The zapatista presence

The readings for this week center the Zapatista movement in México as a postmodern revolution that used different spaces as the cyberspace as a way to expand their presence descentering it from a single figure and leader, reproduce their ideas and to make it more accessible while reimagining the idea of presence.

Taylor, explains the complicated performance and important gesture of the “death” of Subcomandante Marcos. She explains the idea that, in spite of the attention that the movement caused, the government  still “couldn’t see us” (the indigenous people) while they got a lot of attention from the media. This is very telling of the mechanisms of media that might highlight rebellions and their mestizo leaders, but still invisibilize indigenous people. Yet, the figure of comandante Marcos as a “drag-king” (Paul Preciado) that utilizes the mask to “transform the body of the multitude into the collective agent of revolution” is highlighted as a death that did not kill the ideas of the movement.  As his figure disappeared, the movement became more centered in collective struggle, rather than in the image of just one leader. Yet, Taylor also looks at the important aspect of the circulation of the image of Marcos, as “his performance was that he was able to personify the thoughts and priorities of a movement far older and greater than he was.” In the interview to Domínguez they present us the idea of using the media as a space for bridging the most marginal with the spaces and systems of new forms of power.

Lane and Domínguez analyzes the use of digital media as a space for public protest that was also a form to “register a huge, collective, politicized presence in digital space.” (130) Through the analysis of the Electronic Disturbance Theater the authors explain the relation between performance and embodiment in the cyberspace as the Digital Zapatismo used “disturbance spaces” resignifying what we have been discussed as the space of appearance.

The use of digital media for Cortinas de humo

The readings for this week analyze how the use of digital media has become a tool of action for politicians and different groups, as well as a way to rethink the idea of citizenship. Edwards (2018) states that the rise in the use of technology and media have not also been a means for open expression, but they have also contributed to the raise of nationalism as new forms of identification developed with different technologies. An example of this is in Trump’s interventions and appearances as a resemblance of American reality shows; “The global circulation of Donald Trump’s rhetoric and persona beginning with the 2015 campaign ruptured a crucial divide between popular culture and political discourse and under Trump US political system itself has become a form of global entertainment.” (27) The author calls “the selfie determination of nations” where real people, bots and trolls coexist, while performance on Twitter creates an fake intimacy. In Trump’s case the use of Twitter played an important role in his political spectacle. Here, the manipulation of the victims, for example, is a way to reproduce spectacle or “the political theater” (36).

For Poster (2006), this rise of digital media complicates our notion of citizenship. For the author, citizen and natural rights are constructed from a West perspective where “Human rights and citizenship are tied together, but in here we can ask, based on what ideas of humanity are those rights constructed? Here, Poster introduces the idea of the “netizen” for the political subject constituted in the internet (78) that has become a new cultural practice of resignification while also enhancing existing political formations. In here, the net is also used for political figures to take advantage but the net also contains its own forms of hierarchy and control; “many forms of political presence characteristic of the nation-state are reproduced.” (83).

An example of these ideas are seen in what in Peru is called “Cortina de humo” and that started during Fujimori’s dictatorship where media characters like Laura Bozo were utilized to distract audiences and contribute with the spectacularization of the country, while real human rights crimes were been committed. These mechanisms last until today where Twitter is used by fujimoristas to create and spread fake news and terror. This was lately observed with the idea of the “golpe de estado”. Fortunately, there is a section of groups that resist these mechanisms using the same tools.

The spectacle of the dictator

The readings for this week talk about the construction of the figure of the leader that works on the beliefs of the people in order to gain power. Machiavelli proposes that autocratic regimes are founded with a leader –prince- that creates the spectacle of power through discourse and under the figure of a strength that does not fear the opposition to its regime. In this way, we can relate to the figure of the dictator as someone that is feared and that will have the power to handle what the country needs; “The answer is of course, that it would be best to be both loved and feared. But since the two rarely come together, anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved.” This resembles the figure of what in Latin America was the phenomenon of caudillismo that was a precedent for the instauration of dictatorships and that constituted the leader capable to apply “mano dura”. We can see examples of this in the figure of Fujimori and now Bolsonaro.

Elizabeth Kolbert’s article also highlights how social interaction is what shapes our reasoning. Through these thinking systems people, for example, tend to just pay attention to the information that reaffirms their beliefs, and rejects what is contrary to their train of thought. Because of this “confirmation bias” people tend then to only listen to what satisfies the opinions they have already formed; “confirmation bias leads people to dismiss evidence of new or underappreciated threats.” Part of this system is also about relying in someone’s expertise without real verification, but only for the process of socialization. This construction of beliefs then would have more repercussion in politics when “community of knowledge” that does not really manage information become dangerous.

Charles Blow’s article exemplifies these ideas with the figure of Trump and how he transcends as a figure of the “folk leader”- very much what in Latin American is known as “el caudillo”. One important thing in the reading is how in front of the folk leader people abandon their beliefs and blindly believe in the spectacle of power. For example, we saw many white women voting for Trump in spite of the sexual assault scandals around him. In this way; “Behavior that people would never condone in their personal lives, they relish in the folk hero.” As the author says, his lying and sexism don’t damage his persona, but rather add a different dimension to his figure as the outcast, fighter of the establishment and hero.  Similarly, in Peru, the dictator Fujimori constructed his persona as the savior and the only powerful one to fight terrorism. For this reason, people condoned the human rights crimes he committed, and elected him for president three times.

The Power of the Image

The readings for this week focus on the alternative ways for the space of appearance and action that rely in the use of different tools like photography and social media and how these complicate the relationship between spectators and political actors. Beltran (2013) examines the new ways of “coming out” that permitted undocumented activists to reclaim agency and not simply be “spoken about” but instead to be “speaking subjects and agents of change” (81). She calls this peer-to peer and social media use for activist participation a “queer” vision of democracy where an open participation becomes more direct and visible and where activists are able to express “more complex and sophisticated conceptions of loyalty, legality, migration, sexuality and patriotism” (81). With the idea of representation, Beltran mentions the shift in “the politics of incorporation and inclusion” (81) that comes with performative acts and gestures that directly criticize the state unjustice. Here, participation in online practices and new forms of media challenge traditional political domains.

Azoulay (2008) discusses the capacity of action of a photograph, which does not end with the photographic act, but rather has an aftermath effect. For the author, the use of photography has the power to expand the space of action and its effect goes beyond territorial spaces; “ The photographer who found a gap in the curfew and pointed his camera towards the soldiers, deviating the sense and direction of their action, thus restored the conditions of plurality to the space of action. Although plurality cannot erase structural inequalities and discrepancies between the different protagonists, the space of plurality undermines the apparently stable conditions of domination.” (133) Here, photography becomes an object of intervention that gives the capacity of action for the spectator and the one holding the camera; “Within a new framework of time and space, the photograph creates new conditions for moral action.” (135)

Rancière (2009) examines photography as a testimony and its dialectic as image; “The stock reaction to such images is to close one’s eyes or avert one’s gaze…For the image to produce its political effect the spectator must be convinced that she is herself guilty of sharing in the prosperity rooted in imperialist exploitation of the world” (85) Here, photography does not merely represent reality or a duplicate, but has also the power to compel message and a call to action. In this sense speech and image, rather than being opposite cane be complementary.The readings complicate the idea of the space of appearance, civic relations, visibility and representation through the use of new technologies that can be used to reclaim rights and citizenship.

Spectacle and spectator

The readings for this week focus on the technologies used to control and exercise power over populations. Taylor (1997) focuses on how systems of terror use the spectacle of violence to petrify people’s reaction. Taking the dictatorship in Argentina, Taylor analyzes the power dynamics between spectacle and spectatorship where seeing helps to construct the nation’s identity; “Complex exchange of look and gaze contribute to the simultaneous formation of the individual and social subject” (121).  Here, she uses the term “percepticide” which is the self-blinding of the population that, because of the fear imparted on them by the state, pulled back and did not react. The theatricality of terrorism has the effect of making people react in their minds, but not physically. With this split, populations are controlled to see torture but not react. Taylor sees the necessity of getting empowered by seeing and confronting the spectacle of terror, not as a way to find pleasure or to construct ourselves as moral subjects, but rather as to “confront the monster without turning into stone and being petrified” (137) Foucault (1975) analyzes the appearance/disappearance of the body in relation to penal repression. The abstraction of the law is necessary for the justice system not to be responsible for the physical pain that the body suffers when imprisoned. This system of punishment then is one that creates a relation of power and domination where knowledge and strategy are essential; “in our societies, the systems of punishment are to be situated in a certain ‘political economy’ of the body: even if they do not make use of violent or bloody punishment, even when they use ‘lenient’ methods involving confinement or correction, it is always the body that is at issue – they body and its forces, their utility and their docility, their distribution and their submission.” (25) Finally, Girard (1986) uses the image of the scapegoat of the nation to exemplify how the persecutors convince citizens that a small group signifies a big threat for the entire society, where minorities and the “abnormal” are used as the ones to be blamed and to exercise violence on.

Performing Queer Memory Beyond National Trauma

The construction of queer memory and identity in Peru goes in hand with the claim of neglected rights; “…if one is to claim that sexuality as a right over and against a set of laws or codes that consider it criminal or dishonorable, then the claim itself is performative. This is one way of naming that exercise of the right precisely when there is no local law to protect that exercise.” (Butler, 57) With these words Butler explains how one has the right to occupy a space and reclaim the right to exercise one’s sexuality, even if this one is codified as non-normative and as a consequence punished. In this way, the right is then prior to our forms of relating and being intimate with one another; gender and sexuality here are not the only performative instances –as Butler explained in previous works- but also the right to claim the freedom to engage in the sexualities we prefer that becomes then political.

An important aspect of my research and interest in the final project is linked to the ideas we have reviewed during class, specifically thinking about the possibilities to collect queer memory and to reclaim one’s rights through performance and theater. As part of my personal history and different levels of my identity as a queer Peruvian, I am specifically interested in the recovery of unofficial queer memory of the times of political violence in Peru (1980-2001). One question posted by Butler relates to what I seek to untangle; in a nation that does not consider one as a citizen because of their sexuality and/or ethnicity; “what does it mean to lay claim rights when one has none?” (57) Moreover, how can a dead body speak and reclaim its rights? An approach to these questions is related to Taylor’s idea of the possibilities to leave a trace with the body, both as presence and non-presence and creating an affect that is about “past, present and future” (Taylor, 10). In performing queer memory, the body multiplies and becomes the performers and spectators’ bodies, as they perform a different way of knowing; performance here is “a practice and an epistemology, a creative doing, a methodological lens, a way of transmitting memory and identity, and a way of understanding the world.” (39) The performing body then acts as a way to make visible what is invisible to the institutional and normative national memory, using the poetic language of the performance that implies that the regular normative use of language is not enough, or as Boal would put it; where the “Oppressed are let to have their own languages, symbols, time” (Boal, 155)

As Peruvian national memory leaves aside non-normaive bodies, it seems urgent to construct a counter-history that comes from a personal perspective, to speak about memories and voices that were/are left outside of the narratives of what constitutes a national history of trauma. Peru is a country that struggles with “forgetting its past and repeating it” and where the institutional forces keep working on disrupting, institutionalizing and invading versions of the past that serve to the continuity of the conservative wing –fujimorismo- and that neglect the rights of oppressed populations as sexual dissidents. For this reason, numerous activists, artists and sexual dissidents are working to create collective memory while reclaiming their rights to exist. Groups like Trenzar, No Tengo Miedo, and Transhistorias, among others, are working to create interventions inside and outside theaters to use testimony as a way to collect contemporary queer memory, but also to link the current situation of LGBTIQ people to a history of state violence that spans through the years of political violence. These interventions then act as both rehistorization of the violent effects and memory process of queer bodies, and as an epistemology that seeks to educate the population on queer identities. Here, “Performances operate as vital acts of transfer, transmitting social knowledge, memory and a sense of identity through reiterated actions.” (Taylor, 25) These interventions not only summon bodies to be visible, but also they become a way to reclaim political power or as Butler explains; “Contestations are enacted by assemblies, strikes, vigils, and the occupation of public spaces; on the other hand, those bodies are the object of many of the demonstrations that take precarity as their galvanizing condition.” (9) These interventions then open the idea of the creation of a queer future that “includes the possibility of change, critique, and creativity within frameworks of repetition.” (Taylor, 15) These interventions also imply and create a sense of belonging as they make visible identities that have been erased by state forces. As Taylor explains then, the performance becomes an enactment of memory, a collective testimonial that makes visible the scars left in the social body” (22).

The performances of queer activists become a queer gesture; one that documents the emotional and that reviews the past and makes us think about the possibility of a future. These interventions not only make evident the regulatory charater of sexualities and the trauma caused to non-hegemonic identities as part of the system that constitutes the nation, but also subvert the power by enunciating themselves from the space of the abject body to reclaim freedom and sexual agency. This is why the gathering, and appearance in public space becomes an important tool to recover the agency of minoritatian populations. As Butler explains, “they are exercising a plural and performative right to appear, one that asserts and instated the body in the midst of the political field, and which, in its expressive and signifying function, delivers a bodily demand for a more livable set of economic, social and political conditions no longer inflicted by induced forms of precarity” (11) The performance, the ritual and the assembly of bodies here becomes a way to belong, to occupy a space that invisibilizes the non- normative body and to activate memory.  Through performance also the lost bodies that suffered violence haunt us, and these haunting is produced by the performer’s body that reclaims their rights to exist as well as to produces a way of a symbolic reparation.

Keywords: queer memory, identity, affect.

Political spectacle video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yS9dcsTzV4

Week 5: The Space of Appearance

The readings for this week go over the power and mechanisms of popular demonstrations. Arendt (1958) emphasizes how action and words become a way to speak and show ourselves by becoming a “who” that performs their agency; “To act, in its most general sense, means to take an initiative, to begin… to set something into motion.” (177) This mobility finds its power in their unpredictability and plurality; “The fact that man is capable of action means that the unexpected can be expected from him, that he is able to perform what is infinitely improbable.” (178) For Arendt, action takes more power when enacted in collectivity. She sees also the power of the individual moving the collective even in the smallest action that can create a movement; “the smallest act in the most limited circumstances bears the seed of the same boundlessness, because one deed, and sometimes one word, suffices to change every constellation” (190).

            Butler (2015) examines the idea of public assemblies moved by fear or chaos that can produce what she calls a “radical hope” To analyze this, Butler adds to the conversation of who is considered “the people” and how this category implies the exclusion of others and the building of a demarcation as; “the body politic is posited as a unity it can never be” (4). Here, Butler, same as Arendt, recognizes the performativity and power of people gathering together on what she calls “bodies assembly” moved by their same realization of precarity; a body that acts and enacts its presence stating a “we are here”. Butler talks about different types of assembly and asserts that when bodies assembly in any part, even if its virtually like in the #NiUnaMenos movement, they are exercising a plural and performative “right to appear, one that asserts and instated the body in the midst of the political field, and which, in its expressive and signifying function, delivers a bodily demand for a more livable set of economic, social and political conditions no longer inflicted by induced forms of precarity” (11) These disposable bodies then have the potential to express even if its silently.

Week 3: Performance and Politics

The readings for this week focus in performance and theatre as transformative rather than its traditional conceptualization of entertainment. Boal (1985) reviews the coercive character of theatre through the idea of catharsis. Here, he proposes the use of theater as language that is put it in service “of the oppressed” (121) In this sense, his proposal is more near to that of the performance as it is a rehearsal for the revolution (122) The spectator takes action and create revolutionary poetics. Theatre becomes then political. Similarly, Brecht (1974) reviews the idea of theatre as a reflection the structure of society. He proposes a type of theatre which not only releases the feelings, insights and impulses but that makes “possible within the particular historical field of human relations in which the action takes place, but employs and encourages those thoughts and feelings which help transform the field itself.” (190) Both authors then call for a different understanding of theatre. Taylor (2016) defines what performance is and conceptualizes its transformative potential as it leaves a trace, acting with its presence and non-presence that aims to create affects. Performance acts in relation to the systems of power, as it aims to create a new perception of the real and new possibilities. Here, I am mainly interested in the idea that performance and theatre can create what we can understand as a queer temporality; it resists “the laws of reproductive economy and it can act “about past, present and future” (10). In all the works, the authors are aiming for theatre to be seen as a gesture towards a kind of revolution.