Looking back on the Clavin reading from the beginning of the semester as my research comes together and class discussions have come to a close, I feel like I can understand the exact application of transnational history as he describes it in his article, while also thinking of ways my understanding of it is still expanding to meet my interest in queer history. His categories of ‘time, manner, and place’ look different for different fields of research, and I’ve spent time considering how they might look in queer history.
Starting with Time. Clavin discusses eurocentric periodization, and how that has created ideas of progress, as it relates with colonialism, that have been imposed on the rest of the world. For queer history, there seems to be a distinction made between before and after the Stonewall Riots (a revolt led by queer and transgender people of color in New York City, which garnered international attention towards LGBTQ+ rights movements). And before and after the AIDS crisis (which created a necessity for organized activism). Because of the proximity of these two events to each other, and the considerable progress made in parts of the world after the fact, a lot of scholarship in queer history is confined to the past 75 years alone. It’s important to note of course that the progress following these events was not global, and should not be taken for granted as watershed moments across the world when in reality it was largely confined to the west (which also gets into a whole thing about homonationalism which I will discuss in another blog post). Queer people have existed across the globe throughout all points of history and continue to do so today, finding ways to look for them outside of modern resources and the western world is important.
Next, Manner. Manner is interesting to consider when looking into queer histories. Many of the sources available in the archives are ephemeral objects such as flyers for events or badges, existing only in small moments of time. However other ways to look for queer people in history is through the law. Though rarely explicitly mentioned in legal proceedings, the existence of anti sodomy policies, or strict gender codes hint towards an existence of queer people that those in power sought to hide. Other forms of sources available, could be letters and housing records, though historians have traditionally been quick to dismiss such evidence. I’m curious to see how the internet will begin to play a role as a resource for studying queer history, with cites like discord creating spaces for shared communities for queer people across the globe. Or what methods will be discovered in use of uncovering pre-colonial queer cultures in indigenous and non-western local communities.
Through a queer lens of analysis, Clavin’s discussion of place is deeply entwined with the discussion of time, and looking for queer history outside a western context. There is not a singular, universal queer experience, though homonormative assumptions generated in the West largely influence how and what historians look for when searching the archives for queer history. LGBTQ+ identities take many forms and influence people’s understandings of themselves differently. Looking at local communities within a transnational context can help us understand the variety of experiences and how terms have been shared across spaces.
I think that there is so much potential exploring queer history through a transnational lens, and I’m excited to see where my project continues to take me and what I can do with it later on.