--part1_c.11e7163c.27cfc389_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 3/1/01 8:07:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask]
writes:
> >From at least the late Victorian period onward, Uranian meant gay.
>
>
To whom? To gay men? To everyone? I think we should talk about in-group
argots, because it's always tricky to decide, for a given period, how
generally known or generally accepted they really were. It might be that
"everyone" who's Czechoslovakian knows certain Czech curse words. That's
insufficient as evidence that these words are known or used outside the
group, or that there's even any particular interest in them outside the
group.
It's true that at the moment the Internet is flooded with sites on which gay
men seem to be assuming or preaching that Urania "belongs" to male
homosexuals (and presumably isn't "really" the traditional patron of
astronomy/astrology). But why would the sales pitch be necessary if
"everyone" already saw it this way? And isn't this a classic co-opting
situation? I also see Urania mentioned on astronomical and astrological
sites. So the astronomers and astrologers either don't know or don't care
about "the homosexual perspective on Urania."
I think we have to start evaluating what the actual situation might have been
at the time Pound wrote the ditty, and we have to quit assuming that the
social situation at that time was "just like" the social situation today as
we see it reflected on the Internet.
pat
--part1_c.11e7163c.27cfc389_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial Narrow" LANG="0"><B>In a message dated 3/1/01 8:07:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask]
<BR>writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></B>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">>From at least the late Victorian period onward, Uranian meant gay.
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial Narrow" LANG="0"><B>
<BR>To whom? To gay men? To everyone? I think we should talk about in-group
<BR>argots, because it's always tricky to decide, for a given period, how
<BR>generally known or generally accepted they really were. It might be that
<BR>"everyone" who's Czechoslovakian knows certain Czech curse words. That's
<BR>insufficient as evidence that these words are known or used outside the
<BR>group, or that there's even any particular interest in them outside the
<BR>group.
<BR>
<BR>It's true that at the moment the Internet is flooded with sites on which gay
<BR>men seem to be assuming or preaching that Urania "belongs" to male
<BR>homosexuals (and presumably isn't "really" the traditional patron of
<BR>astronomy/astrology). But why would the sales pitch be necessary if
<BR>"everyone" already saw it this way? And isn't this a classic co-opting
<BR>situation? I also see Urania mentioned on astronomical and astrological
<BR>sites. So the astronomers and astrologers either don't know or don't care
<BR>about "the homosexual perspective on Urania."
<BR>
<BR>I think we have to start evaluating what the actual situation might have been
<BR>at the time Pound wrote the ditty, and we have to quit assuming that the
<BR>social situation at that time was "just like" the social situation today as
<BR>we see it reflected on the Internet.
<BR>
<BR>pat</B></FONT></HTML>
--part1_c.11e7163c.27cfc389_boundary--
|
