Skip to main content

Epic Faggotry--The good kind!

So my friend Meg made my week when she tipped me off to this: Tchaikovsky was fantastically gay*. Like, unbelievably gay. Like, Freddie Mercury gay. Like, so gay his fabulousness radiated across Russia and warmed the hearts of millions (Ah, if only the Russians weren't such cold, heartless bastards, eh?). Oh, I came my pants. Verily.

Such a bear; do you think he was much into leather, too?



As a flaming queer and wiki nerd, I've read a lot of these "Personal Life" and "Sexuality" subsections in people's wiki-bios. Like, a lot. There are definite patterns--hints, even, for the desperately closeted queer looking for solidarity/lulzy gay troll. In fact, I'm pretty sure you could actually rate people's degree of gayness by how well their wiki "Personal Life"/"Sexuality" subsection conforms to some of these patterns/hints. Hm. I'll have to make a mental note of that in case I get bored--Make bogus wiki gay rating system. I know this much--for simply having a "Personal Life"/"Sexuality" subsection, you get a rating of at least 50% gay. You'll see why that's important in a moment. Like, in the next paragraph.

Basically, in order to warrant a "Personal Life"/"Sexuality" subsection, one must reach at least a certain level of gayness--or at least the speculation thereupon must have reached at least a certain point. Even the flamboyant Courtney Taylor-Taylor of The Dandy Warhols used to have a "Sexuality" section; it naively concluded that he was "just very metro". Fag. Doesn't matter that he's married some poor beard, still a fag.

Of course, there's almost always dispute. Apparently no matter how gay you are, someone will always assume you're straight and argue it to the death. It's just a rule of life--and wikipedia. There's always bickering--cuz we're just good lil queers like that, eh?--over this letter or that person's opinion/interpretation or so-and-so's biography about the fag. Read/skim/glance upon Morrisey's "Sexuality" subsection and you'll see what I mean. Goddanged queers. Can't y'all just make up your minds and get back to the glorious butthurtz??

Anyway, with Tchaikovsky, on the other hand, there's no such flibbertygibbeting about--it's simply assumed at the outset that he was a raging homo. The real question seems to be why the fuck he ever bothered marrying some poor broad (only a minor dispute; twas but a beard, obvs, much like that hag Courtney Taylor-Taylor married) and just how utterly unbothered he was by his own gayosity. He was so chill with the man-loving that over his lifetime he left behind, like, reams of letters and diaries and autobiographical material about it. Like, it seems the only thing holding him back from declaring his love of buttsecks to the world every morning was concern for how it might affect his family and his own professional career. Lame, but understandable...I guess. Hell, even his brother was a faggot!

Hm. Rule 34 anyone? I smell some hot toasty wincest....

So you gotta understand, in order to subvert all that wishywashing gay/nay discussion like this, one has to be really really gay. I'm so amused by this--to no end. I imagine he must have been much the same class of queer as I am--all but constant gay jokes and flirtation, guffawing much as I do at the hilarity of buttsex and cumshots (easily the two funniest things in all of human history), and generally shamelessly oggling any hot lad ass that happens by. Fuck yeah!

So, epic fag was epic, and that was pretty fucking win for his era. If only he and Whitman had met.... God, who would have topped whom in that scenario??


* As if to prove my wiki nerdness, I figured I'd include the permalink as of 8:04am on Wednesday Sept. 8, too: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pyotr_Ilyich_Tchaikovsky&oldid=383320102

Comments

Other things that might interest you...

QP: Changes to come, I hope.

My grandmother passed away about 2 weeks ago. I hope to write about her more soon, but for this moment, I want to speak briefly about where I'm at overall: Her passing has led me to reevaluate aspects of my life because I'm realizing that the status quo amounts to just wasting my life away. (This is another "quick post," which means it's a short update that I likely didn't edit and revise quite as much as the more "thoughtful" pieces I aim for. I say this because I'm self-conscious and worry that you, my reader, will judge me!) I'm up in Boston and have today and tomorrow off, and I want to spend at least a portion of each day figuring out (some of) my life. I say this fully aware how often I've variously done so before: asserted a need for change, described how I was going to do it, made an attempt, then fallen off in the follow-through. I'm honestly not sure what to do about that, though. It frustrates me now just as much as eve

This moment: A tattoo.

So I read Mrs. Dalloway in high school, and it was perhaps the most beautiful thing I'd ever read. One passage in particular, very early in the book, hit me hard with my first experience of the sublime, and stayed with me—and led at last to my first tattoo. In people’s eyes, in the swing, tramp, and trudge; in the bellow and the uproar; the carriages, motor cars, omnibuses, vans, sandwich men shuffling and swinging; brass bands; barrel organs; in the triumph and the jingle and the strange high singing of some aeroplane overhead was what she loved; life; London; this moment of June .  ( Emphasis added; full paragraph included below. From the full text of the novel as made available by the University of Adelaide. ) The paragraph this is from, the 4th paragraph of the novel, is the 1st passage with the stream of consciousness the book is famous for; although self-limited here, the flow is no less gorgeous. In the passage, Clarissa is walking on a street to get those famous fl

Sarracenia 'Ennui.'

I mentioned in a recent post  that even hybrids of the same species can demonstrate disparate variety. Which is the case with the other cultivar I discovered. Yes; there's another. I could go into how this variety among hybrids should surprise no one, but I'm not here to teach you genetics (poorly). No, I want to talk about my other big cultivar-related excitement: Sarracenia 'Ennui,' or so it's being called for now. I guess it's semiofficial now that I've "announced" it in a blog post. Welp. (My main hesitation in calling it this is that the name may already been claimed. But I think it's an  awesome  name for a plant and peculiarly kind of perfect for this one: It's got this muted glamour that feels not only somehow French but also weirdly existential...?) I found this beauty at Meadowview Biological Research Station . The other half of the main plant can still be found there, by the way, and that nursery has a gorgeous array of o