Sara Ahmed,
"Feminist Killjoys (And Other Willful Subjects)"
(page 4 of 8)
Feminist Tables
A feminist call might be a call to anger, to develop a sense of rage
about collective wrongs. And yet, it is important that we do not make
feminist emotion into a site of truth: as if it is always clear or
self-evident that our anger is right. When anger becomes righteous it
can be oppressive; to assume anger makes us right can be a wrong. We
know how easily a politics of happiness can be displaced into a politics
of anger: the assumption of a right to happiness can convert very
swiftly into anger toward others (immigrants, aliens, strangers) who
have taken the happiness assumed to be "by right" to be ours. It is
precisely that we cannot defend ourselves against such defensive use of
emotion that would be my point. Emotions are not always just, even those
that seem to acquire their force in or from an experience of injustice.
Feminist emotions are mediated and opaque; they are sites of struggle,
and we must persist in struggling
with them.[8]
After all, feminist spaces are emotional spaces, in which the
experience of solidarity is hardly exhaustive. As feminists we have our
own tables. If we are unseated by the family table, it does not
necessarily follow that we are seated together. We can place the figure
of the feminist killjoy alongside the figure of the angry Black woman,
explored so well by Black feminist writers such as
Audre Lorde[9] and
bell hooks[10].
The angry black woman can be described as a killjoy;
she may even kill feminist joy, for example, by pointing out forms of
racism within feminist politics. She might not even have to make any
such point to kill joy. Listen to the following description from bell
hooks: "a group of white feminist activists who do not know one another
may be present at a meeting to discuss feminist theory. They may feel
bonded on the basis of shared womanhood, but the atmosphere will
noticeably change when a woman of color enters the room. The white woman
will become tense, no longer relaxed, no longer
celebratory."[11]
It is not just that feelings are "in tension," but that the tension
is located somewhere: in being felt by some bodies, it is attributed as
caused by another body, who comes to be felt as apart from the group, as
getting in the way of its enjoyment and solidarity. The body of color is
attributed as the cause of becoming tense, which is also the loss of a
shared atmosphere. As a feminist of color you do not even have to say
anything to cause tension! The mere proximity of some bodies involves an
affective conversion. We learn from this example how histories are
condensed in the very intangibility of an atmosphere, or in the
tangibility of the bodies that seem to get in the way. Atmospheres
might become shared if there is agreement in where we locate the points
of tension.
A history can be preserved in the very stickiness of a situation. To
speak out of anger as a woman of color is then to confirm your position
as the cause of tension; your anger is what threatens the social bond.
As Audre Lorde describes: "When women of Color speak out of the anger
that laces so many of our contacts with white women, we are often told
that we are 'creating a mood of helplessness,' 'preventing white women
from getting past guilt,' or 'standing in the way of trusting
communication and action.'"[12]
The exposure of violence becomes the
origin of violence. The woman of color must let go of her anger for the
white woman to move on.
The figure of the angry black woman is a fantasy figure that produces
its own effects. Reasonable, thoughtful arguments are dismissed as anger
(which of course empties anger of its own reason), which makes you
angry, such that your response becomes read as the confirmation of
evidence that you are not only angry but also unreasonable! To make
this point in another way, the anger of feminists of color is
attributed. You might be angry about how racism and sexism
diminish life choices for women of color. Your anger is a judgment that
something is wrong. But then in being heard as angry, your speech is
read as motivated by anger. Your anger is read as unattributed, as if
you are against x because you are angry rather than being angry because
you are against x. You become angry at the injustice of being heard as
motivated by anger, which makes it harder to separate yourself from the
object of your anger. You become entangled with what you are angry about
because you are angry about how they have entangled you in your anger.
In becoming angry about that entanglement, you confirm their commitment
to your anger as the truth "behind" your speech, which is what blocks
your anger, stops it from getting through. You are blocked by not
getting through.
Some bodies become blockage points, points where smooth communication
stops. Consider Ama Ata Aidoo's wonderful prose poem, Our Sister
Killjoy, where the narrator Sissie, as a black woman, has to work to
sustain the comfort of others. On a plane, a white hostess invites her
to sit at the back with "her friends," two black people she does not
know. She is about to say that she does not know them, and hesitates.
"But to have refused to join them would have created an awkward
situation, wouldn't it? Considering too that apart from the air
hostess's obviously civilized upbringing, she had been trained to see
the comfort of all her passengers."[13]
Power speaks here in this moment of hesitation. Do you go along with
it? What does it mean not to go along with it? To create awkwardness is
to be read as being awkward. Maintaining public comfort requires that
certain bodies "go along with it." To refuse to go along with it, to
refuse the place in which you are placed, is to be seen as causing
trouble, as making others uncomfortable. There is a political
struggle about how we attribute good and bad feelings, which hesitates
around the apparently simple question of who introduces what feelings to
whom. Feelings can get stuck to certain bodies in the very way we
describe spaces, situations, dramas. And bodies can get stuck depending
on the feelings with which they get associated.
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
Next page
|