View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Queen Mary Research Online Queer fun, family and futures in Duckie’s performance projects 2010-2016 Benjamin Alexander Walters Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Drama Queen Mary University of London October 2018 2 Statement of originality I, Benjamin Alexander Walters, confirm that the research included within this thesis is my own work or that where it has been carried out in collaboration with, or supported by others, that this is duly acknowledged below and my contribution indicated. Previously published material is also acknowledged below. I attest that I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the work is original, and does not to the best of my knowledge break any UK law, infringe any third party’s copyright or other Intellectual Property Right, or contain any confidential material. I accept that the College has the right to use plagiarism detection software to check the electronic version of the thesis. I confirm that this thesis has not been previously submitted for the award of a degree by this or any other university. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author. Signature: Date: 27 September 2018 3 Acknowledgements This research was made possible by a Collaborative Doctoral Award from the Arts and Humanities Reseach Council (grant number AH/L012049/1), for which I am very grateful. The collaboration was with the Department of Drama at Queen Mary University of London and the queer performance collective Duckie. I am fortunate to have been able to work with two such dynamic and progressive bodies. During the challenging process of doctoral research, my supervisor Catherine Silverstone has been incredibly supportive, constructive, resourceful, patient and diligent. I deeply appreciate her vital help shaping and refining my work. I am grateful to Huw Marsh and Hari Marini for their administrative help and to the other members of the department, including my second supervisor Dominic Johnson for his pragmatic feedback and advice. The Glynne Wickham Scholarship Fund and Postgraduate Research Fund enabled me to attend international conferences. Working with Duckie has been a privilege and an inspiration. I thank all involved at all levels in the collective’s projects for their indulgence, kindness, thoughtfulness and help. I am particularly indebted to Simon Casson, Dicky Eton and Emmy Minton, without whose encouragement and facilitation – including the provision of any information I requested – this research could not have happened. My gratitude goes particularly to Annie Bowden, Tim Brunsden, Ursula Martinez, Mark Whitelaw and Robin Whitmore, who generously helped my attempts to understand their work. Thanks too to Stefan Dickers at Bishopsgate Institute for help accessing Duckie’s archival holdings. Thinking Writing, part of Queen Mary Learning Development, facilitated writing groups, writing retreats and thesis boot camps that hugely supported my thinking and writing. Particular thanks go to Kelly Peake, Sally Mitchell and Jack Gaine, and to my fellow doctoral candidates Isabel Meier and Ruth Clifford for company, support, tea and chocolate in the final stretch. I am extremely privileged to have parents as loving and supportive as Jessica and David and they have my profound love and gratitude, as does my brother Olly. I am also very, very lucky to have the friendship of Jane Hayward and Matt Morrison, who have been through it (alongside Sandra Weer); of Josh Tyree, so warm and wise, who applied his generous insight to an early draft of the thesis; and of Atabey Mamasita, whose discourse, dancing and hugs have brought joy to a difficult couple of years. More than anything, I thank Tom Frederic for his love and care, his critical eye, his extraordinary patience and his capacity for comfort and hope. I couldn’t have done it without him. 4 Abstract This thesis argues that participatory performance projects can materialise better worlds for marginalised subjects. Drawing on and contributing to performance studies, queer studies and fun studies, it proposes a concept of reproductive queer futurity. This concept expands José Esteban Muñoz’s work on queer futurity (a utopian position rooted in collective hope for better worlds for marginalised subjects) by foregrounding the intentional reproduction of technologies of hope. The thesis argues that reproductive queer futurity is well served by forms and processes that emerge from lived experience and operate autonomously and adaptively to generate hope in routine ways. The operation of these homemade mutant hope machines (as the thesis calls them) is powerfully supported by queer understandings of family (framed here in relation to material support and intergenerational transmission) and fun (framed here in relation to the perception of low stakes and the capacity for civic intervention). Participatory performance projects can make good homemade mutant hope machines. Chapter One articulates the concept of reproductive queer futurity. Chapters Two and Three respectively conceptualise revised understandings of queer family and fun. Subsequent chapters illustrate these concepts through case studies of participatory projects by the London-based queer performance collective Duckie (1995-), analysed primarily through participant observation, interviews and surveys. Chapter Four analyses the Duckie Homosexualist Summer School (2015-2016), a training programme for young LGBTQI+ performers. Chapter Five analyses the ‘vintage clubbing’ cycle of immersive nightlife events (2010-2016) reanimating past instances of queer socialising. Chapter Six analyses the Posh Club (2012-), an afternoon cabaret for older people at risk of isolation. These analyses show how low-stakes situations, material support, intergenerational transmission and reproducible forms and understandings enable self-expression, relationality and agency in contexts of marginalisation. Collectively, they show how structures of queer fun and family mobilised through participatory performance can generate hope and materialise better worlds. 5 Contents Introduction ‘It’s impossible to be hopeful’ 8 Critical contexts 12 A history of Duckie 29 Duckie and arts practice under neoliberal capitalism 35 Case study selection 43 Methodologies 47 Critical narrative and chapter outlines 56 The light at the end of the tunnel 61 PART I — ON THE ROUTINE GENERATION OF HOPE Chapter One: Reproductive queer futurity, its forms and uses Introduction 64 Reproductive queer futurity 66 The queer child 71 Homemade mutant hope machines 75 Homemade mutant hope machines in action 79 Conclusion 85 Chapter Two: Doing family queerly Introduction 87 Expanding understandings of queer family 87 Material support 97 Intergenerational transmission 102 Doing family queerly through Ballroom 108 Doing family queerly through Duckie 111 Conclusion 119 Chapter Three: Doing fun queerly Introduction 121 Fun tamed, fun defined 123 The nascent interdisciplinary field of fun studies 128 Low stakes 136 Fun as technology, fun as performative 145 Some versions of fun 151 Fun and participatory performance 155 Fun and reproductive queer futurity 158 Doing fun queerly through Duckie 169 Conclusion 175 6 PART II — DUCKIE’S HOMEMADE MUTANT HOPE MACHINES Chapter Four: Doing school queerly at DHSS Introduction 179 About Duckie Homosexualist Summer School 183 DHSS participants as queer children 187 DHSS as a queer family structure 194 Material support 200 Intergenerational transmission 205 DHSS and fun 212 DHSS as homemade mutant hope machine 220 DHSS mutates 225 Conclusion 230 Chapter Five: Doing the past queerly at the ‘vintage clubbing’ cycle Introduction 232 The ‘vintage clubbing’ cycle as homemade mutant hope machine 236 Critical contexts 241 Intergenerational transmission 249 Material support 256 Connections between story telling, family and fun 259 Enjoyment in abjection and the stakes of pleasure 264 Fun as technology 267 Fun as performative 272 Conclusion 276 Chapter Six: Doing ageing queerly at The Posh Club Introduction 279 Welcome to The Posh Club 280 The Posh Club as homemade mutant hope machine 283 Queering The Posh Club 289 Doing family queerly at The Posh Club 292 Intergenerational transmission and material support 296 Making guests high status 301 Fun at The Posh Club 306 Enabling harmonious dissensus 310 Enabling relationality as a project of social justice 313 Enabling expression and agency: dressing up, dancing, performing 319 Making a new world 325 Conclusion 329 7 Conclusion Research findings 331 Further areas of research 336 Bibliography Books, book chapters, journal articles and zines 345 Media reportage (newspapers, magazines, radio and online) 367 Webography (online material excluding media reportage) 373 Legislation and reports 376 Live performances (excluding Duckie events) 378 Films 379 Television programmes 379 Songs 380 Chronology of Duckie events mentioned in thesis 381 Duckie archival material 387 Online resources published by Duckie 388 Duckie internal documentation 391 Surveys of participants in Duckie projects 392 Interviews with Duckie producers, artists and project participants 393 8 Introduction ‘It’s impossible to be hopeful’ ‘Feeling optimistic?’ ran the question on the promotional flyer. ‘Don’t be. It could get worse yet.’1 This downbeat slogan advertised