What do you think?
Rate this book
Queer Theory and Social Change
Queer Theory and Social Change argues that there is a crisis within Queer theory over whether or not its theories can actually deliver change.
Max Kirsch presents a challenging alternative to the current fascination with post-modern analyses of identity, culture, and difference. It emphasizes the need for a discussion of the importance of communities and the role of globalization on queer movements.
Max Kirsch presents a challenging alternative to the current fascination with post-modern analyses of identity, culture, and difference. It emphasizes the need for a discussion of the importance of communities and the role of globalization on queer movements.
176 pages, Paperback
First published November 23, 2000
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
October 14, 2024
Kirsch attempts to question the place of theory in the struggle for equality and concludes with a call for community.
The book dives into an analysis and criticism of queer theory. Some quick notes on what I remember:
• He believes that the focus of queer theory on individual rights to self-expression as queers will lead to the weakening of communities, in its interaction with capitalism. This may inadvertently support capitalist relations of being, which does not lead to liberation for all
• He believes in community building as a 'power in numbers' strategy
• Queer theory needs to be refocused "to take into account the realities of everyday life in a capitalist world system". While we try to make sense of our queerness as an identity in its own right, we must also remember, account for, and act with the knowledge that queerness still exists in a heteronormative world
• Man really does not like Judith Butler
• He introduced two new concepts re: ways capitalism alienates the individual - it alienates the individual from their sense of community, and community members with each other, thus destroying 'energetic relations' which can be used as a source of power for the anti-oppression struggle.
I'm heartened to read this book because it reflects my own journey from learning about theories of anti-capitalism, feminism, queer theory to the place where I currently am, which is a strong conviction in community building.
For folks who may not be too keen to read deep theoretical analysis, his concluding summary and statement is good enough.
The book dives into an analysis and criticism of queer theory. Some quick notes on what I remember:
• He believes that the focus of queer theory on individual rights to self-expression as queers will lead to the weakening of communities, in its interaction with capitalism. This may inadvertently support capitalist relations of being, which does not lead to liberation for all
• He believes in community building as a 'power in numbers' strategy
• Queer theory needs to be refocused "to take into account the realities of everyday life in a capitalist world system". While we try to make sense of our queerness as an identity in its own right, we must also remember, account for, and act with the knowledge that queerness still exists in a heteronormative world
• Man really does not like Judith Butler
• He introduced two new concepts re: ways capitalism alienates the individual - it alienates the individual from their sense of community, and community members with each other, thus destroying 'energetic relations' which can be used as a source of power for the anti-oppression struggle.
I'm heartened to read this book because it reflects my own journey from learning about theories of anti-capitalism, feminism, queer theory to the place where I currently am, which is a strong conviction in community building.
For folks who may not be too keen to read deep theoretical analysis, his concluding summary and statement is good enough.
August 2, 2020
In response to some queer theory texts which argue that labels and identities are restrictive, Max Kirsch, in the first sentence of his book identifies himself: “I am an anthropologist, a gay man, a white American, a university professor.” He should have noted, also, that he was a Marxist.
-
From a Critical perspective, Kirsch’s Queer Theory and Social Change challenges the political space of Queer theory and asks the primary question: “Can Queer theory translate into practical social change?” The book is a tool that Kirsch has created to “rescue” Queer theory from itself. In believing “that inequality will not be resolved under capitalism” (123) and that Queer theory’s emphasis on the impossibility of identity “closely follows the development of the current capitalist relations of production” (17), Kirsch believes on some level that Queer theory has been reifying a social order that it claims to reject. The author is skeptical of a theory whose opposition to noxious forces is merely language-based. He notes that “real opposition takes place in the realm of reproduction of community and the larger social sphere, on the basis of daily existence and in the realm of social and productive power” (118).
-
In the first third of the book, Kirsch explores Queer theory’s emergence. He traces its evolution from the post-structuralists’ and post-modernists’ disengagement with the political left after the 1960’s when discourse replaced class. Early in the book, the reader starts to get the idea that this is not just about Queer theory per se, but more particularly about its wedding to post-structuralism and post-modernism. More than a few Marxists feel that these newer theories are simply repackaged functionalism which simply reinforces the status quo. However, Kirsch makes a more interesting analogy in chapter two, comparing present day Queer theorists to the Young Hegelians. The Young Hegelians, in debate with Marx and Engels, believed that “consciousness could change the reality of people” and free them from their imprisonment, whereas Marx and Engels “disputed the idea that consciousness was derived from mental activity, which, they claimed, abstracted human beings from their contexts” (37). The Young Hegelians saw themselves as radical social critics, prompting Marx to remark:
-
Let us teach man, says one person, to exchange these imaginings for thoughts that correspond to man’s essence; let us teach man to be critical towards them, says another; let us teach man to get rid of them altogether, says a third. Then – existing reality will collapse. Such innocent and childlike fantasies make up the core of recent young-Hegelian philosophy which not only is received with horror and awe by the German public, but also propounded by the philosophic heroes themselves with a ceremonious consciousness of its cataclysmic dangerous and criminal disregard (Marx).
-
By setting up modern Queer theorists as the Young Hegelians in argument with Marx, the reader is reminded of Plato’s stories of the Sophists and their conflict with Socrates. In both cases, Socrates and Marx represent the grand narrative or “truth” while the Sophists and Young Hegelians blather away with relativities or abstractions of language dismissing “truth” or “productive activity.”
-
As Marxist theories began to wane in the universities, a blending of human rights and ethnic and identity studies have paved the way for the emergence of Queer theory. But Kirsch points out that
-
many of the dominant strands of current Queer theory, such as the signification of the self, the concentration of performativity (Butler,1992), and the deconstruction of roles and identities pose the danger of forgetting that observable norms do exist, are enforced through socialization, and are fundamental to the exercise of power(18).
-
Kirsch does not feel that Queer theory has to align with a post-modern theoretical model. He argues early in the book that these newer movements are not proactive but instead “’anti’: Anti-subject, anti-identity, anti-statement” (5) and that Queer theory should instead align itself with group identification, collective action, and a consideration of class, race, and history. More specifically, and summarizing his general thesis, he states:
-
If our goal then is to create a society that accepts difference, welcomes diversity, and champions human rights, how do we get there? The relativity of identity and experiences is not enough. We need to confront power in all of its aspects: who holds it, how hegemony is maintained, what the dominant culture consists of and how it influences our daily lives and experiences. Strategies for change need to be connected and collective. This means that we need to refocus analytic energies, realizing that consciousness does not act on its own. There needs to be an identification process with social movements and with each other (10).
In later chapters Kirsch explores the constructionist/essentialist debate, arguments surrounding the presentation of the body in society, an analysis of social class and its place in queer theory, and finally, unlike many others within Queer theory, he offers strategies for moving ahead.
-
I think the book does a great job explaining the current conflicts between Marxists and those who work within the frameworks of post-modernism and post-structuralism. I also feel that any serious student of queer theory who is unfamiliar with earlier Critical or Conflict theories should read Kirsch’s work, if, for no other reason than to know more about the theoretical framework with which early post-structuralists became disenchanted. Kirsch has done his homework, and engages the prominent contributors to the queer theory cannon (Foucault, Butler etc.) throughout the book, as well as incorporating other theorists belonging to the larger post-modern/post-structural (Derrida, Baudrillard, Jameson,etc.) and psychoanalytic (Freud, Lacan) cannon. Kirsch makes clear that he is aware that a Marxist/Critical theory and a modern Queer theory are doing different things in different political spaces; however, he is concerned with the possible displacement of a Critical theory from academia. And, although he implies that these newer “trendier” theories, with their emphasis on ideas over action, have their place, it becomes problematic to him that they are now often offered as the only alternative to old school functionalism in the university setting, thus weakening the possibilities for real social change.
-
From a Critical perspective, Kirsch’s Queer Theory and Social Change challenges the political space of Queer theory and asks the primary question: “Can Queer theory translate into practical social change?” The book is a tool that Kirsch has created to “rescue” Queer theory from itself. In believing “that inequality will not be resolved under capitalism” (123) and that Queer theory’s emphasis on the impossibility of identity “closely follows the development of the current capitalist relations of production” (17), Kirsch believes on some level that Queer theory has been reifying a social order that it claims to reject. The author is skeptical of a theory whose opposition to noxious forces is merely language-based. He notes that “real opposition takes place in the realm of reproduction of community and the larger social sphere, on the basis of daily existence and in the realm of social and productive power” (118).
-
In the first third of the book, Kirsch explores Queer theory’s emergence. He traces its evolution from the post-structuralists’ and post-modernists’ disengagement with the political left after the 1960’s when discourse replaced class. Early in the book, the reader starts to get the idea that this is not just about Queer theory per se, but more particularly about its wedding to post-structuralism and post-modernism. More than a few Marxists feel that these newer theories are simply repackaged functionalism which simply reinforces the status quo. However, Kirsch makes a more interesting analogy in chapter two, comparing present day Queer theorists to the Young Hegelians. The Young Hegelians, in debate with Marx and Engels, believed that “consciousness could change the reality of people” and free them from their imprisonment, whereas Marx and Engels “disputed the idea that consciousness was derived from mental activity, which, they claimed, abstracted human beings from their contexts” (37). The Young Hegelians saw themselves as radical social critics, prompting Marx to remark:
-
Let us teach man, says one person, to exchange these imaginings for thoughts that correspond to man’s essence; let us teach man to be critical towards them, says another; let us teach man to get rid of them altogether, says a third. Then – existing reality will collapse. Such innocent and childlike fantasies make up the core of recent young-Hegelian philosophy which not only is received with horror and awe by the German public, but also propounded by the philosophic heroes themselves with a ceremonious consciousness of its cataclysmic dangerous and criminal disregard (Marx).
-
By setting up modern Queer theorists as the Young Hegelians in argument with Marx, the reader is reminded of Plato’s stories of the Sophists and their conflict with Socrates. In both cases, Socrates and Marx represent the grand narrative or “truth” while the Sophists and Young Hegelians blather away with relativities or abstractions of language dismissing “truth” or “productive activity.”
-
As Marxist theories began to wane in the universities, a blending of human rights and ethnic and identity studies have paved the way for the emergence of Queer theory. But Kirsch points out that
-
many of the dominant strands of current Queer theory, such as the signification of the self, the concentration of performativity (Butler,1992), and the deconstruction of roles and identities pose the danger of forgetting that observable norms do exist, are enforced through socialization, and are fundamental to the exercise of power(18).
-
Kirsch does not feel that Queer theory has to align with a post-modern theoretical model. He argues early in the book that these newer movements are not proactive but instead “’anti’: Anti-subject, anti-identity, anti-statement” (5) and that Queer theory should instead align itself with group identification, collective action, and a consideration of class, race, and history. More specifically, and summarizing his general thesis, he states:
-
If our goal then is to create a society that accepts difference, welcomes diversity, and champions human rights, how do we get there? The relativity of identity and experiences is not enough. We need to confront power in all of its aspects: who holds it, how hegemony is maintained, what the dominant culture consists of and how it influences our daily lives and experiences. Strategies for change need to be connected and collective. This means that we need to refocus analytic energies, realizing that consciousness does not act on its own. There needs to be an identification process with social movements and with each other (10).
In later chapters Kirsch explores the constructionist/essentialist debate, arguments surrounding the presentation of the body in society, an analysis of social class and its place in queer theory, and finally, unlike many others within Queer theory, he offers strategies for moving ahead.
-
I think the book does a great job explaining the current conflicts between Marxists and those who work within the frameworks of post-modernism and post-structuralism. I also feel that any serious student of queer theory who is unfamiliar with earlier Critical or Conflict theories should read Kirsch’s work, if, for no other reason than to know more about the theoretical framework with which early post-structuralists became disenchanted. Kirsch has done his homework, and engages the prominent contributors to the queer theory cannon (Foucault, Butler etc.) throughout the book, as well as incorporating other theorists belonging to the larger post-modern/post-structural (Derrida, Baudrillard, Jameson,etc.) and psychoanalytic (Freud, Lacan) cannon. Kirsch makes clear that he is aware that a Marxist/Critical theory and a modern Queer theory are doing different things in different political spaces; however, he is concerned with the possible displacement of a Critical theory from academia. And, although he implies that these newer “trendier” theories, with their emphasis on ideas over action, have their place, it becomes problematic to him that they are now often offered as the only alternative to old school functionalism in the university setting, thus weakening the possibilities for real social change.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews