 |
 |
>Lord lord. Cant I be something else? Like a construction worker? > >Though as soon as I say that though I think 'no'. > >'I want to be the perfect prostitiute - seductive, dexterous, skilled and >able to please. And have every valuable out of your pocket before you wake >up. > >I never loved you anyway rememember?' > >(so it seems AD has a point?!) I think he does - does this mean you're not a Christian, Liz? I do feel there is a point where a single focus on the body doubles back on itself and becomes its own prison. But I can't help feeling suspicious of the piece... for one thing, in the quotation the "reader" (observer) is contructed as exclusively male. What happens if there is a female onlooker/reader? What happens if the body which is "presented" (represented?) is not the "night club singer" passively offered up for consumption, but aging, incontinent, aggressive, articulate, non-comformable, funny, all manner of things which bodies are? What is the dynamic of repulsion? Is that available to women (say, in the sense Genet might use it?) Is there any escape from the consuming male gaze which assumes that the body is offered up for its valuing alone? How many of the redefinings he asks for have already been offered, and are being ignored? Et cetera. I don't know the context of the quote, but it begs a few questions. Best Alison