Absara Hassan
Response 5: George Chauncey, Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture and the Making of the Gay Male World.
George Chauncey takes readers into the depths of the gay community in his Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture and the Making of the Gay Male World. In the introduction, Chauncey says that the “gay world” before World War II is hidden behind three myths: the myths of isolation, invisibility, and internalization. The “myth of isolation” says that hostility towards the gay community prevented them from creating a gay subculture and also made them live solitary lives (Chauncey, 17). He then states “a battery of laws criminalized not only gay men’s narrowly ‘sexual’ behavior, but also their association with one another” (Chauncey, 18), but challenges this by reasoning that these laws were enforced irregularly and that much of the backlash stems from indifference or curiosity opposed to hostility or fear. Although “gay men had to take precautions… they were able to construct spheres of relative cultural autonomy in the interstices of a city governed by hostile powers.” (Chauncey, 18). According to Chauncey, the gay world had developed social networks across many locations in the city, such as bathhouses, apartments, saloons, and even the streets. Eventually, gay enclaves emerged entirely in Harlem, Times Square, and Greenwich Village.
The myth of invisibility states that the gay world was kept invisible, from both the outside world and from gay men. Chauncey says that gay men “boldly announced their presence by wearing red ties, bleached hair, and the era’s other insignia of homosexuality” (Chauncey, 19) and that although they were forced to keep part from the “dominant culture”, they had a way of keeping close to one another, such as using “codes of dress, speech, and style—that enabled them to recognize one another on the streets, at work, and at parties and bars” (Chauncey, 20). Lastly, Chauncey brings up the myth of internalization, which holds that gay men accepted the policing of their lives instead of resisting it because they internalized the outside world’s vision of them as “sick, perverted, and immoral” (Chauncey, 20). Chauncey brings up moments when doctors said it themselves that most of their “inverts saw nothing wrong with their sexuality” and were rather proud (Chauncey, 21). In a large portion of his introduction, Chauncey’s goal is to recover the “lost” gay world that existed in New York City during the pre-war era, and he does so by showing the audience that there was indeed a flourishing and visible gay world, as proven by his debunking of the myths.
Further into his book, Chauncey discusses the formation of gay enclaves and the specific neighborhoods in which they have taken root. The most thriving gay centers in the early twentieth centuries were the Bowery, Greenwich Village, and Harlem. The Village grew very popular in the 1920’s, becoming the most famous gay enclave in the nation. Chauncey ties the thriving of Greenwich Village as a gay center to its bohemian community. The Village provided cheap living and was able to tolerate eccentricity. “These held out the promise of making the Village a safe and even congenial place for homosexuals to live” (Chauncey, 249). Chauncey also says that the expansive development of this gay enclave is also a result of World War I, due to the commercialization that had occurred during that time. Despite all this, Harlem is home to the much livelier gay enclave, because it was “the only place where black gay men could congregate in commercial establishments” (Chauncey, 247). George Chauncey brings together all aspects of the gay world and discusses its development, from space to culture. His discussion ties into the broader theme of the class by reflecting our conversations of immigration and settlement. Chauncey brings up the migration of people into and out of areas due to surrounding circumstances and the establishment of gay enclaves, much like the process of immigration. People seek a new way of living and find comfort in their own bubbles, whether ethic or not. Gay New York expands on the making of these bubbles, specifically focusing on the gay community.
Questions:
- Are there any other “myths” that Chauncey could have possibly excluded?
- Why do gay enclaves form? In a hidden response to fear? Or self-interest?
