12 ▶ Social
Weronika Peek
Where I Don't Exist
B
ehind every great man there is a great woman – and sometimes, another man. Take Alexander the Great and his friend Hephaestion, whom Alexander often described as his “alter ego”. The king mentally collapsed once Hephaestion died and then organized one of the most lavish funerals in ancient history. With extreme loneliness and grief preying on his mind, Alexander died soon after. Let’s think Frida Kahlo with her astonishing works. And her many rumoured affairs, including Leon Trotsky, Georgia O’Keeffe or Josephine Baker. Let’s think Chopin and his fiery letters to Tytus Woyciechowski, straightforwardly expressing how he longs to kiss him and will always “love him only”. If you’re wondering how come you’ve never heard of any of those relationships, there’s a reason for that, and it’s called LGBT erasure. ‣ Scholars have spent centuries trying to pass ostentatiously romantic, nonheterosexual relationships as “good friends”. Unfortunately, even though LGBT acceptance has come a long way since the 1960s, this kind of erasure still runs deeply in academic circles. Why is it still so unthought-of to state the obvious and call them gay, lesbian, or bisexual? Is the evidence not enough? Or are we indeed seeing something that was never there? ‣ One of the most common arguments for LGBT erasure is the fact that it doesn’t really add anything to the picture. Wittgenstein would’ve still become a prominent language philosopher had he been straight, right? Well… we’ll never know. In some twisted way, Wittgenstein
may have become who he was because of being a homosexual, just like perhaps Chopin’s music is so touching due to the fact he was, allegedly, bi. ‣ Another approach is to comfortably overlook the “damning” evidence or hurry to point out the lack of context. “Love” could actually be used when talking about a friend, affairs could simply be rumours, and relationships could, in fact, be nothing but camaraderie. It so happened when Alexander, the 2004 film starring Brad Pitt, first hit the screens, prompting a group of historians to sign a petition against the “inaccuracies” presented in it. As one of them stated: “We are not saying that we are against gays, but we are saying that the production company should make it clear to the audience that this film is pure fiction and not a true depiction of the life of Alexander”. Now, the quest for maximum accuracy is a laudable effort. But let’s ask ourselves why scarce evidence is not treated as evidence at all. Why would it ever bother anyone who “is not against gays”? And how can humanity ever come to terms with the fact that men can love men, women can love women, if any piece of evidence for this is being constantly obliterated? ‣ Of course, if the l-, g-, or b-words still sound too intimidating, we might as well follow the path of separating the author from their work. After all, The Magic Mountain, Swan Lake, or even the Sistine Chapel are just as compelling with and without the knowledge that their creators were gay. But what if, by paying no attention to that fact, we run the risk of blatantly disregarding the meaning that can be hidden in the text?
