Blowing the Lid: Gay Liberation, Sexual Revolution and Radical Queens, by Stuart Feather (Zero Books)
Even before Blowing the Lid reached my desk, several things about this purported history of the UK's Gay Liberation Front had my eyebrows raised. First and foremost was its claim that the author, British Bloolips gay theatre troupe co-founder and interior design craftsman Stuart Feather, was "the first participant of the Front to write a history of the lesbian and gay men who joined Gay Liberation [UK]." While it seemed rather strange that it had taken 45 years for anyone to write a history of a movement that was founded in October 14, 1970, over 15 months after the formation of the New York Gay Liberation Front, it turned out that the claim was half hyperbole. Feather's may in fact be the first personal memoir of the UK's Gay Liberation Front that also claims to be a comprehensive history of the modern British gay rights movement.
While it made sense that I review the book – I lived in New York City's pioneering 17th St. Collective, was active in NY GLF from June 1970 until its demise, paraded the streets in drag, and remain in touch with most of the key players – I knew nothing about the history of GLF UK. To be able to offer some kind of critical perspective, I requested assistance from Steven F. Dansky, an early GLF veteran and founder of the Outspoken: Oral History from LGBTQ Pioneers project. Dansky's contributions to NY GLF are even cited in Feather's book, although his surname is misspelled.
With Dansky's help, I contacted two UK GLF veterans. The first was Peter Tatchell, whose work as a gay and human rights advocate is celebrated worldwide. The other was Jeffrey Weeks, a well-known gay academic whose latest book, What is Sexual History?, reaches the U.S. in May.
Flags went up when Tatchell replied that he had not read Blowing the Lid and had no plans to do so. Weeks didn't go that far, but also acknowledged that he had not read it. He also said that while he had been around Feather in GLF, he (Weeks) had worked in GLF's political action arm while Feather was affiliated with the Radical Queens faction. "I knew him but I didn't really know him, if you understand what I mean," is what I recall Weeks writing via Facebook.
Upon receiving the book, imagine my surprise at reading, in the book's opening chronology, "1969: June 27. New York. The police raid The Stonewall Inn, Greenwich Village. Drag queens and lesbians fight back."
First of all, the raid took place at approx. 1 a.m. on the morning of June 28. Secondly, while there were clearly lesbians and transvestites/drag queens of all races and classes in the Stonewall that particular night – David Carter's definitive book Stonewall says it was resistance on the part of a furious butch lesbian that sparked the initial revolt – there was also a sizable number of male-identified gay men in the bar who fought back. In fact, given that many of those who joined the melee from the outside were gay men, they were likely the majority. Why, I wondered, has Feather played so loose with such a pivotal event in our history?
The answer came upon reading Feather's simultaneously exhaustive and exhausting 547-page account. As much as he is determined to tell the tale via extensive, multi-page quotes from articles, leaflets, and first-person accounts, he is equally set upon naming names, revealing potentially compromising personal information, and getting back at individuals whom he feels de-railed UK GLF and precipitated its demise.
Hence, amidst interminable polemics and counterarguments, you'll find out who was wasted on dope or alcohol, who was having sex with whom, and who was dropping acid. You'll also discover that Tatchell is a Maoist, and Weeks guilty of "shoddy investigation and analysis." So much for them.
But that's just a bit of it. As much as Feather condemns those whose background in the straight liberation and socialist movements contributed to doctrinaire ideological stances, he is all too eager to counter their arguments after the fact with lengthy ideological arguments of his own. At the book's start, this is done amidst a plethora of enlightening tales of abominable police brutality against gays – the stories bear a striking similarities to today's "Black Lives Matter" protests in the U.S. – and many amusing accounts of street-theater actions and drag get-ups. But eventually, it's hard not to wonder if the entire presentation is constructed to vindicate Feather's approach and vilify his opponents.
One item to marvel at is the leaflets GLF handed out. Judging from Feather's account, GLF didn't simply hand out one-page, big-lettered calls for action. Instead, it published a number of mini-tomes suitable for university courses on political theory. I do recall a number of ideologically centered debates in NY GLF, and I'm sure some people debated political theory all night rather than cruising the trucks or Christopher Street. But from Feather's account, "think-ins," meetings, and publications were filled with lengthy back and forths from people who took them very seriously. To the extent this was the case, I can well imagine that GLF alienated at least as many gay people as it attracted. Then again, NY GLF did the same.
Reading countless polemics, like so much else in the book, eventually becomes tiresome. After all, as much as we in NY GLF chanted, "Smash the Church, Smash the State," we also chanted, "Gay Love is Gay Strength." I could have done with a lot more lovin' and a lot less polemic. The joys of street-theatre actions and colorful get-ups quickly become suppressed by so much dish.
Another of the book's many challenges is the layout. Rather than putting lengthy excerpts and first-person accounts in italics, they are simply indented. As you turn the page, it becomes difficult to figure out who is talking. Which I suppose makes sense, since Feather's choice of what to include is so personal.
While Feather deserves praise for bringing so much valuable information together, praise must be tempered by the fact that he does so in such a back-biting, "I've been waiting for decades to get back at you" manner. Ultimately, his stance calls into question the veracity of his account. Proceed with caution.