Queer Possibility

ABSTRACT

Queer possibility is an interpretive strategy that uplifts the marginalized narratives of LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) historical figures and objects of queer significance. This article outlines three unspoken standards that content developers use to determine whether to include queer content in museum exhibits and tours. In a heteronormative, cisnormative society, choosing not to interpret queerness or potential queerness is not a neutral action. These limiting standards can unwittingly perpetuate a legacy of homophobia and transphobia in museum interpretation. In response to these limiting standards, the article outlines three alternative queer-positive strategies that prioritize the experience of queer visitors and the telling of queer history.

KEYWORDS:

• Diversity and inclusion
• gender
• interpretive strategy
• LGBTQ
• sexuality
• queer

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

About the author

Margaret Middleton is an independent exhibit designer working at the intersection of design and social justice. Middleton has a degree in industrial design from the Rhode Island School of Design and 15 years of experience in the museum field. Middleton developed the Family Inclusive Language Chart in 2014 and consults with museums on implementing family inclusive practice. Their writing has been published in the Journal of Museum Education, Exhibition (National Association for Museum Exhibition), Dimensions (Association of Science and Technology Centers), and Museum Magazine (American Alliance of Museums).

Notes

1 Saint Sebastian has been used as a symbol of male homoeroticism in art and literature for several hundred years (Hammill, Sexuality and Form; Sontag, Against Interpretation; Mishima and Weatherby, Confessions of a Mask).

2 Washington Post art and architecture critic Phillip Kennicott interprets the group of men as the artist’s “chosen family” and references the borrowed classical poses of the men as evidence of a queer aesthetic (Washington Post, 2017).

3 I use “queer” in this article as a catch-all term to describe non-straight and non-cisgender individuals including but not limited to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.

4 Hinchy, Governing Gender and Sexuality in Colonial India.

5 Ferentinos, Interpreting LGBT History at Museums and Historic Sites, 26.

6 The phrase was popularized by Carol Hanisch in her 1969 essay “The Personal is Political”.

7 Ingraham, “Thinking Straight, Acting Bent,” 307.

8 Middleton, “The Queer-Inclusive Museum”.

9 Jones et al., “Anxiety, Nostalgia, and Mistrust”.

10 Heimlich and Koke, “Gay and Lesbian Visitors and Cultural Institutions,” 93–104.

11 Gates, How Many People are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender?.

12 Susie Wilkening (Researcher, Wilkening Consulting), interview with the author, 2017.

13 Tubman, “Harriet Tubman Warns "Kill the Snake Before It Kills You.”

14 Kinsley, Middleton, and Moore, “(Re)Frame,” 56–63.

15 Hernandez, “Resisting the Museum,” 374.

16 Manion, Female Husbands, 10.

17 Sandell, Museums, Moralities and Human Rights, 27–56.

18 Riley Snorton and Haritawarn, Trans Necropolitics, 68–71.

19 Annie Anderson (Manager of research and public programming, Eastern State Penitentiary), interview with the author, 2020.

20 Faderman, To Believe in Women, 3.

21 Though some have argued that the word’s former life as a slur should preclude its use from museum settings, when used as an adjective with a respectful tone, queer is acceptable, even academic. In the professional development training sessions I lead, I recommend that staff who are new to the term practice pronouncing it confidently in the mirror to ensure it sounds natural and respectful.

22 Barbara Callahan (Museum and curatorial assistant, Gibson House Museum), interview with the author, 2020.

23 Claire Mead (Curator, independent), interview with the author, 2020.

24 Muñoz, Cruising Utopia, 65.

25 Danielle Bennett, Dwelling in Possibility: Queering Historic House Museums, 112–14.