What did I learn so far in this project?
There might not be any objective part to my identity.
Identity is performed and not static.
Resubjectification is central to queer identities that are shaped by outside forces.
In order to have agency, we can continuously strive to create dissonances that open up a space of possiblity, rather than re-instating normative forms of identity.
My Identity on the countryside feels more restricted, whereas in my social bubble, sexuality feels so arbitrary that it is even akward to center it.
I do not feel represented by a lot of “queer aesthetics” - they are usually urban-centric.
Disruptive processes can leverage power (ruinology, radical drag, queer phenomenology).
I made the first iteration of the presentation for midterms and felt this need to validate every bit of the project - every archetype and decision, and where I found that validation was in personal recountings of experience, emotions, my sensibilities - romantic and emotional. And I pulled these excerpts from this blog that felt like they really expressed something, and then I couldn’t even present it to Lena. I was ashamed of it. Of how visceral and real it felt, how simple and benign my struggles seemed, how human and soft it was.
I do not need to extract my emotions this much for the project, not outwardly at least.
It is interesting that again and again I am treading this line of it being too personal but at the same time this self-excavation is fueling me with so much motivatino because it is expressing something deep within. I feel like it strikes a chord within me, which is beautiful for me personally but also because I believe there are people who have had similar experiences to mine who would benefit from seeing this inner conflict of a rural queer past presented in a way that feels empowering, playful, gratifying. Rather than just traumatic, something to lock away once you arrive at the safe haven of the city.
At this point in time the project is a lot about me reconnecting with my roots, which is something I do very shyly and timidly. It is a scary act, revisiting this space with the intention to dig for connection. With the intention of laying bare who I am - something I am only used to doing so freely everywhere but home. And even then very sparesly in a sincere manner.
It is scary.
I go back to the city and look at the stuff I recorded back home and build a meta-narrative. Like examining a static relic, a lifeless thing, something set in stone. It is a sense of no agency that is at play there, or limited to the parts of me that are accepted. I have a privileged position there, one where my parents know most people in town and vice versa, people like them, their restaurant is a staple for the community. In a way a lot of trust and help is handed to me via them in advance. This is a position I am not fully aware of yet i believe.
I went back and removed the personal parts of the presentation, removed the explanation of every element. I will present the method, show the tryouts, give glimpses into the vast amount of thought I have read and produced around the work and then just show the video. The bread as a medium is perfect for safeguarding myself. It abstracts enough for me to touch on these subjects without combusting. While I hope it retains points for identification and association. It’s nice like that.