Minoritarian performance
Author: Eugenia Seleznova
Translation from Ukrainian: Galyna Kotliuk
Editor: Clemens Poole
However, as argued by Muñoz, even on stage they are not evaluated on the same level as a “mainstream” — white, straight — performer. One of the manifestations of such inequality is the widespread reluctance of the media to record and broadcast the performances of black queer artists. They are most often available to the audience only in live performances; as a result, the time of their existence is limited by their time on stage. Muñoz calls this the “burden of liveness” [3]. In this way, he argues, “minoritarian” performers are denied the right to historicity and futurity. It is important to note that Muñoz’s research does not focus on the deliberate discrimination against artists based on their belonging to minoritarian groups — it rather explores how societal racism and homophobia construct an image of what is desirable and worthy of distribution and preservation.
Although Muñoz builds his theory of minoritarian performance around interpreting performance as a form of public artistic expression, the concept of performing is not limited to such acts. For example, according to Judith Butler’s theory of performativity, performance is also understood as the quotidian reproduction of established ideas (discourses) about phenomena and identities through words, appearance, general behavior, etc. [4] — a “stylized repetition of acts” [5], which, according to Butler, constructs identity. Usually this happens unconsciously, because the general acceptance of such ideas allows you to reproducing them without additional constructive efforts [6].
For example, in order to perform femininity, we don’t have to contemplate what it means to be a woman each time. Instead, according to Butler, we have to “cite” [7] the social norm that defines femininity with our appearance and behavior — refer to ourselves as female and have a body, hairstyle, clothes and voice that are recognized in society as “feminine” (at the same time, as argued by Butler, the list of such features is never exhaustive, and therefore it is unrealistic to think that one can fully correspond to the “ideal woman” [8]). Different aspects of identity in different contexts can be performed with different intensity.
The Ukrainian context is, of course, significantly different from the North American one explored by Muñoz. But the russian invasion in 2022 created conditions under which Ukrainians are also forced to constantly perform their “Ukrainianness” for a Western audience in order not to lose international support. This primarily affected those who found themselves abroad. Cultural manager Katya Taylor talks about how employees of embassies and Ukrainian organisations in Berlin failed, probably due to their work commitments, to attend the performance of Maryna, a Ukrainian woman: “...we should not be too busy to organise public events in support of Ukraine, because our voice is heard less and less... there may not be enough ambassadors for each event, but since last year none of those living in Europe has ceased to be an ambassador of goodwill from Ukraine. Don’t give up, don’t forget your main role while the war continues” [9].
This call is indeed valid. However, while observing the “performance of Ukrainianness” with curiosity, Europeans do not always desire to counter russian aggression themselves. During my research on the wartime experiences of LGBTQIA+ Ukrainians, I have more than once heard from respondents who were displaced to the EU about forced “small talks” with locals. Hearing that their interlocutor comes from Ukraine, they sometimes ask insensitive questions, such as: “What about your home?”, “Do you plan to return?” or “Well, you're probably glad that you live in Europe now?”. Interrupting such “small talk” can be awkward, since a person seems to be showing an empathetic [10] interest in the “guest” (sometimes quite literally — for example, when it comes to conversations with hosts in temporary housing). But in fact, such a conversation primarily serves as a performative affirmation of the subjectivity [11] of a European who can “observe historical events from a safe distance” and a Ukrainian as the European’s “interior Other” [12], forced to share the “exotic” experiences of war and being a refugee in order not to lose political or material support — for example, a temporary shelter. It is notable that Europeans usually avoid personal questions or comments about the sexuality and gender expression of their interlocutors: this suggests that for them an LGBTQIA+ person is not perceived as “Other” and “minoritarian” to the same extent as a Ukrainian [13].
The artistic “performing of Ukrainianness” in Europe also suffers from the “burden of liveliness”: Ukrainian events rarely make it into local news, and their formats indicate a lack of accessible, stable locations and platforms — single-day or multi-day exhibitions, street actions, fairs, “days of Ukrainian cuisine”, etc. The participation of “local” or “international” curators and artists in the event significantly enhances the chances of coverage outside of a purely Ukrainian social bubble.
The phenomenon of “forced performing of Ukrainianness” demonstrates the unequal, inferior position of Ukrainians in the Eurocentric social hierarchy, despite the fact that formally they are “white Eastern Europeans”. The status of a displaced person contributes to minoritising, but even staying in Europe with a different status, in particular that of “expert” or “researcher”, does not eliminate the “compulsion to perform Ukrainianness”. Revealing the described inequality makes it possible to develop a critique of both Eurocentrism and russian colonial aggression, which has reinforced the inequality and vulnerability of Ukrainians in the Eurocentric context abroad.
Endnotes
02. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, “The Rani of Sirmur: An Essay in Reading the Archives,” History and Theory 24, no. 3 (October 1985): 247, процитовано у Sune Qvotrup Jensen, “Othering, Identity Formation and Agency,” Qualitative Studies 2, no. 2 (October 3, 2011): 63–78.
03. Munoz, 1999, с. 187.
04. Judith Butler, “Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory,” Theatre Journal 40, no. 4 (December 1988): 519–31.
05. ibid., с. 519
06. Judith Butler, “Critically Queer,” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 1, no. 1 (November 1, 1993): 17–32.
07. ibid., с. 23
08. ibid., с. 22
09. Катя Тейлор, “26 листопада Марина прийшла під Бранденбурзькі ворота...,” Facebook, 1 грудня 2023.
10. On the problematic nature of a “white man’s” empathy to a “man of color”, see Saidiya V. Hartman, Scenes of Subjection: Terror, Slavery, and Self-Making in Nineteenth-Century America (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997). Hartman also pays attention to forced performances in the context of slavery in the 19th century USA. Although Muñoz seems to me more relevant for the Ukrainian context due to the subtlety of the inequalities he describes, Hartman’s book is certainly worth reading for further study of the topic. I am grateful to Mrs. Maria Hlavajova, who directed my attention to this work.
11. Also in Hartman, p. 19-23.
12. Helge Vidar Holm, Sissel Laegreid, and Torgeir Skorgen (eds.), Europe and Its Interior Other(S) (Aarhus, Dk: Aarhus University Press, Hightown, Lancaster, United Kingdom, 2014).
13. Eugenia Seleznova, “Sense of Belonging in LGBTQIA+ Ukrainians amidst the Full-Scale War with Russia” (MA Diss, Central European University, 2023).
For further reference
Hartman, Saidiya V. Scenes of Subjection: Terror, Slavery, and Self-Making in Nineteenth-Century America. New York ; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Tlostanova, Madina. “Postsocialist ≠ Postcolonial? On Post-Soviet Imaginary and Global Coloniality.” Journal of Postcolonial Writing 48, no. 2 (May 2012): 130–42. — щодо радянської та пострадянської колоніальностей.
Author
Eugenia Seleznova
About the author