When Korey Garibaldi guest lectured our class, he asked us: Who holds the power, David or Giovanni? Some people responded that David is less powerful because he is so controlled by his own shame, fear, and second guessing of himself and his actions. Giovanni was perceived as powerful to an extent because he feels that he has nothing to hide about himself. He is not ashamed of his queerness, and he does not feel that he is doing anything unnatural or wrong. David’s identity grants him immense power–he is a white, American man. America is the richest nation in the world. David has money, and he also has a partner, Hella, who has money; wealth obviously grants him considerable power.
There seemed to be no direct answer as to who holds the power in their relationship. Rather, the power dynamics between them are nuanced. This idea reminded me of Foucault’s conception of power in The History of Sexuality, VI. He believes that society typically envisions power solely in a monarchical fashion–what he termed the “juridico-discursive” representation of power (Foucault, 82). He describes one of the main features of this power as “the insistence of the rule”–the manner in which power is conceived as unilateral; certain laws are given by the authority and received by the subject (Foucault, 83). This idea of power creates a binary between those who possess it and those who are subject to it.
Foucault believes that understanding power in this way leads to misunderstanding the manner in which sex and sexuality function in our society. Foucault redefines the concept of power as diffused, operating through “unspoken strategies” and having no certain direction (Foucault, 95). It is exercised from “innumerable points,” meaning that there is no singular authority possessing it (Foucault, 94). It is multidirectional, with power originating from below as well as from above, operating vertically and horizontally. It is inextricably linked to “economic processes, knowledge relationships, sexual relations,” and relationships of the like (Foucault, 94). These “power relations are both intentional and nonsubjective,” meaning that while some individuals are responsible for carrying out certain acts of power, there are forces of power that exist beyond any individual act, always controlling people but without a precise locus of control (Foucault, 94). Foucault reenvisions power as something enacted by the individual that may conventionally seem powerless as well as something imposed upon them.
With Foucault’s idea of power in mind, I believe it is possible for both David and Giovanni to hold power in their relationship. The power between them need not be dichotomous. There are certain aspects of their character, race, ethnicity, nationality, and economic status that grant each of them power in very specific ways. There are also factors beyond either of their control that have power over them–like society’s heteronormativity. I feel as though considering Foucault and his ideas of sex and sexuality may bring to light aspects of identity that are at play in the novel that on the surface seem neglected in failing to thoroughly address race and intersectionality.