From Romance to Magical Realism

Crisp, Thomas. “From Romance to Magical Realism: Limits and Possibilities in Gay Adolescent Fiction.” Children’s Literature in Education 2009, 40:4. Pp. 333-348

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10583-009-9089-9

Image from Springer

Crisp’s article posits two main ways in which YA authors represent gayness, “While some authors use homophobia as the foil against which queer characters struggle in order to find happiness as a couple, others work to suspend "reality" by imagining away homophobia…” Quoting Cart and Jenkins, Crisp explains that the increase of gay characters in YA lit indicates a move away from ghettoization and towards a “more integrated part of the total body of young adult literature”. Yet Crisp warns that many of these depictions of gay characters in YA lit still manage to reinforce a “heteronormative and heterosexist” worldview. Crisp explores the use of gay characters in Alex Sanchez’s Rainbow Boys trilogy, where heteronormative masculine and feminine roles are maintained as fit the norms of the romance genre. In Sanchez books, there are “textual construction that reinforce a view of gay people as outcasts subject to being the targets of physical abuse and verbal harassment”. Crisp then explores the homophobic rhetoric used in Sherman Alexie’s Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian to describe the queer-tinged relationship between Junior and Rowdy. Crisp explains, “The intention here is not to suggest that any author of young adult fiction is endorsing or approving of homophobia, but simply to draw attention to the fact that many titles rely upon homophobia and homophobic discourse to provide readers with a sense of ""realism."" Crisp then explores a different narrative strategy used by authors like David Levithan in his book Boy Meets Boy, which he characterizes as a “utopian” and existing not in a real setting but rather one in which Levithan  “seeks to demonstrate what this world can become”. In magical realism texts, authors invite the readers “to compassionately experience the world as many of our fellow human beings see it.” Crisp explains that Levithan’s book “is a novel with a clear mission: it hopes to serve as an intervention, a tool for activism. On one level, the attempt is effective at momentarily disrupting categories of “male,” “female,” “gay,” “straight,” and “queer.”” But Crisp critiques Levithan in pointing out that simply flipping the binary narrative of “gay/not gay” and “bad/not bad” is not enough to disrupt heteronormativity; literature would have to imagine “beyond identity categories.” Crisp explains that “an antihomophobic stance reacts within a good/bad binary without new opportunity; the task ultimately involves finding a new place to begin.” Crisp explains that much like the use of The Diary of Anne Frank is a way to distance youth from the harsh realities of confronting the Holocaust, many of the modern YA queer lit “often actually work to continue the invisibility of gay males by filtering queer existence and distancing readers (i.e., queer characters are safely viewed through layers of heterosexuality).” Crisp argues that readers need to critically assess whether increased quantity of new YA LGBTQ lit is in fact progress, if these texts reaffirm what is taken for granted in a heteronoramitve society or use homophobia as “inevitable “ or “natural”.

I think Crisp’s critiques are valid, in as much as many of the YA books I knew of before taking this class follow many of the genre tropes of romance lit,  reimagined with gay characters who still fall into the heteronormative goal of monogamous coupling.  Nevertheless, I think Levithan’s novel of Will Grayson, Will Grayson is one example of a text that transcends this.  In this collaboration between John Green and David Levithan, the character Tiny Cooper is positively depicted despite the fact that his increasingly large number of love interests point to a reality of gay love that doesn’t quite fall in line with monogamous coupling. That said, it’s worth noting that the story revolves about the paired successful relationship of Will Grayson and Jane Turner (heterosexual pairing), and the less successful relationship between a second Will Grayson and Tiny Cooper (gay pairing). Nevertheless, the second Will Grayson’s failed relationship with Tiny Cooper gives him the courage to come out to his mother and peers at school and even provides for the character growth that allows him to make a healthy platonic friendship with another openly gay boy in his own school. Levithan and Green’s novel is incredibly hopeful in its tone, ultimately showing that being true to your self leads to positive, nurturing relationships.  More than romantic love, I think this books recognizes the value of friendship as a support structure. I think this novel falls in line with what Crisp would define as magical realism, one where “queer characters are safely viewed through layers of heterosexuality.”  I loved the book, and think that the rich characters of Tiny Cooper and both Will Graysons are fully developed characters that teens can identify with, but I think that Crisp would have problems with this novel just as much as he did with Boy Meets Boy.