 November 2024).

Ernst Van Alphen (1992) Francis Bacon and the loss of self. London, UK: Reaktion Books.

Farquharson , A. (2017) ‘Director’s Foreword, in C. Barlow (ed.) Queer British Art 18611967. London, UK: Tate Publishing, pp. 7–8.

(Fig 1.1.) Bacon, F. (1953) Two Figures [Oil on Canvas].

(Fig 1.2.) Bacon, F. (1972) Triptych August 1972 [Oil paint and sand on 3 canvases].

(Fig 2.1.) Mapplethorpe , R. (1970) Leatherman #1 [Mixed media].

(Fig 2.2.) Mapplethorpe , R. (1977) Jim and Tom, Sausalito [Photograph, gelatine silver print].

(Fig 2.3.) Mapplethorpe, R. (1988) Self Portrait [Photograph, gelatine silver print on paper].

(Fig 3.1.)Archer, K (2017) [Photograph].Available at: https://www.theupcoming.co.uk/2017/04/04/queer-british-art-1861-1967-at-tate-britain-exhibitionreview/ (Accessed: 6/1/25)

(Fig 3.2.) Knobluach, L (2019), [Photograph]. Available at: https://collectordaily.com/art-afterstonewall-1969-1989-leslie-lohman-museum-and-grey-art-gallery-nyu/ (Accessed: 6/1/25)

(Fig 3.2). Knobluach, L (2019), [Photograph]. Available at: https://collectordaily.com/art-afterstonewall-1969-1989-leslie-lohman-museum-and-grey-art-gallery-nyu/ (Accessed 6/1/25)

(Fig 3.3.) Knobluach, L (2019), [Photograph]. Available at: https://collectordaily.com/art-afterstonewall-1969-1989-leslie-lohman-museum-and-grey-art-gallery-nyu/ (Accessed 6/1/25)

(Fig 3.4 ) Knobluach, L (2019), [Photograph]. Available at: https://collectordaily.com/art-afterstonewall-1969-1989-leslie-lohman-museum-and-grey-art-gallery-nyu/ (Accessed: 6/1/25)

Foucault, M. (1978) The History of Sexuality. New York: Pantheon Books.

Francis Bacon Estate (no date) George Dyer | Francis Bacon, www.francis-bacon.com. Available at: https://www.francis-bacon.com/life/family-friends-sitters/george-dyer (Accessed: 20 December 2024).

Gagosian (2019) Francis Bacon: Couplings, Grosvenor Hill, London, June 6–August 3, 2019, Gagosian. Available at: https://gagosian.com/exhibitions/2019/francis-baconcouplings/ (Accessed: 20 December 2024).

Gefter, P. (2009) ‘Two Robert Mapplethorpe Symposia’, Aperture, (197), pp. 82–85. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24473416 (Accessed: 12 October 2024).

Germano Celant, Franzen, E., Arkady Ippolitov, Mapplethorpe, R. and Vail, K. (2004) Robert Mapplethorpe and the Classical Tradition : Photographs and Mannerist Prints ; [published on the Occasion of the Exhibition Robert Mapplethorpe and the Classical Tradition: Photographs and Mannerist Prints ; Deutsche Guggenheim, Berlin, July 24October 17, 2004 ; State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, December 8, 2004 - January 16, 2005 ; Moscow House of Photography, January 21 - March 10, 2005 ; Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, July 1 - August 24, 2005]. New York, Ny: Guggenheim Museum.

Halberstam, J. (2005) In a Queer Time and Place: Transgender Bodies, Subcultural Bodies. New York: New York University Press.

Halberstam, J. (2017) ‘Framing Queer British Art’, in C. Barlow (ed.) Queer British Art 1861-1967. London, UK: Tate Publishing, pp. 19–23.

Ian Chilvers and John Glaves-Smith (2015) ‘Mapplethorpe, Robert (1946–89)’, A Dictionary of Modern and Contemporary Art. 3rd edn. Oxford University Press.

Institut Pasteur (2023) 40 years of HIV discovery: the first cases of a mysterious disease in the early 1980s, Institut Pasteur. Available at: https://www.pasteur.fr/en/researchjournal/news/40-years-hiv-discovery-first-cases-mysterious-disease-early-1980s (Accessed: 7 November 2024).

J Tyburczy (2016) Sex Museums : The Politics and Performance of Display. Chicago, Il: University Of Chicago Press.

Johnson, A.D. (2016) ‘The Artist-Activist: History and Healing through Art’, Black History Bulletin, 79(1), pp. 27–33. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5323/blachistbull.79.1.0027 (Accessed: 4 October 2024).

Keith Hartley (2006) Robert Mapplethorpe : [exhibition], Edinburgh, National galleries of Scotland, from 29 July to 5 November 2006. Edinburgh: National Galleries Of Scotland.

Kenneth E. Silver (1992) ‘Modes of Disclosure: The Construction of Gay Identity and the Rise of Pop Art’, in R. Ferguson (ed.) Hand- Painted Pop: American Art in Transition, 195562. Los Angeles, US: Museum of Contemporary Art, pp. 178–203.

Legislation.Gov.uk (2011) Offences Against the Person Act 1861, Legislation.gov.uk. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/24-25/100/section/61/enacted (Accessed: 19 December 2024).

Lewis, R. and Stephenson, A. (2017) ‘Round Table: Queer Lifestyles, Politics and Curating Now’, Visual Culture in Britain, 18(1), pp. 100–114. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14714787.2017.1318543.

Linhart, K.M. (2005) ‘Decriminalization of Homosexuality and Its Effects on Family Rights: A German-US-American Comparison’, German law journal, 6(6), pp. 943–965. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200014048.

Malcolm, N. (2023) Forbidden Desire in Early Modern Europe. Oxford University Press.

Mapplethorpe, R. (1970) Bull’s Eye [Photographic collage].

Mapplethorpe, R. (1980) Self-Portrait [Photograph, gelatin silver print].

Mapplethorpe, R. (1982) ‘The Shock of Black and Blue’, SoHo News

Mapplethorpe, R. (1985) Certain people : a book of portraits. 3rd ed. Twelvetress Press.

Mapplethorpe, R. (1988) Self Portrait [Photograph, gelatin silver print].

Martin, S. (2017) ‘Queer British Art: London ’, The Burlington Magazine, 159(1374), pp. 738–739. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/44870071.

Meyer, R. (2018) Outlaw representation : censorship & homosexuality in twentieth-century American art. Brattleboro, Vermont: Echo Point Books & Media.

Michelangelo (1512) The Creation of Adam [Fresco].

Munch, E. (1895) Self-Portrait with a Skeleton Arm [Lithograph].

Muybridge, E. (1887) Two Men Wrestling, [Collotype].

Ofleld, S. (2001) ‘Wrestling with Francis Bacon’, Oxford Art Journal, 24(1), pp. 113–130. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3600381 (Accessed: 4 October 2024).

Peters, F.G.H. (2004) The Sacred Pentagram. Available at: https://www.gscsricf.org/files/public-papers/peters_111404.pdf (Accessed: 20 December 2024).

Potvin, J. and Gindt, D. (2017) ‘“Queer British Art, 1861-1967” at Tate Britain, London, 5 April-1 October, 2017’, Visual Culture in Britain, 18(3), pp. 414–418. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14714787.2017.1407999.

Queer British Art 1861-1967 (2017) [Exhibition]. Tate Britain, London. April 5 - October 1, 2017.

Robert Mapplethorpe (2016) The Art Story. Available at: https://www.theartstory.org/artist/mapplethorpe-robert/ (Accessed: 17 November 2024).

Russell, J. (1993) Francis Bacon. Rev ed. New York, USA: Thames And Hudson. Schneider, S. (1904) Hypnosis [Etching and aquatint print].

Self Portrait by Robert Mapplethorpe | National Galleries of Scotland (2020) National Galleries of Scotland. Available at: https://www.nationalgalleries.org/art-and-artists/90652 (Accessed: 17 November 2024).

Soboleva and Morgan (2019) ‘Art After Stonewall, 1969–1989: Grey Art Gallery and LeslieLohman Museum’, QED: A Journal in GLBTQ Worldmaking, 6(3), p. 189. Available at: https://doi.org/10.14321/qed.6.3.0189.

Sontag, S. (1985) ‘Sontag on Mapplethorpe’, Vanity Fair, July, pp. 69–73. Available at: https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/1985/7/sontag-on-mapplethorpe (Accessed: 28 November 2024).

Souter, A. (2017) Queer British Art: 1861-1967 at Tate Britain | Exhibition review, The Upcoming. Available at: https://www.theupcoming.co.uk/2017/04/04/queer-british-art-18611967-at-tate-britain-exhibition-review/ (Accessed: 17 December 2024).

Stephenson, N. (1996) ‘PLAYING WITH THE EDGE: THE PHOTOGRAPHIC ACHIEVEMENT OF ROBERT MAPPLETHORPE. Arthur C. Danto’, Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North America, 15(1), pp. 69–70. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1086/adx.15.1.27948829.

STILL, J. (2003) ‘What is a Man? Looking at the Traces of Men’s Sexuality, Race and Class in the Work of Some Contemporary Photographers’, Paragraph, 26(1/2), pp. 119–133. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/43263718.

Stulberg, L.M. (2018) LGBTQ social movements. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Sylvester, D. (1998) Francis Bacon : the human body [published on the occasion of the occasion of the exhibition held at Hayward Gallery, 5 February - 5 April 1998]. University of California Press.

Sylvester, D. (2007) Francis Bacon: David Sylvester 1963, 1966, 1979.London: Guardian News & Media

Sylvester, D. and Bacon, F. (1980) Interviews With Francis Bacon, 1962-1979. London Thames And Hudson.

Tate (2017) Queer British Art 1861–1967 – Exhibition Guide , Tate. Available at: https://www.tate.org.uk/art/queer-british-art-1861-1967 (Accessed: 17 December 2024).

Tate (2017) LARGE PRINT GUIDE. Tate Britain . Available at: https://www.tate.org.uk/documents/1245/tb_exb_0044_queer_british_art_printguide_all_roo ms.pdf (Accessed: 11 October 2024).

Tate (2017) Queer British Art 1867-1961 [Exhibition guide] Tate Gallery, London. Available at:

https://www.tate.org.uk/documents/1245/tb_exb_0044_queer_british_art_printguide_all_roo ms.pdf. (Accessed: December 17th, 2024)

Taylor, R. (2003) How to Read a Church : a Guide to Symbols and Images in Churches and Cathedrals. London, UK: Random House.

The Estate of Francis Bacon (2009) Biography | Francis Bacon, Francis-bacon.com Available at: https://www.francis-bacon.com/biography (Accessed: 4 October 2024).

The National Archives (2011) Local Government Act 1988, Legislation.gov.uk. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/9/section/28/enacted (Accessed: 19 December 2024).

Tyburczy, J. (2013) ‘Queer curatorship: Performing the history of race, sex, and power in museums’, Women & Performance: a journal of feminist theory, 23(1), pp. 107–124.

Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/0740770x.2013.792635.

UK Parliament (2024) Regulating sex and sexuality: the 20th century, UK Parliament Available at: https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/privatelives/relationships/overview/sexuality20thcentury/ (Accessed: 6 November 2024).

UK Parliament (2019) Sexual Offences Act 1967, UK Parliament. Available at: https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/privatelives/relationships/collections1/sexual-offences-act-1967/sexual-offences-act-1967/ (Accessed: 7 November 2024).

Ware, B., Caygill, H., Horowitz, G.M., Leader, D., Malabou , C., Nobus, D., Salecl , R. and Zupančič, A. (2019) Francis Bacon : painting, philosophy, psychoanalysis. Edited by B. Ware. London: Thames & Hudson.

Weeks, J. (2012) ‘Queer(y)ing the “Modern Homosexual”’, Journal of British Studies, 51(3), pp. 523–539. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23265593 (Accessed: 1 November 2024).

Weeks, J. (2018) ‘Queer British Art, 1861–1967 on JSTOR’, History Workshop Journal, 85, pp. 309–313. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/48554984 (Accessed: 11 October 2024).

Yingling, T. (1990) ‘How the Eye Is Caste: Robert Mapplethorpe and the Limits of Controversy’, Discourse, 12(2), pp. 3–28. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41389150 (Accessed: 11 October 2024).

Zabunyan, E. (2019) ‘Art after Stonewall, 1969-1989’, Critique d’art. Groupement d’intérêt scientifique (GIS) Archives de la critique d’art. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4000/critiquedart.54146.