DIPLOMARBEIT Titel der Diplomarbeit “Missing Identity” - The Queer Politics of SpongeBob SquarePants Verfasserin Beatrice Frasl angestrebter akademischer Grad Magistra der Philosophie (Mag. phil.) Wien, 2013 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt: A 343 Studienrichtung lt. Studienblatt: Anglistik und Amerikanistik Betreuerin: ao. Univ. Prof. Dr. Monika Seidl TO MY SISTERS, SARA-YVONNE AND GEORGINA, WHO INTRODUCED ME TO THE WISDOM AND THE KNOWLEDGE OF SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS THANKS TO DR. MONIKA SEIDL for her support and agreement to supervise a thesis with a rather unorthodox topic in a rather short period of time. MY PARENTS for your continuous financial and emotional support and for believing in me. GINA AND SARA for general awesomeness. This thesis is dedicated to you. ANDI for too many things to mention, but, most importantly, for being my best friend. MY FRIENDS old and new, for your patience, encouragement and support; for open hearts, ears and minds. especially to JO for last minute technical troubleshooting and for disciplining me into writing my thesis with threats of physical violence – like any decent friend would. MARIE, CATI, NICOLE AND MICHI the team of fellow sufferers, for critical input, our crisis meetings, and for making the thesis-writing-process a little less unpleasant and a lot more entertaining. Together we took the meaning of the word “procrastination” to a whole new level. NICOLE for your supportive, comforting and encouraging words and your kindness. MICHI for your support throughout the process of writing this thesis, productive disagreement, coffee breaks (“coffee” “breaks”) and for sabotaging my panicky despair with your serenity and spongebobesque optimism. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1 1. QUEER THEORY AND QUEER READING .......................................................................................... 7 1.2. QUEER THEORY ..................................................................................................................... 12 1.2.1. Who/What is “queer”? ............................................................................................. 12 1.2.2. Why “queer”? ............................................................................................................ 17 1.3. QUEERING TEXTS .................................................................................................................. 19 1.3.1. Queering Texts as resistant/subversive academic practice ...................................... 19 1.3.2. Author/ities ............................................................................................................... 21 1.3.3. Reading between the lines of heteronormativity: the risk of reiterating heterosexist discourses ............................................................................................. 22 1.3.4. Challenging heteronormativity ................................................................................. 24 1.3.5. The Deconstruction of Identity – pointing out ambiguities ...................................... 25 2. QUEER AS FOUCAULT…. JUDITH BUTLER AND QUEER THEORY ................................................... 28 2.1. THE MATERIALITY OF BODIES - “SEX” VS. “GENDER” .................................................................. 28 2.2. THE DISCURSIVE AND PERFORMATIVE PRODUCTION OF SEX/GENDER .............................................. 30 2.3. SUBJECTIVATION IN THE HETEROSEXUAL MATRIX ........................................................................ 36 2.3.1. The heterosexual matrix ........................................................................................... 36 2.3.2. The compulsory order of sex/gender/desire ............................................................ 37 2.3.3. “You are what you must not love” – subject formation and psychoanalysis ........... 40 2.4. SUBVERSION ........................................................................................................................ 42 2.5. REWORKING BUTLER ............................................................................................................. 47 2.5.1. Subversion and Humour ............................................................................................ 47 2.5.2. Hegemonic masculinity as privileged heterosexual gender identity ........................ 48 3. ANALYSIS – QUEER READING OF SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS ................................................... 50 3.1. GENDER AS PERFORMANCE – EN-GENDERING AMBIGUITY IN SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS ................ 50 3.1.1. The Performativity of gender in SpongeBob SquarePants........................................ 50 3.1.2. Ambiguous design – ambiguous behaviour .............................................................. 54 3.1.3. Cross-Dressing ........................................................................................................... 58 3.2. SEXUALITY AS NON-IDENTITY: SEXUAL AMBIGUITY IN SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS ............................ 71 3.2.1. Are cartoon characters asexual? ............................................................................... 71 3.2.2. Sexual ambiguity – non-identitarian treatment of sexuality in SpongeBob SquarePants…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..73 3.2.2.2.1. Same-sex desire and romance………………………………………….…….………..…..74 3.2.2.2.2. Queer desires and non-identities………………………………….……………………….81 3.2.3. Deconstructing heterosexuality as societal institution ............................................. 87 3.3.OF “KIDS“ AND “MEN”– MASCULINITY AND HETEROSEXUAL GENDERS IN SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS 94 3.3.1. From idealization to rejection – parodic deconstruction .......................................... 94 3.3.1.1. Hegemonic masculinity vs. queerness………………………………………………………94 3.3.1.2. Parodic exaggeration of hegemonic masculinity…………………………………….104 3.3.1.3. Femininities…………………………………………………………………………………………...110 3.3.2. Childhood vs. adult masculinity .............................................................................. 113 3.3.3. Denaturalization of sexed bodies ............................................................................ 120 3.4. IDENTITY AS ASSIGNMENT – MATURITY, COHERENCE AND FAILURE .............................................. 125 3.4.1. Failure: The Rejection of “Normal” ......................................................................... 125 3.4.2. Ignorance................................................................................................................. 132 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................ 136 WORKS CITED AND CONSULTED .......................................................................................... 142 Films and Episodes from Television Series ...................................................................... 145 Figures .............................................................................................................................. 148 APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................ 150 Deutsche Zusammenfassung / German summary ....................................................... ….150 Curriculum Vitae (English) ............................................................................................... 153 Curriculum Vitae (Deutsch) ............................................................................................. 154 I’ve got news for straight culture: your readings of texts are usually ‘alternative’ ones for me and they don’t often seem like desperate attempts to deny the queerness that is so clearly a part of mass culture (Doty 1993, xxi). Patrick: “What happened to you?” SpongeBob: “Oh, I got normal.” Patrick: “Whatever that means.” (Not Normal) SpongeBob: “Quick, Patrick, without thinking: If you could have anything right now, what would it be?” Patrick: “Um... more time for thinking.” (Chocolate With Nuts) “Missing Identity” – The Queer Politics of SpongeBob SquarePants INTRODUCTION In 2005 the We Are Family Foundation (WAFF) sent an animated video to American elementary schools, which featured more than 100 popular TV-figures (including the eponymous main character from the TV-series SpongeBob SquarePants) with the aim of teaching children the value of tolerance and diversity (see: Johnson 269-270; Kirkpatrick, n.p.). Right wing Christian organizations attacked the WAFF and their video, because their homepage included the category of sexual identity in its "tolerance pledge" and furthermore, links to LGBTQ1- organizations could be found on it. The video was, inter alia, called “[…] an insidious means by which the organization is manipulating and potentially brainwashing kids." (Batura, qutd. in Kirkpatrick, n.p.). The issue received media-attention after James Dobson (the founder of Focus on the Family) had given a speech in which he had warned against alleged homosexual contents of the – so-called “pro-homosexual” (Dobson, qutd. in Johnson 270) video and had specifically focussed on SpongeBob in his critique (see: Kirkpatrick, n.p.). Strikingly, the debate soon shifted from a discussion of the video to a discussion of the television series SpongeBob SquarePants2 and its main character’s alleged “sexual identity”. Three days after Dobson’s speech, the article Conservatives Pick Soft