Cruising Utopia The Then and There of Queer

Futurity José Esteban Muñoz download

https://ebookname.com/product/cruising-utopia-the-then-and-there-
of-queer-futurity-jose-esteban-munoz/

Get Instant Ebook Downloads – Browse at https://ebookname.com

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

The Swan System of the C2 Molecule John G. Phillips

https://ebookname.com/product/the-swan-system-of-the-c2-molecule-
john-g-phillips/

Warships in the War of the Pacific 1879 83 1st Edition

Angus Konstam

https://ebookname.com/product/warships-in-the-war-of-the-
pacific-1879-83-1st-edition-angus-konstam/

Gibraltar 1779 83 The Great Siege First Edition René

Chartrand

https://ebookname.com/product/gibraltar-1779-83-the-great-siege-
first-edition-rene-chartrand/

Space Bomber Expert Level Paper Airplanes 4D an

Augmented Reading Paper Folding Experience Marie
Buckingham

https://ebookname.com/product/space-bomber-expert-level-paper-
airplanes-4d-an-augmented-reading-paper-folding-experience-marie-
buckingham/
Flavor chemistry and technology 2nd Edition Gary
Reineccius

https://ebookname.com/product/flavor-chemistry-and-
technology-2nd-edition-gary-reineccius/

Fundamentals of Psychiatric Treatment Planning Second

Edition James A. Kennedy

https://ebookname.com/product/fundamentals-of-psychiatric-
treatment-planning-second-edition-james-a-kennedy/

Catherine the Great and the Russian Nobilty A Study

Based on the Materials of the Legislative Commission of
1767 1st Edition Paul Dukes

https://ebookname.com/product/catherine-the-great-and-the-
russian-nobilty-a-study-based-on-the-materials-of-the-
legislative-commission-of-1767-1st-edition-paul-dukes/

The Dietitian s Guide to Vegetarian Diets Issues and

Applications 3rd Edition Reed Mangels

https://ebookname.com/product/the-dietitian-s-guide-to-
vegetarian-diets-issues-and-applications-3rd-edition-reed-
mangels/

Salmon at the Edge 1st Edition Derek Mills

https://ebookname.com/product/salmon-at-the-edge-1st-edition-
derek-mills/
If We Must Die From Bigger Thomas to Biggie Smalls 1st
Edition Aimé J. Ellis

https://ebookname.com/product/if-we-must-die-from-bigger-thomas-
to-biggie-smalls-1st-edition-aime-j-ellis/
Cruising Utopia
 SE XU A L C U LT U R E S
G eneral E ditors: Ann Pellegrini, Tavia Nyong o,
and Joshua Chambers-Letson
Founding Editors: Jose Esteban Munoz and Ann Pellegrini
Titles in the series include:
Times Square Red, Times Square Blue
Samuel R. Delany
Private Affairs: Critical Ventures in the Culture o f Social Relations
Phillip Brian Harper
In Your Face: 9 Sexual Studies
Mandy Merck
Tropics o f Desire: Interventionsfrom Queer Latino America
Jose A. Quiroga
Murdering Masculinities: Fantasies o f Gender and
Violence in die American Crime Novel
Gregory Forter
Our Monica, Ourselves: The Clinton Affair and the National Interest
Edited by Lauren Beriant and Lisa A. Duggan
Black Gay Man: Essays
Robert E Reid-Pharr
Passing: Identity and Interpretation in Sexuality, Race, and Religion
Edited by Maria C. Sanchez and Linda Schlossberg
The Explanation fo r Everything: Essays on Sexual Subjectivity
Paul Morrison
The Queerest Art: Essays on Lesbian and Gay T heater
Edited by Alisa Solomon and Framji Minwalla
Queer Globalizations: Citizenship and the Afterlife o f Colonialism
Edited by Amaldo Cruz Malav& and Martin F. Manalansan IV
Queer Latinidad: Identity Practices, Discursive Spaces
Juana Maria Rodriguez
Love the Sin: Sexual Regulation and the Limits o f Religious Tolerance
Janet R. Jakobsen and Ann Pellegrini
Boricua Pop: Puerto Ricans and the Latinization o f American Culture
Frances N£gron-Muntaner
Manning the Race: Reforming Black Men in the Jim Crow Era
Marion Ross
 In a Queer Time and Place: Transgender Bodies, Subcultural Lives
J. Jack Halberstam
Why I Hate Abercrombie and Pitch: Essays on Race and Seocuality
Dwight A. McBride
God Hates Fags: The Rhetorics o f Religious Violence
Michael Cobb
Once You Go Black: Choice, Desire, and the Black American Intellectual
Robert Reid-Pharr
The Latino Body: Crisis Identities in American Literary and Cultural Memory
Ldzaro Lima
Arranging Grief: Sacred Time and the Body in Nineteenth-Century America
Dana Luciano
Cruising Utopia: The Then and There o f Queer Futurity
Jos6 Esteban Munoz
Another Country: Queer Anti-Urbanism
Scott Herring
Extravagant Abjection: Blackness, Power, and Sexuality
in the African American Literary Imagjmation
Darieck Scott
Relocations: Queer Suburban Imaginaries
Karen Tongson
Beyond the Nation: Diasporic Filipino Literature and Queer Reading
Martin Joseph Ponce
Single: Arguments for the Uncoupled
Michael Cobb
Brown Boys and Rice Queens: Spellbinding Performance in theAsias
Eng-Beng Lim
Transforming Citizenships: Transgender Articulations o f the Law
Isaac West
The Delectable Negro: Human Consumption and
Homoeroticism within US Slave Culture
Vincent Woodard, Edited by Justin A. Joyce and Dwight A. McBride
Sexual Futures, Queer Gestures and Other Latina Longings
Juana Maria Rodriguez
Sensational Flesh: Race, Power, and Masochism
Amber Jamilla Musser
 The Exquisite Corpse o f Asian America: Biopolitics,
Biosodality, and Posthuman Ecologies
Rachel C. Lee
Not Gay: Sex between Straight White Men
Jane Ward
Embodied Avatars: Genealogies o f Black Feminist Art and Performance
Uri McMillan
A Taste fo r Brown Bodies: Gay Modernity and Cosmopolitan Desire
Hiram Perez
Wedlocked: The Perils o f Marriage Equality
Katherine Franke
The Color o f Kink: Black Women, BDSM and Pornography
Ariane Cruz
Archives o f Flesh: African America, Spain, and Post-Humanist Critique
Robert F. Reid-Pharr
Black Performance on the Outskirts o f the Left: A History o f the Impossible
Malik Gaines
A Body, Undone: Living on After Great Pain
Christina Crosby
The Life and Death ofLatisha King: A Critical Phenomenlogy o f Transphobia
Gayle Salamon
Queer Nuns: Religion, Activism, and Serious Parody
Melissa M Wilcox
After the Party: A Manifesto fo r Queer o f Color Life
Joshua Chambers-Letson
Sensual Excess: Queer Femininity and Brown Jouissance
Amber Jamilla Musser
Afro-Fabulations: The Queer Drama o f Black Life
Tavia Nyong o
Queer Times, Black Futures
Kara Keeling
Queer Faith: Reading Promiscuity and Race in the Secular Love Tradition
Melissa E. Sanchez
For a complete list of books in the series, see wwwjiyupress.org
Cruising Utopia,
1 OTH A N N IV E R S A R Y E D IT IO N

The Then a n d There o f Q ueer Futurity

Jose Esteban M unoz

With two additional essays by the author

a n d a new fo re w o rd by
Joshua Chambers-Letson,
Tavia Nyong'o, and
Ann Pellegrini

n
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY PRESS
New York
N EW YORK U N IV ER SITY PRESS
Ne w York and London
wwwjxynpress.org

© 2 0 0 9 by New York University

Forew ord and two additional essays © 2 0 1 9 by N ew York University
All rights reserved

“F or Freddy Fucking A gain” poem b y D iane di Prim a; from Freddie Poem s

(P oin t Reyes, CA : Eidolon Editions; 1 9 7 4 ). C ourtesy o f the author.

“H aving a Coke w ith Y ou” from The C ollected Poem s o f Frank O 'H ara; by Frank
O 'H ara; edited by D onald Allen. Copyright © 1971 b y M aureen Granville- Smith,
A dm inistratrix o f The Estate o f Frank O 'H ara. Reprinted by perm ission o f Alfred A .
Knopf; a division o f Random H ouse, In c

“A photograph” Collected Poem s, by Jam es Schuyler. Copyright © 1993 by the

Estate o f Jam es Schuyler. R eprinted by perm ission o f Farrar, Straus and G iroux, L L C .

“One A rt,” from The Com plete Poem s, 1 9 2 7 -1 9 7 9 , by Elizabeth Bishop. Copyright
© 1 9 7 9 ,1 9 8 3 b y Alice H elen M ethfessel. Reprinted b y perm ission o f Farrar, Straus
and Giroux, L L C .

Library o f Congress Cataloging-in-Publication D ata

N am es: M unoz, Josd Esteban, author.
Title: Cruising u to p ia: the then and there o f queer futurity / Jo se Esteban M unoz;
w ith new essays and a foreword by Joshua Cham bers-Letson, Tavia N yongo, and
Ann Pellegrini.
D escription: 10th Anniversary Edition. |N ew Y ork : N ew York University Press,
[2 0 1 9 ] |Series: Sexual cultures |Revised edition o f the author's Cruising utopia,
c2 0 0 9 . |Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: L C C N 2018046341| ISBN 9 7 8 1 4 7 9 8 1 3 7 8 0 ( d : alk. paper) |ISBN
9 7 8 1 4 7 9 8 7 4 5 6 9 (p b : alk. paper) |ISBN 9 7 8 1 4 7 9 8 6 8 7 8 0 (elS B N ) |ISBN
9 7 8 1 4 7 9 8 9 6 2 2 6 (elSBN )
Subjects: LC SH : Q ueer theory. |U topias. |H om osexuality and art. |Perform ance art.
Classification: L C C H Q 76.25 JVI86 2 0 1 9 |D D C 3 0 6 .7 6 0 1 — d c23
L C record available at h ttp s://lccn lo c.g o v /2 0 1 8 0 4 6 3 4 1

N ew York U niversity Press books are printed on add-free paper, and their binding
m aterials are chosen for strength and durability. W e strive to use environm entally
responsible suppliers and m aterials to the greatest extent possible in publishing our books.

M anufactured in the U nited States o f A m erica

10987654321
Contents

Foreword: Before and After ix

CRU ISIN G U TO PIA

Acknowledgments xix

Introduction: Feeling Utopia 1

1. Queemess as Horizon: Utopian Hermeneutics in the

Face of Gay Pragmatism 19

2. Ghosts of Public Sex: Utopian Longings, Queer Memories 33

3. The Future Is in the Present: Sexual Avant-Gardes and the

Performance of Utopia 49

4. Gesture, Ephemera, and Queer Feeling:

Approaching Kevin Aviance 65

5. Cruising the Toilet: LeRoi Jones/A m iri Baraka, Radical Black

Traditions, and Queer Futurity 83

6. Stages: Queers, Punks, and the Utopian Performative 97

7. Utopias Seating Chart: Ray Johnson,Jill Johnston, and Queer

Intermedia as System 115

8. Just Like Heaven: Queer Utopian Art and the

Aesthetic Dimension 131

9. A Jete Out the Window: Fred Herkos Incandescent Illumination 147

10. After Jack: Queer Failure, Queer Virtuosity 169

Conclusion: “Take Ecstasy with M e” 185

TW O A D D ITIO N A L ESSAYS

Race, Sex, and the Incommensurate: Gary Fisher with

Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick 193

Hope in the Face of Heartbreak 207

Notes 21S

Bibliography 235

Index 245

About the Author 253

Color illustrations appear as an insert following page 130.

Foreword
Before and After

By Joshua Chambers-Letson, Tavia Nyongb, and Ann Pellegrini

One may not cast a picture of utopia in a positive manner. Every at­
tempt to describe or portray utopia in a simple way i.e., it will be like
this, would be an attempt to avoid the antinomy of death and to speak
about the elimination of death as if death did not exist. That is perhaps
the most profound reason, the metaphysical reason, why one can actu­
ally talk about utopia only in a negative way. . .
— Theodor Adorno, in conversation with Ernst Bloch1

TO T H I N K , W RITE , dream, and live in the wake of heartbreak: this is

the challenge posed by “Hope in the Face of Heartbreak,* the short essay
that is published for the first time in this new edition of Cruising U topia. It
is also the charge we are faced with here: how to think and write after Jose
Munoz— and also for him— in the painful, temporally out o f joint forever
“after* o f this foreword.
“Hope in the Face of Heartbreak* was written to be heard and was given
as a talk, in September 2013, at the University of Toronto to celebrate the
launch of the Women & Gender Studies Institutes PhD Program. The
manuscript bears the traces of the live occasion; it also carries the literal
traces of the one who wrote and spoke its words aloud. “H opes biggest
obstacle is failure,* the manuscript begins, its opening words neatly typed
and printed. But, midway through the opening paragraph, the typeface is
interrupted by hand-writing. The pivot by hand, to handed-ness, happens
at a critical juncture where Munoz is reminding his audience of a distinc­
tion made by Ernst Bloch (key interlocutor o f Cruising U topia), between
abstract and concrete or educated hope:
 In part we must take on a kind of abstract hope [that] is not much
more than merely wishing and instead we need to participate in a
more concrete hope, what Ernst Bloch would call an educated hope,
the kind that is grounded and consequential, a mode of hoping that is
cognizant of exactly what obstacles present themselves in the face of

The words "this hoping9 are crossed o u t The revised sentence reads " . . . a
mode o f hoping that is cognizant o f exactly what obstacles present them­
selves in the face of obstacles that so often feel insurmountable.9 So, if the
original sentence repeated the word "hoping,9 the revised one doubles
down on the “obstacles.9 On the manuscript we can glimpse the hand­
written word "our,9 also crossed out, before he settles on the word "ob­
stacles.9 Hope falters, gives way to more obstacles.
"Hope in the Face o f Heartbreak9 is revisiting and also expanding on
arguments made in Cruising Utopia. A t this early moment in the talk, it’s as
if Munoz needs to stress the “obstacles9 as a wedge against overly hopeful
or romanticizing readings of Cruising Utopia. In our conversations with our
late friend and comrade, he occasionally expressed disappointment that his
defense of utopia was enthusiastically read by some as uncritical optimism.
His work testifies to the contrary. Hope is work; we are disappointed;
whats more, we repeatedly disappoint each other. But the crossing out of
"this hoping9 is neither the cancellation of grounds for hope, nor a dis­
charge of the responsibility to work to change present reality. It is rather a
call to describe the obstacle without being undone by that very effort.
A sentence later, still in the hand-written addition, there is another
crossing out; obstacle is not a hard stop, it is a challenge: " . . . I have cho­
sen to focus on two texts, one scholarly [Robyn Wiegmans O bject L es­
sons] and one cultural [Anna Margarita Albelo’s film Who's A fraid o f Va­
gina W olf?], that offer snapshots at of some of the obstacle challenge [s]
we need to not only survive but surpass to achieve hope in the free of an
often heart breaking reality9 The first page of the short manuscript ends
with these hand-written words: “in the face of an often heart breaking re­
ality9 W e who survive are left to free this challenge without him. We are
also charged by him to do so.
A common sight during his lifetime: Before giving a paper, he’s sit­
ting on a panel, hunched over, crunching on ice, and listening intently to
the person speaking. Multi-tasking, he simultaneously flips through the
pages he’s set on the table in front of him, and takes his pen and scribbles
 something across the page: a revision in the text. Back to listening, pulling
his right foot across his left knee, a glance out over the room to see who
is there, before glancing down at another page and posing the pen for an­
other revision.
One can only imagine what revisions he might have made for this edi­
tion of Cruising U topia. The challenge we faced in writing this foreword is
that a foreword or introduction assumes an anterior stance, with the au­
thors and readers positioned before the text. But as we stand in the authors
stead, introducing the text by meditating on revisions that Munoz cannot
make, we do so because we introduce him in the time after his death.
If we have never been queer, as Munoz famously asserts throughout the
text, then there is a degree to which we are always standing before queer
loss. This is the nature of queer grief. It is informed by life lived a fter the
historical accumulation of queer deaths: a collection of losses that have
taught us to know (because our survival depends upon this knowledge)
that we are also standing before losses that have yet to come.
Queer grief is characterized by the simultaneity o f grieving those we
have loved and lost, alongside mourning for a queemess and the forms
of queer life that we have not yet known and are still yet to lose. Linger­
ing on Munozs handwritten notes and imagining the types of revisions
he m ight have m ade is a way of inhabiting the incommensurable simulta­
neity of before and after. It is to perform within the reparative m atrix of
queer temporality proposed by Munoz s teacher, Eve Sedgwick: "Because
the [reparative] reader has room to realize that the future m aybe different
from the present, it is also possible for her to entertain such profoundly
painful, profoundly relieving, ethically crucial possibilities as that the past,
in turn, could have happened differently from the way it actually did.”2
Throughout Cruising U topia, Munoz mines the past for glimmers of uto­
pian potential that are rich with the possibility of a past that "could have
happened differently from the way that it actually did.” H e invites us to
put these glimmers to work, both as we cast a negative or critical picture
of the insufficiencies of the present, but also as we undertake the work of
hoping for, rehearsing, dreaming, and charting news paths toward differ­
ent and queerer futures.
Alexandra T. Vazquez, Munoz's student, writes that "our teachers leave
behind care instructions for any and all kinds of arrivals and departures.”3
The students of Cruising U topia (past, present, and future) might thus ap­
proach the text as an instruction manual for how to have hope both be­
fo re and after the death of the teacher. To read the text in the time after
Munoz’s death is to be reminded, once more, that queer of color life oc­
curs within this out-of-joint temporality such that queer of color death is
not a negating after to Cruising U topia. Rather, the negation that is queer
death presupposes the text’s entire critical enterprise (and was crucial to
the opening of his first book, D isidentifications, with its extended critical
account o f racial melancholia).4 To approach the text from this vantage is
to be confronted with the question that animates Munoz’s address: How
are we to have hope while living simultaneously in the before and after of
queer heartbreak? The answer, far from veering away from the discourse of
negation, requires a counter-intuitive turn toward the negative. For utopia,
though it bears many positive qualities, also bears negation, as originating
from the Greek for “no place" or “not place.” Utopia is not the antithesis
of negation in this sense, so much as it is a critical means of working with
and through negation. Queer utopia is the impossible performance of the
negation of the negation.
Since its publication ten years ago, Cruising U topia has had a wide im­
pact across and beyond a range of academic fields. Appearing at the height
of the controversy regarding the anti-relational thesis in queer studies, the
book invited the field to turn the page on a somewhat stalled debate by
rearticulating the critical negativity associated with anti-relationality in a
new way. W ithout acceding to the assimilationist vision of queer futures
that underpinned homonormativity, it performed a negative dialectic that
nevertheless expressed a politics of hope: “Here the negative becomes the
resource for a certain mode o f queer utopianism."5 The audacious opening
move of the book, to declare that we are “not yet" queer, drew on the criti­
cal utopianism of the M arxist philosopher Ernst Bloch as much as it was
in dialogue with a still-expanding literature on queer temporality, whose
interlocutors included Sedgwick, Carolyn Dinshaw, Jack Halberstam, and
Elizabeth Freeman.6
Throughout Cruising U topia, Munoz presumes and builds upon the
queer of color critique pioneered in his first book, D isidentifications. And,
as with D isidentificationsj a key reason for Cruising U topia’s wide influ­
ence has been its astounding archive. The book moves promiscuously
and enthusiastically across its sources in order to braid together the “no-
longer-conscious" of queer world-making with the “not-yet-here" o f criti­
cal utopianism No doubts the richly described worlds of the text stand
in some tension with the tradition of negative utopianism he draws upon.
For Bloch, and especially his interlocutor Adorno, utopian thought is first
and foremost a negation; Bloch even characterizes the hope that inspirits
utopian thinking as “the determined negation o f that which continually
makes the opposite of the hoped-for object possible.”7 It is through draw­
ing out this almost apophatic concept o f hope and o f utopia that Munoz
is able ingeniously to reframe queer cruising. As one alert reviewer o f the
first edition noticed, cruising is a way o f moving with “no specific desti­
nation ; the ultimate goal is “to get lost [ . . . ] in webs o f relationality
and queer sociality”8 Cruising, that is to say, is as much the method of the
book as is critical utopianism.
After Munozs death, his friend and colleague Barbara Browning issued
a call for people to inscribe the following passage from the books opening
paragraph in a paradigmatic location o f queer cruising, the bathroom stall:
“Some will say that all we have are the pleasures o f this moment, but we
must never settle for that minimal transport; we must dream and enact
new and better pleasures, other ways o f being in the word, and ultimately
new worlds.”9 People sporadically performed the act in bathrooms or
other public spaces (including a bathroom in the department where Mu­
noz taught), sometimes posting a photo o f the transgression (or o f the en­
counter with its written trace) to social media. It circulated in other ways
as well: a group of queer activists designed and distributed stickers with
the passage printed across Andy Warhol’s Silver Clouds (an installation of
balloons discussed in the books eighth chapter). And in a statement to
the Windy City Times discussing her gender transition, the film director
Lilly Wachowski wrote: "I have a quote in my office . . . by Jose Munoz
given to me by a good friend. I stare at it in contemplation sometimes try­
ing to decipher its meaning but the last sentence resonates: ‘Queemess is
essentially about the rejection of a here and now and an insistence on po­
tentiality for another world.’”10
The popularity and circulation of this sentiment— which pits futurity
against the present— is reflective of the general reception of Cruising Uto­
p ia since its publication, which draws upon and emphasizes the text’s pos­
itive elaborations on queemess, hope, and futurity by positioning them
against the (negating) poverty of the present As Munoz insists through­
out the book, “The present is not enough. It is impoverished and toxic
for queers and other people who do not feel the privilege of majoritarian
belonging, normative tastes, and 'rational’ expectations.”11 But along these
very lines, an overemphasis on futurity, a flat rejection of the present, and
an over-romanticization o f the past risk eliding Munoz’s nuanced insis­
tence on the political (if not revolutionary) dimension of a queer utopian
imaginary as a negative dialectic.
 Munoz warned us against disappearing wholly into futurity since
“one cannot afford“ to simply “turn away from the present“ The present
demands our ethical consideration and the task at hand is not to refuse
the present altogether, but rather to maneuver from the presents vantage
point at the crossroads of life that is lived after catastrophe (as m aybe die
case with queer, black, and brown life) and simultaneously before i t The
utopian impulse yields the idealist power o f the utopian imaginary to offer
a negative critique of the present and past (framing the insufficiencies of
both) while opening up different avenues through which we might con­
struct alternative possibilities for queemesss future beyond the limited
options that are presently before us. That we are standing before the possi­
bility, even likelihood, of hopes disappointment does not so much negate
the principle of hope as confirm i t
Throughout Cruising Utopia, Munoz insists that “hope and disappoint­
ment operate within a dialectical tension in this notion of queer utopia.“12
The utopian imaginary is understood to be an act of failure in the free of
a stultifying regime of pragmatism and normativity: “Utopias rejection of
pragmatism is often associated with failure. A n d . . . utopianism represents
a failure to be normal.“13 Queemess, blackness, brownness, minoritarian
becoming, and the utopian imaginary thus resonate with each other as
they all cohere around a certain “failure to be normal,” unwilling or un­
able to submit to the pragmatic dictates of majoritarian being. This failure,
which is situated both after and before defeat does not counter-intuitively
confirm the totality of defeat, however, so much as it opens up queer av­
enues for other potentials to flicker in (and out) of being.
Bloch described hopes failure as the ontological grounds on which
hope is defined: "It too can be, and will be, disappointed; indeed, it must
be so, as a matter of honor, or äse it would not be hope." That hope will
be disappointed, and fail us, is not its negation but its condition of pos­
sibility. W hen the acute failures and dangers of the present (o f “normal”,
“straight,” “white,” or “capitalist” tim e) threaten us, we turn to the utopian
imaginary in order to activate queer and minoritarian ways of being in the
world and being-together. W e do so to survive the shattering experience of
living within an impossible present^ while charting the course for a new
and different future.
The frequent and even necessary disappointment o f hope is due to
an incommensurability: things do not line up; loved objects (whether
persons, theories, or social movements) let us down. Theories about
identities and politics frequently miss actually existing subjects in their
complexity, messiness, and plurality. To paraphrase M unozs powerful
concluding paragraph in “Hope in the Face of H eartbreak/ however, this
missed encounter, this incommensurability, far from disqualifying queer
of color critique or cultural production, is instead the very condition—
however blasted and painful it can sometimes feel— o f our being-with
others. Hope may not be commensurate to reality; our hopeful actions
m ay not produce— may not ever produce once and for all— the hoped-for
end. But this prizing of the incommensurate over the equivalent is a queer
angle of vision, a queer ethics for living through the gaps between what
we need and what we get, what we allow ourselves to want and what we
can survive and transform in the now.
The value and the challenge o f the incommensurable are the focus of
another essay published in this expanded edition of Cruising Utopia, “Race,
Sex, and the Incommensurate: Gary Fisher with Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick.”
In this essay too, we can see Munoz clarifying arguments he first made in
Cruising U topia. The focus o f this essay, which was first published in Queer
Futures: Reconsidering Ethics, Activism, and the Political, edited by Elahe
Haschemi Yekani, Eveline Kilian, and Beatrice Michaelis, proleptically
figures this foreword: Munoz is writing about the collaboration between
Fisher and Sedgwick. Fisher, like Munoz, was one o f Sedgwicks graduate
students (Fisher at Berkeley, Munoz at Duke). W hen Fisher died in 1994,
too young and “ahead of his tim e/ as the saying goes, Sedgwick took on
the task of editing and publishing a collection of his short stories and po­
ems, G ary in Your P ocket (1996) . Munoz is interested in the difficult recep­
tion of this text, and what it can tell us about “a kind o f queer politics of
the incommensurable”— an incommensurability characterized by differen­
tial power dynamics (advisor and student), race (Fishers blackness and
Sedgwick’s whiteness), and gender. But he is equally referring to Fisher’s
and Sedgwick’s collaboration and a communism begun in life, continued
after the death of one of them, living on in their readers— known, antici­
pated, never imagined— after the death of all.
This mode of communism was anticipatory, but also material. Munoz
understood it as manifest, or performed, within the lived experiences of
queers of color and in the brown commons. In “Race, Sex, and the Incom ­
mensurate,” he illustrates this mode o f communism (as he did in Cruis­
ing U topia) through stories about relationships between incommensura-
bly different types of beings (here, Sedgwick and Fisher) as well as the
aesthetic example (Fisher's short story “Arabesque”). This commons was
an experience of, in Munoz’s words, “a dynamic that partially transpires
under the sign of queer of color/ that is routinely misread by die lens of
a politics of equivalence, but that becomes newly accessible as a sharing
(out) of a nonequivalent, incommensurable, and incalculable sense of
queemess.” This theorization of the queer o f color commons anticipates
the turn in his final works toward describing a brown commons. There, he
was attending to the way certain radalized people (primarily Latinx, but
not solely) are made to be brown through "global and local forces [that]
constantly attempt to degrade their value and diminish their verve. But
they are also brown insofar as they smolder with a life and persistence;
they are brown because brown is a common color shared by a commons
that is of and for the multitude.”14 This brown commons, like the mode of
queer of color communism depicted in the essay on Sedgwick and Fisher,
is "an example of collectivity with and through the incommensurable.”
As editors, we find ourselves incommensurate to the task of completing
his work, even as we recognize that this form of adjacency was precisely
what he sought to theorize in some of his very last writings on the con­
cept of being singular plural. Some interpret this concept as a pretty but
vague synonym for something like "community/1 but community was a
normative, even hegemonic term, of which Munoz remained consistently
skeptical. More than any actually existing collectivity in the here and now,
his reconsideration of the ethics of Sedgwicks being with Fisher leads to
a proposal that we think of queer relationality as incommensurate with
itself His work, and our work on his work, point us to a spacing out in
time— futures, pasts, and presents— in which we may not yet be queer,
but can nonetheless orient ourselves to queemesss horizon.
C R U ISIN G U T O P IA
Acknowledgments

THIS BOOK HAS been in the works for over ten years. I cannot
hope to properly acknowledge all the people who have been supportive
of the writing and research that went into these pages. I have presented
the writing that became these chapters at seemingly countless universities,
museums, performance spaces, and conferences. A t these various institu­
tions many audiences listened to this work and engaged in beneficial ways.
Queer friendship has proven to be the condition of possibility for imagin­
ing what queemess can and should mean. The actual relational circuits I
am lucky enough to find myself belonging to whet my desire for future
collectivity.
I have had the gift of extraordinary research assistance. Joshua Cham-
bers-Letson has invested so much of his own energy and intelligence in
this book. Sujay Pandit has been indispensable in my completing this
project The manuscript benefited from the attention of Julia Steinmetz
and Chelsea Adewunmi. So many excellent students have proven to be
such great interlocutors for this book as it emerged. This list will be woe­
fully incomplete: Hypatia Vourloumis, Jeanne Vacarro, Frank Leon Rob­
erts, Sandra Ruiz, Katie Brewer-Ball, Eser Selen, Tina Majkowski, Karen
Jaim e, Ellen Cleghom e, Beth Stinson, Alex Pittman, Lydia Brawner, Roy
Perez, Albert Laguna, Andre Carrington, Leticia Alvardo, Anna Fischer,
Jonathan Mullins, Ronak Kapadia, Stephanie Weiss, and Justin Leroy. One
of the greatest rewards in teaching is when your former students become
your colleagues and friends: there are no better examples of this in my life
than Christine Balance, Ricardo Montez, and Alexandra Vazquez. Also in
that category is Shane Vogel, who also gave me great feedback on this vol­
ume. I teach in a relatively small department that 1 have chaired for the
past few years, and I am grateful for the climate of mutual support and
respect achieved in the Department o f Performance Studies, Tisch School
o f the Arts at NYU. Colleagues like Barbara Browning, Karen Shimakawa,
Richard Scheduler, Andrg Lepedd, Diana Taylor, Barbara Kirshenblatt-
Gimblet, Allen Weiss, Anna Deavere Smith, Deborah Kapchan, Tavia
 Nyong'o, and Ann Pellegrini make institutional life rewarding Ann has
been a coeditor of the series this book appears in, and I could never have
anticipated enjoying such a fun and harmonious working relationship. I
cannot begin to express properly m y gratitude to the staff at Performance
Studies who enable my work as a chair, a faculty member, and a scholar.
Thank you N oel Rodriguez, Patty Jan g and Laura Elena Fortes for your
extreme competence and good humor, Many friends outside of Perfor­
mance Studies at N YU need to be thanked for their contributions to the
texture of my life and thinking The first to be mentioned is Lisa Dug­
gan, who has been a staunch ally, loving friend, and brilliant interlocutor.
Other friends include Anna McCarthy, Josefina Saldana-Portillo, Gayatri
Gopinath, Ana Dopico, Phillip Brian Harper, and Carolyn Dinshaw.
The three scholars who have read this book for the press in different
drafts offered me welcomed engagement Elizabeth Freeman and I m et
each other as precocious graduate students on the conference circuit, and
I see in her work some of the best thinking of m y second-generation queer
theory cohort. Judith Halberstam has simply been an ideal colleague and
reader. She is also an amazing friend. I feel privileged to have the bril­
liant Fred M oten as a friend, comrade, and interlocutor. M y editor, Eric
Zinner, read this book with great care and skill Ciara M cLaughlin and
Em ily Park have been also been extremely helpful. A grant from the Tisch
Deans Faculty Development Award has helped me include color images
in this book. I am especially grateful to M arvin Taylor and Ann Butler at
the Fales Library, New York University.
John Andrews showed up in the middle of this writing project He has
responded to my work with equal parts enthusiasm and skepticism. He
has been a perfect reader and the very best company I could have asked
for. My other great companions during the writing of this book have
been my princess bulldogs. The late great Lady Bully showed me the
grandeur of companion-species utopias, and Dulce Maria is herself the
sturdy embodiment of the good life. My family are amazingly support­
ive. My brother Alex s support is very touching My cousin Albert strolled
into my everyday life quite unexpectedly and has becom e a lovely pres­
ence, helping me watch the Northern F ro n t Sam Green is m y kindred
utopian spirit; his work and our bond inspire me. I am fortunate to know
Jennifer Doyle, who has responded to my life and work with so much
love, generosity, and intelligence. I owe a great debt to Kevin M cCarty
for helping me glimpse utopia. Luke Dowd has been my friend forever,
and I continue to learn from his work and find beauty there. Tony Justs
images have also provided necessary aesthetic pleasure. Nao Bustamante
is simply awesome. H er friendship and art mean the world to me. Time
spent over the years with Jonathan Hatley has been extremely rewarding.
N ick Terrys friendship is treasured. I have enjoyed getting to know and
write about My Barbarian (Malik Gaines, Jade Gordon, and Alex Segade),
Kalup Linzy, and Dynasty Handbag (Jibz Cameron). An incomplete list
of scholars, artists, and collaborators who have read this work, pushed
these ideas, or generally engaged me include Lauren Berlant, Ann Cvet-
kovich, Ricardo Ortiz, Carla Freccero, Lida Fiol-Mata, Rebecca Schnei­
der, Henry Abelove, Michael M oon, Jos& Quiroga, Jorge Ignado Cortinas,
Alina Troyano/Carm elita Tropicana, Ela Troyano, Ana Margaret Sanchez,
Karen Tongson, Carlos Carujo, David Roman, Anjali Arondekar, Patrida
Clough, Jasbir Puar, Michael Cobb, Josh Run, Heather Lukes, Molly M c-
Garry, George Haggerty, Gavin Butt, Dominic Johnson, Vaginal Davis, Ja­
net Jacobsen, Kathleen McHugh, Chon Noriega, Eric Lott, Cindy Katz,
Donald Pease, Michael Wang, Juana Maria Rodriguez, Rebecca Sumner
Burgos, Coco Fusco, Abe Weintraub, and Shari F rilo t My foundational
friendship with Antonio Viego makes this work and so much m ore possi­
ble. Guinevere Turner has kept things real in the m ost hallucinatory ways.
Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick passed as I finished this book. She has been my
great friend and mentor. Her gentle touch and luminous inspiration is ev­
erywhere for me.
Introduction
Feeling Utopia

A map of the world that does not indude utopia is notworth glancing a t
— Oscar Wilde

QUEERNESS IS NOT yet here. Queemess is an ideality. Put another

way we are not yet queer. We may never touch queemess, but we can feel
it as the wann illumination of a horizon imbued with potentiality. We have
never been queer, yet queemess exists for us as an ideality that can be dis­
tilled from the past and used to imagine a future. T he future is queemess s
domain. Queemess is a structuring and educated mode of desiring that al­
lows us to see and feel beyond the quagmire of the present T h e here and
nowis a prison house. We must strive, in the face of the here and nows total­
izing rendering of reality, to think and feel a then and there. Some will say that
all we have are the pleasures of this moment, but we must never settle for
that minimal transport; we must dream and enact new and better pleasures,
other ways of being in the world, and ultimately new worlds. Queemess is a
longing that propels us onward, beyond romances of the negative and toiling
in the present Queemess is that thing that lets us feel that this world is not
enough, that indeed something is missing. Often we can glimpse the worlds
proposed and promised by queemess in the realm of the aesthetic. The aes­
thetic, especially the queer aesthetic, frequently contains blueprints and sche­
mata of a forward-dawning futurity. Both the ornamental and the quotidian
can contain a map of the utopia that is queemess. Turning to the aesthetic in
the case of queemess is nothing like an escape from the social realm, insofar
as queer aesthetics map future social relations. Queemess is also a performa­
tive because it is not simply a being but a doing for and toward the future.
Queemess is essentially about the rejection of a here and now and an insis­
tence on potentiality or concrete possibility for another world.
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
A. That night?
Q. Yes?
A. No, sir; not to my knowledge—he did not.
Q. Do you know when he sent to the Governor for troops?
A. These men that came for him, told him all they wanted of him,
was to go out and make a demand of the crowd to disperse.
Q. Who told him that?
A. I believe it was Mr. Scott told him that.
Q. Did you hear him tell him that?
A. Yes, sir; I am not certain it was Mr. Scott, but I think it was.
Q. Was it one of the railroad officials?
A. It was one of the railroad officials and one of the men that came
for the sheriff.
Q. When did the sheriff call on the Governor to furnish him with
troops?
A. That night, sir.
Q. After he returned?
A. After he returned.
Q. And before morning?
A. And before morning; yes, sir.
Q. State whether you were with him at any other time?
A. On Friday I was out—Friday morning—to serve some writs, and
didn't get back until pretty late in the morning. When I got in, he
told me he wanted me to go along out to Twenty-eighth street.
Q. That was the next day?
A. Yes; that was on Friday. We two went down to the depot. The
militia was gathered there. We stood there several hours. I think he
came to the conclusion not to go out on that day. He told us we
could go home again—would not go out before the next day. The
next day I was out some place attending to some business in my
district, and came back. He told me that the rest of the deputies
were all out and they wanted men to go to Twenty-eighth street.
That was the day before—that was on Friday, I think it was Friday—
he attempted to raise a posse, I would not be certain. He said the
rest of the deputies were all through town trying to get a posse to
go and assist in making arrests, and told me he wanted me to go
out and raise all the men I could—if I could find any, to bring them
in. I went out and met a good many men that I knew, and some
that I was not acquainted with, anymore than I knew their faces,
and spoke to them about going out, and none of them would go.
Q. Where did you go to raise a posse?
A. I went around through the city.
Q. On what streets?
A. I believe all the time I was on Fifth street.
Q. What class of men did you ask to go?
A. Just any man at all that I thought there was any show of getting.
Q. Did you ask any of the business men?
A. I don't remember that I did.
Q. Who did you ask—anybody you met in the street?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You didn't ask strangers, did you?
A. There are a great many men in the city that their faces are
familiar, but I don't know their names.
Q. Any citizens?
A. Yes, sir; any citizens I met.
Q. What replies did you get.
A. Some of them stated they didn't want to have anything to do with
fighting against the workingmen, other men said, damned if they
wanted to go out there to get killed, and such replies as that.
Q. Did you demand—make a demand on them to go?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And they absolutely refused?
A. They absolutely refused.
Q. What was done with those men that refused?
A. I never knew of anything being done to them.
Q. Was any report of it made to the court?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. Nor no arrests made?
A. No.
Q. State in what way the demand was made?
A. Well, sir, I just made a verbal demand.
Q. In what words?
A. I asked if they would go out, and assist in making arrests at
Twenty-eighth street.
 By Mr. Larrabee:

Q. Did you say to any of them that you commanded them as a

peace officer—you demanded their assistance as a posse to assist in
suppressing the riot?
A. No, sir; I believe I didn't.
Q. It was a mere request, then, and not a command?
A. I suppose it was.
Q. And they declined?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you go outside of the city in search of men?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you call upon professional men?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What class of professional men?
A. Attorneys.
Q. Did you succeed in getting any?
A. They just laughed at me.
Q. Did you call on any physicians?
A. I believe not.
Q. Any dentists?
A. Not that I know of. We don't go to that class of men.
Q. I believe you cannot state anything but what has already been
stated?
A. I believe not, sir. I have not heard——
Q. We have had a great many witnesses on that subject?
A. I don't think I can enlighten you any on that subject.

By Mr. Engelbert:

Q. The sheriff issued no proclamation?

A. Not that I know of.

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. Did the sheriff go out himself, and command men to join him in
putting down the riot?
A. I couldn't state that, whether he did or didn't. I was not in the
office much. I was away in the morning, and when I came back, he
requested me to go out.
Q. What were his directions to you?
A. His directions were to go out in town, and get all the men I could
to assist in making arrests in Twenty-eighth street. He said there
was three or four men there they had warrants for, and they
expected trouble, and wanted a posse.
Q. Didn't tell you to make your demands, or what language to use,
nor gave you no written summons.
A. Nothing more than what I have told you.

James H. Fife, being duly sworn, testified as follows:

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. Where do you reside?

A. Allegheny City.
Q. Brother of Sheriff Fife, of Allegheny county?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you with your brother at any time during the riots of July
last?
A. I was with him on Saturday.
Q. With him on Saturday?
A. Yes, sir; went with him from the Union depot up to Twenty-eighth
street.
Q. What time did you meet him at the Union depot?
A. I think about two o'clock, as near as I can recollect.
Q. Go on and state what took place from that time on.
A. There was considerable delay, at least I thought so, before we
made a start to go from the depot to Twenty-eighth street. There
appeared to be a delay with the military. They had not all arrived at
the one time, and those that had, had to have something to eat,
before they were ready to go on. There appeared to be considerable
delay. I think it was near four o'clock before a start was made from
the depot—somewheres between three and four o'clock. The sheriff
and I think seventeen assistants were in advance of the military, and
marched up the railroad street in that way. I understood the object
that we were taken for was to assist Constable Richardson in making
some arrests. I understood that there was an order issued from
court to arrest some ten or eleven of the ring-leaders of the strikers,
and we were to assist Richardson in making the rescue, and the
military, as I understood it at the time, was to protect us. I walked
with my brother the greater part of the way. We went two by two, in
advance of the military. We reached the neighborhood of Twenty-
eighth street, and the crowd was so dense it was with difficulty that
we could get through it. We worked our way on up to Twenty-eighth
street. I stood about the center of the street for a considerable
length of time, at Twenty-eighth street, where the railroad crosses.
You have heard the statements made in regard to the disposition
that was made of the military there, and my own views are just the
same. They were put into what is termed a hollow square, and then
what followed after that——
Q. Did you find any of the men you went to arrest?
A. No, sir; my understanding before we started, and on the way
there, and afterwards, was, that Mr. Pitcairn was to point out the
men to this Constable Richardson, but I have never seen Mr. Pitcairn
but once since, and that was before your honorable body, and I saw
no men pointed out. There was no attempt made to arrest that I
know of, and I think it was very well that it was so.
Q. When you got to a certain point, the crowd resisted your further
progress?
A. It was an impossibility to get through, that was just about it. They
were there in large numbers. In front of us appeared to be one
dense mass of people, for a square or more, and on either side. Of
course they gave away to the military, to a certain extent, up to
Twenty-eighth street, and there the military halted, and appeared
not able to go any further.
Q. When the hollow square was formed, where was the sheriff's
posse?
A. The sheriff was just—the last place I saw him was just at what we
would call the corner of this hollow square, on the left hand side as
you go up. His posse was—the principal part of them—right in front
among the crowd—immediately in front. I know that was my
position, and there was several others, I noticed, that went with us,
that were within a few feet of me at the time the order to charge
bayonets was made. I was, perhaps, no further than to that wall,
[indicating about fifteen feet,] from where I am sitting to where the
charge was made.
Q. Was any attack made upon the sheriff's posse?
A. None that I know of. I was looking for it; but there was nothing of
the kind made. We were distinguished by a badge, so that we could
have been known by any person.
Q. Did the sheriff say anything to the crowd?
A. He tried to; but the noise was so great I don't think he was heard,
only by a very few in the immediate neighborhood.
Q. What did he say?
A. I don't know really what he did say. I could see that he was
talking; but I don't know what he did say. He was perhaps twenty
(20) feet from me.
Q. Was any attack made on the military by the crowd?
A. Yes; I presume you gentlemen were up there and can understand
me. Just where Twenty-eighth street crosses the railroad there is a
road which leads diagonally up the hill to the hospital. Just where
that road connects with Twenty-eighth street there was a gate that
was hung to close up that road. That gate was swung back, about
two parts that way, and here was a pile of stones behind it—
between it and this fence. There were two men standing behind that
gate, and from the time that these men attempted to make a
charge, these men commenced throwing stones at the military.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. The stones came from the right and front of the military?
A. Yes; and there was quite a number of pieces of coal and other
missiles thrown from the front or from this side here. These two men
that throwed them were behind this gate.
Q. This gate is east of the street, isn't it—Twenty-eighth street?
A. East of the street; it is to close that road that runs up the hill to
the hospital.

By Mr. Larrabee:

Q. They commenced throwing when the military got in reach?

A. No, sir; not until the time the charge of bayonets was made.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. Where was it on Twenty-eighth street?

A. Just at the edge of it.
Q. Just reaching the street?
A. Yes, sir. I saw the two soldiers that were struck with missiles. One
of them was knocked down. He got up in a minute. When he
dropped his cap had dropped off, and when he got up he held his
gun in his left hand this way, butt on the street, and he was wiping
his face so, [indicating] it was bleeding very profusely. The other one
didn't fall; he was struck some place about the shoulder. These are
the only two that I saw that I knew to be struck, and it was over in
that neighborhood where these two were struck that the firing
commenced, the firing was in that direction, over towards the hill. I
didn't see any stone thrown immediately in front, but there was coal
and other missiles—pieces of sticks and things of that kind.

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. Have you any new facts to communicate to us that have not been
gone through?
A. I don't know that I have, unless there will be some question
occurring to you.
Q. Do you know what efforts were made by the mayor to suppress
the riots?
A. I know nothing about that, only from hearsay.
Q. You live in Allegheny City?
A. Yes; I live in Allegheny City. I live on Anderson street—that is, at
the far end of the bridge.
Q. Was there any riot over there?
A. We didn't permit it over there.
Q. Was there any strike?
A. Yes; there was a strike, and the railroad, as I understood it, and
to all appearance, was in the possession of the strikers. There was
no destruction of property.
Q. How large a crowd of strikers was together at any one time?
A. At one time, I suppose, I saw two or three or four hundred
together at the outer depot.
Q. What day was that?
A. That was on Sunday. They didn't appear to destroy any property,
everything appeared to be just at a stand-still. There was men
standing talking, and didn't appear to molest anybody.
Q. What preparations were made by the city authorities of Allegheny
City, to protect themselves and to keep down the riot?
A. Meetings of the citizens were called at the public square—the
mayor's office—and of course there was a great deal of talk like
there is at all these kind of meetings, and a good many propositions
made, but the one that was adopted, was, that they should organize
the citizens into a military force, and did it, so that General Lesieur—
General Lesieur was the colonel of the round-head regiment during
the late trouble. He is now a practicing physician in Allegheny City.
Q. What time was it organized?
A. Sunday afternoon or Monday afternoon, the time of the troublest
times, anyhow.

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. Go on?
A. To let you know a part of what was done, I live adjacent to the
bridge. There was a piece of artillery planted there, and sixteen
men, armed with muskets, stood there as a guard for a week, every
night, and I was informed it was so down at the other bridges, and
the street cars that run over that line, many of them, were stopped
just at the end of the bridge, and one of these military would look in
to see who was in. There was persons coming, as I understood,
from a distance here, roughs and rowdies, &c., and the object was
that they shouldn't come in Allegheny City—they had to go back on
this side.
Q. How long did that crowd continue there at the outer depot—of
strikers?
A. I don't know the length of time it continued; there was more or
less of them there for several days, until the thing got settled.
Q. What was done by the mayor and his subordinates prior to the
citizens' meeting in Allegheny City—Mayor Philips?
A. Well, I don't know precisely what was done, it is only from
hearsay, and that, of course, is not evidence.

By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Was this meeting called by the mayor?
A. Called by the mayor, as I understood.
Q. Organized a force?
A. Yes, sir. I don't know the number, but the number is quite small,
compared with this city. I saw myself, on Sabbath day, a policeman
stop two persons that were carrying stuff away, that afternoon, they
had got from some of the cars here. It was plunder. They stopped
them and took them with them, I presume to the lock-up. I don't
know, but I suppose so.
Q. Plunder and all?
A. Plunder and all. A question has been raised here frequently about
who gave orders to fire up there. I think I was in a position that I
would have known.
Q. That is, at Twenty-eighth street?
A. Yes; I heard no order given by any one, and during the time the
firing was in progress, I saw a man that was represented, that I
understood to be General Brinton, trying, apparently, to stop it. He
was using his sword this way, [indicating,] under their guns, to get
them to shoot up or quit. That was the idea conveyed to my mind.
Q. I would like to ask you another question or two in relation to this
citizens' meeting in Allegheny City. Were the people generally in
Allegheny City unwilling to respond, or did they willingly respond to
the call of the mayor, and organize themselves into a military
organization.
A. I think so—all that was needed. I think there was no difficulty
there.
Q. How large was the response—was the meeting in response to the
mayor's call?
A. This thing of fixing numbers is kind of guess work. I don't know.
There was two or three hundred, perhaps, when I saw them. I think,
if you would call Mayor Philips, he could give you that perhaps better
than I could.
Q. Was there anybody who refused, to your knowledge?
A. I don't know of a single one that refused in Allegheny City—I
don't know of any.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. Did Mayor Philips take active measures to raise a force for the
purpose of preventing or suppressing violence and riot?
A. I so understood that he did.
Q. He did his duty well?
A. I think so; and the evidence of it is, that he had his men at these
bridges, guarding them, and keeping them there for a week, a piece
of artillery and twelve or sixteen men at every bridge.

George Olnhausen, being duly sworn, testified as follows:

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. Where do you reside?

A. Over on the south side, on Carson street.
Q. What is your business?
A. Window glass business.
Q. Were you a member of any of the military companies?
A. Yes; pay-master of the Fourteenth regiment.
Q. On the ground or scene of the riots?
A. Yes; I was there.
Q. What day first?
A. It was on Saturday. We started on Friday afternoon, or rather
Saturday morning, to go up there, about four or five o'clock.
Q. Were you there before the arrival of the Philadelphia troops?
A. Yes; we arrived about three or four o'clock.
Q. Colonel Gray and the entire Fourteenth regiment?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was he there on Saturday?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In command of his regiment?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many men did he have on arrival?
A. On arrival we had twenty-seven officers and one hundred and
seventy-eight men on Twenty-eighth street.
Q. How long were you on duty there before the arrival of General
Brinton and his troops.
A. I think when we got there it was between four and five o'clock,
and stayed there until Brinton came. It was, I think, perhaps two or
three o'clock; I think somewheres near that time.
Q. Was anything said or done by Colonel Gray about clearing the
track before the arrival of General Brinton?
A. Yes. In the morning when we first got there there was a little
excitement—it didn't amount to really very much, but by ten or
eleven or twelve o'clock, one, &c., it got on worse all the time; that
is, there was a great many more men got there, and Colonel Gray
sent me down—I think it was between two and three o'clock—to
give Colonel Hartley Howard his compliments, and said, if they
would cooperate with them he would clean that track. Colonel
Howard acknowledged the compliments, and said he didn't think it
was proper to do that.
Q. What regiment did Colonel Gray command?
A. The Nineteenth.
Q. Where was he stationed then?
A. He was laying just about this gate Mr. Fife spoke about here a
little while ago.
Q. Where abouts was the Fourteenth regiment then?
A. Right up on the hill.
Q. Commanding the hill?
A. Commanding the hill—that is, we were laying there. I went and
reported the matter to the colonel, that Colonel Howard didn't think
it was justifiable in doing that, and that ended the matter.
Q. Which officer was senior in command then, Colonel Gray or
Colonel Howard?
A. Colonel Gray is senior in command. Colonel Gray sent down that
word. I don't suppose that he meant or wanted to shoot or use any
extra force, just simply wanted to get them to go away from the
track; at least that is my impression.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. Was the message in the form of an order to Colonel Howard from

Colonel Gray?
A. No, sir; I don't think it was in the form of an order. Just simply
stating, that, if he would cooperate, they would clear the track
together. At that time we had four or five companies, and just as
soon as one company would march by they would rush in again, and
kept on that way all the time, from ten o'clock until the afternoon. It
was very annoying, because the men were very nearly played out.
Q. You may state what condition Colonel Gray's regiment was in, as
to obeying orders, and whether it was disposed to obey orders.
A. The majority of the men were. Of course, there were some few
that were in sympathy with the strikers. In fact, almost everybody in
Pittsburgh was in sympathy with the strikers.
Q. How many of Colonel Gray's regiment was in sympathy with the
strikers?
A. I should judge there would be about thirty-two.
Q. That couldn't be depended upon in case of an attack on the mob?
A. I suppose there might not have been that many, not quite thirty-
two you couldn't depend on, but there was thirty-two missing that
night, and I didn't hear of any of them being shot, and I suppose
they must have gone away.
Q. They skulked, in military parlance?
A. Yes; that was generally the case. I would also state, that when
we were disbanded at the Union depot we had twenty-eight officers
and one hundred and forty-six men. We had one officer more.
Q. When were you disbanded?
A. It was about eleven o'clock Saturday afternoon.
Q. For what purpose—why did you disband?
A. So far as I can learn, as General Brinton gave the orders to
Colonel Gray, Colonel Gray gave it to the officers and his men, and
he disbanded—staff officers.
Q. I would like the general to explain what he means by disband.
A. He meant that we should go to our homes.

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. Broke ranks for the evening?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you re-assembled the next morning?
A. No, sir; we didn't re-assemble the next morning. I was over, and a
great many of the other officers were over, to see what we could do,
but we didn't re-assemble.
Q. To whom did you communicate these facts?
A. I communicated them to a number of persons.

By Senator Clark:

Q. Will you give the names of those persons?

A. I want to state this fact right here, that I understand this
committee to be appointed for the purpose of investigating this
transaction. Now, with all due respect to the committee, my idea is,
that the committee is appointed for the purpose of investigating the
facts.
Q. As a regiment you were not re-organized until Monday morning?
A. Yes, sir; a great many of the officers were there, and I suppose a
great many of the men. Everything was so exciting we could not get
them together.
Q. While you were on the hill, during Saturday, did your soldiers
mingle among the rioters, or did they preserve order?
A. They preserved order. There was a few that would get leave of
absence to go down street for something or other—very few.
Q. Did they remain in ranks.
A. Remained in ranks.
Q. You staid there until what hour?
A. We all remained there until the Philadelphia regiments were
coming up there, and I got instructions from Colonel Grey to have
the troops got ready to move.
Q. At what time did you abandon the hill?
A. I think we received orders to move down there about six o'clock. I
guess, perhaps, a little later than that—perhaps a little earlier—I am
not positive. We marched down there.
Q. Down where?
A. Down the hill, on to the railroad track at Twenty-eighth street,
and then down to the transfer depot, and stayed there until eleven
o'clock, or near eleven—half past ten, anyway.
Q. Did you hold your position on the hill until six o'clock——
Senator Yutzy: On Saturday, at the time of the firing?
A. Yes, sir.

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. Did the Nineteenth regiment remain on the hill?

A. They were laying below us at the gate.
Q. Did they hold their position until six o'clock?
A. There was some of them did, and some of them did not.
Q. How far is the transfer depot from the round-house.
A. I think the transfer depot is on Sixteenth street—six or eight
blocks.
Q. Where were the mob when you marched down to the transfer
depot?
A. They were mostly all down along the railroad, at Twenty-eighth
street.
Q. Did you meet with any resistance in marching down?
A. No, sir.
Q. Where were they when you disbanded, at eleven o'clock?
A. They were most everywhere then, because, it seemed to me, that
all the workmen from the south side, Allegheny City, Sharpsburg,
and all from the country had come in here, and so far as I could
learn, they were going to clean out the Philadelphia troops.
Q. Had the burning commenced when you disbanded?
A. No, sir; not that I know of. When I got home, I could see over
that they were burning—that was about twelve o'clock.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. Your regiment was resting on the hill, in good order. What

position did they have during the day. Were they at rest—stacked
arms?
A. Yes, sir; stacked arms, and we had a guard there.
Q. Your men laid close by the arms?
A. Close by the arms.
0. When you broke ranks down by the Union depot, did you have
orders to re-assemble at any time?
A. No, sir; we did not.
Q. Who gave the order to break ranks?
A. Colonel Grey gave orders to his regiment. So far as I could learn,
General Brown gave him the orders.
Q. Did they take their arms to the armory, or did they go away, each
one taking his own gun home with him?
A. Yes, sir; we were not marched to the armory.
Q. Broke ranks right there at the depot?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there any mob there at the depot?
A. Yes, sir; they were running all up and down the street, yelling and
shouting.

By Mr. Larrabee:

Q. Was there any effort made by your regiment on the 19th to clear
the crossing, or keep it clear that day?
A. We were there from three or four o'clock in the morning and until
the Philadelphians came in that day, and kept it clear.
Q. How happened there to be such a large——
A. That is to say, suppose this was the track. We would go and clear
this off, and then they would get in behind us, shouting and howling
and cursing. It kept three or four companies going there all day.
Q. Did you undertake to hold possession of the crossing of the track
any distance there at the crossing, or merely clear it off and fall
back?
A. Then they would rush in behind us, and we would have to send
another company.
Q. How happened there to be such a large crowd on the crossing at
the time the Philadelphia troops marched up?
A. I think our regiment had orders—that is the companies—had
orders to fall back and let the Philadelphians in. Our orders were, so
far as I can remember, that we were to go on a train, and go out.
Q. How long previous to the Philadelphia troops coming up there
had you fallen back?
A. I suppose it was about a minute.
Q. Some testify that the mob was mixed up with the troops there
near the crossing, and on the side of the hill?
A. They were only mixed up in that way, just as I told you.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. The troops were mixed in the crowd?

A. Yes; mixing in the crowd.

By Mr. Larrabee:

Q. How; were they on good terms—the crowd and the troops?

A. They didn't say anything. Some of them said they were going to
clean out the militia, we didn't take any notice of that at all.
Q. No particular hard feeling by the crowd against your troops?
A. No, sir.
Q. They showed considerable feeling against the Philadelphia troops
—it was supposed that they would clear the crossing there.
A. They were, of course, from Philadelphia, and they didn't like them
—that was about it.
Q. Could not the force you had there—these two regiments—could
not that crossing there, and the immediate neighborhood, been kept
clear entirely by the force you had there?
A. I think they could. That is very hard to tell. We didn't know what
might have happened.
Q. Were the efforts of the officers directed in that way—to keep it
clear?
A. Yes; of course some of our men were in sympathy with the
strikers, but if we were to take away two or three regiments, away
to different cities or somewhere out away from Pittsburgh, 1 think
they could pretty nearly clean out a city of this size.
Q. You don't think they were as firm in their duty as they would have
been in some other city?
A. Yes.
Q. They were a little more tender of the people they were dealing
with?
A. Yes; they were friends and relatives.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. Fraternize with the people—with the crowd?

A. I think if you would take the Fourteenth regiment out, in fact,
even in another riot, they would do their duty. All of our officers
were men in the army during the war except one or two. It is like all
these other things that are unexpected, and like in the war at first;
they were all demoralized, and didn't stand up as well as they did in
the last part of the war.
Q. Was the military at any time deployed on the railroad track, and
any attempt made to drive them off the track in both directions?
A. That was done all the time—they were kept off most of the time.
Q. Were the military deployed along the track of the railroad?
A. Yes; marched back and forward.
Q. Were they stationed with a skirmish line?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. In your opinion, as a military man, couldn't that mob or crowd
have been kept off the track by deploying the men along the track
as a skirmish line, or, say two skirmish lines, one on each side of the
track?
A. No, sir; I don't think it could, unless you did some shooting.

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. Could it have been done by doing some shooting?

A. If they had shot everybody that came they couldn't have got on.
Q. Could a skirmish line have maintained its position and kept the
crowd back?
A. I don't think they could by shooting, for the reason men, women,
and children would come in, and they couldn't have kept it clear—
not kept the whole track clear.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. The reason I asked him that, was that he said the companies
marched over on the railroad and they would fall in behind. I want
to know if the military had been deployed with two skirmish lines,
why they couldn't have kept the crowd away?
A. There was too many people.
Q. Were the people armed?
A. No, sir; not that I saw. They all might have had revolvers and
such things as that, but they had no guns.
Q. Did all that crowd appear to be violent and riotous, or were there
a great many there that were simply there out of curiosity?
A. Yes; there was a great many out of curiosity—three or four that
were working for me.
Q. How many hundred men do you think there were there that were
riotous or disposed to be lawless?
A. I should judge—of course it is a pretty hard thing to tell—there
was a great many, indeed—two thousand, anyhow.
Q. What proportion of that crowd were disposed to be riotous or
lawless?
A. There might have been five hundred in the first place, but after
the shooting commenced all were or pretty nearly all.

By Mr. Dewees:

Q. At any time before the Philadelphia troops came, could you have
or could the military have dispersed the mob at any time?
A. I think they could, yes.

James I. Bennett, being duly sworn, testified as follows:

By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. State where you reside, Mr. Bennett?
A. Allegheny city is my residence.
Q. Where is your business?
A. In Pittsburgh.
Q. And what is it?
A. Manufacturing of iron nails, &c.
Q. Been engaged in the business a long time?
A. Twenty years or more. About twenty years.
Q. What is your firm name?
A. Graff, Bennett & Co.
Q. Were you in the city during the riots of July last?
A. I was.
Q. Just give us a statement of what you saw, the hour and date
commencing——
A. I was not in the riots. I was in the city, but I was not up to the
depot until Sunday—until Sunday afternoon. I didn't feel very much
concerned. Saturday is generally a busy day with us, but Saturday
afternoon I became anxious about the matter. I had been
accustomed to be in a good many of these quarrels with laboring
men, and supposed the thing would be adjusted; but on coming
home on Saturday evening, from what I heard, learned of the
condition of affairs, I became considerably alarmed and very much
concerned. I live down that side of the river at my residence, about
three miles. After going home, I hitched up my buggy, and came
back to the city. When I came into the city, the crowd was just
coming, I think, out of Bowers' store. They had cleaned out a gun
store—hardware store, on Third street. The first intimation I had of
that was seeing a man with a gun, and I asked him what was going
on. I was satisfied that he had no business with the gun. He told me
there was a large crowd of men had been into Bowers' store and
broken it open and taken all the arms that they could get there, and
that they were marching then to the railroad. At one point I turned
around my horse and buggy and drove back to Mr. Thaw's house,
which is on Fifth street. I went to Mr. Thaw's house and I called him
out, and we talked about the matter. Thaw didn't appear to be
alarmed; he said he was going to his business. He thought there
was no danger. I went up again to Third street and Fifth street, and
was satisfied in my mind that there was a great deal of trouble, or
was likely to be a great deal, and I went back to Mr. Thaw. He spoke
of the military coming in, and he thought there was enough to
protect. I advised him not to go up to the offices of the Fort Wayne
road at all. I think I went back to Mr. Thaw's house the third time,
and he then appeared to be very much more concerned and alarmed
this time. I think one of his neighbors came down that had been up
there. I left him then, and on my way home, in Allegheny city, I
went to Mr. McCullough's house. We sat until perhaps eleven o'clock,
talking together. Mr. McCullough at first felt entirely satisfied that the
military would be sufficient to prevent any serious damage. I felt
very much concerned, and advised him to be very careful and not
put himself in the way of danger or any trouble.
Q. Who is Mr. McCullough?
A. Mr. McCullough is vice president of the Pennsylvania Company. He
is managing man of the Pennsylvania Company's lines.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. I would like you to state what the Pennsylvania lines were?

A. The leased lines west of this.
Q. Pennsylvania Central?
A. Their offices are altogether; but they are connecting lines. I live in
Allegheny city, and I felt concerned——
Q. What is Mr. McCollough's first name?
A. J. M. He told me there was a regiment coming up on the line of
the road that night, and that there was a sufficient number of troops
coming in that would prevent any trouble. He felt secure; but, as I
said before, I did not. I told him that there was trouble certain
ahead, and I felt very much concerned from what I could learn all
around, that there was gathering into our city a very bad set of men,
and it was hard to tell what the consequences might be. I left him,
and started home about eleven o'clock, or perhaps a little after
eleven. I got down to Strawberry lane, which is below the shops of
the Fort Wayne road. I drove right into a crowd, I presume, of
several thousand persons. I had come up that way that night, and
there was no person there.
Q. The evening before?
A. That same evening. There were no parties there when I came up,
and I drove in and called some of them to know what it meant. I
was considerably taken aback, coming unexpected into it, and they
told me they were waiting for a train of soldiers that were coming
up. Three or four came out that knew me, and said, "Don't you go
away;" says I, "Why?" Says he, "they have rifle pits just above there,
and if the train comes in you will be in the line of their fire," and I
was in sight of my house and my family was there, and I could see
the situation, and drove rapidly past them, after inquiring what was
going on there. When I came to the bridge crossing, perhaps, a
quarter of a mile below there, as I drove up there, there appeared to
be sentinels stationed along the line of the railroad across this
bridge.

By Senator Yutzy:
Q. At what point was this?
A. A quarter of a mile below this place where they were waiting.

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. On the line of the Fort Wayne and Chicago?

A. They were there patrolling the streets with their guns, as orderly
as any soldiers. They were all very sober and polite men, nothing
like rioters, and ladies from the adjoining neighborhood had come
down to the bridge to see—that was the only place they could see
anything—and about the time they expected the train in, these men
had gone up to them and asked them to retire back behind the hill,
lest a stray shot would reach them. There appeared to be a perfect
organization.
Q. What bridge?
A. This was a bridge in Allegheny City, below the outer depot of the
Fort Wayne.
Q. Bridge across the railroad?
A. Bridge across the railroad. There appeared to be an entirely
perfect organization on that side of the river. They were armed, and
were sober men. Some of them knew me—they all knew me—I
could not name a great many of them, but most of them knew me.
Q. Were they railroad men—employés?
A. There were a great many of them employés. I was told by other
persons they were employés. I could not tell certain, but I made an
inquiry, and was told that a great many of those men were employés
of the railroad company, and this organization appeared to me to be
very perfect, and they were very orderly, and appeared to be very
systematic. There was no fighting in this tremendous crowd above.
The crowd was there, but they were orderly—no quarreling nor
fighting going on.
Q. Were they all men that were in that crowd?
A. No; there was a great many boys, but the most of them were
men. I think the great majority of them were men. I stayed there
until about twelve o'clock at night, about half past twelve or one,
and the report came down about the firing on this side, and the
burning of the round-house, and the soldiers having been burned
up. We were all very much alarmed. I could do nothing but stay at
home, seeing the crowd there, and not knowing what was coming,
but in the morning I came to town—on Sunday morning. I stopped
in Allegheny, and saw one or two gentlemen, and got them to go
over with me. I went to Mr. Barr's office at the Post, but he was not
there. He had been there, but had gone out to the outer depot of
the Pennsylvania railroad. I went around and saw some other
parties, and went down to the Chronicle office. Mr. Sieblich was
there, and, I think, the Dispatch people. At the office there were
posters out, one for a public meeting of the citizens at twelve o'clock
—at half past twelve, at the old city hall, notices of which were then
sent to the different churches, that there would be a citizens'
meeting—to be read from the pulpits in that neighborhood. There
was a large number of churches in the neighborhood There were no
citizens but what were extremely anxious to do anything and
everything they could do, but they appeared to be paralyzed, and
did not know what to do. The reports came in that the military had
gone, and that the mob had everything in their own hands, and no
one appeared to know just how things stood. That meeting came
together, and they adjourned to the mayor's office. I understood that
there was a reason for that: that the city hall then was used as an
armory, and they had adjourned, as they did not think it was
prudent to open that. Some gentlemen I was talking to had made a
suggestion that we should go and see Bishop Tuigg, and some other
parties who would go out, and see what persuasion would do, and
there was no man that was more extensively known than Bishop
Tuigg. He said he would do so, and they proposed to get another
minister that he would nominate himself to go along with him. At
our meeting in the mayor's office, the minister of the First church,
Mr. Scoville, was at the meeting, and Mr. Scoville accompanied
Bishop Tuigg. Mr. Parke and some other gentlemen went up. At this
time the fire had got down—it had burned all the way down to the
old market-house—that is a few squares above the depot. We went
up, and he addressed these people.

By Senator Yutzy.

Q. Who addressed them?

A. Bishop Tuigg. He did everything he could to get these people to
desist. I saw a few there that I knew of our own people, and these I
do say were not engaged in burning. After that, we went up to try
and find the engineers of the railroad—locomotive engineers. We
went up to see them. We got some of the citizens to go to their
houses and tell them that we would meet them. We went up there,
and were not able to meet any, but two or three of them at a time
came in, and Mr. Slagle remained there. Bishop Tuigg and the
Reverend Scoville and I went over there to Allegheny City to see the
officials of the Pennsylvania Company and Pennsylvania railroad. Mr.
Cassatt was there, Mr. Thaw, Mr. McCullough, and their solicitor,
Senator Scott. We talked with them upon the subject, but previous
to that I had gone down to the Monongahela house, and had met
Mr. Cassatt there, and I think Mr. Quay, and a number of gentlemen
that were there. I took him in my buggy and took him across to
Allegheny City.
Q. Mr. Cassatt?
A. And left him there with the other gentlemen connected with the
railroad.
Q. What is Mr. Thaw's first name?
A. William Thaw.
Q. What is his official position?
A. He is also connected with the Pennsylvania Company, in charge of
the leased lines of the Pennsylvania railroad.
Q. In what capacity?
A. I think he is vice president.
Q. Mr. Cassatt is connected with what road?
A. Connected with the Pennsylvania Central.
Q. And Mr. Thaw with the Pennsylvania?
A. Mr. Thaw with the Pennsylvania. Mr. Cassatt was at the
Monongahela house, and these gentlemen had connection with the
two roads running together. He said he would like to go over. I said I
would take him over, and took him in my open buggy, which he did
not appear to relish very well just at that moment, but really there
was no danger. I went down and crossed the lower bridge, and over
into the street where Mr. Layng is living. I do not think we saw fifty
people. The people had gone up to the fire. Allegheny City was at
that time as quiet as it is on any Sabbath day, outside of the
immediate neighborhood of the depot. I met no person on Sunday
who was not just as anxious as they could be to do anything and
everything they could to put down the rebellion, as I called it, for as
I have said, I never could recognize it as a riot or anything else than
an uprising of the people. On our own side of the river it was
comparative quietness, but these men were settled on having their
own way. If they had not commenced it before, it was not likely that
they could organize as quickly and as thoroughly as they had done.

By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. What was the result of the interview with Cassatt and McCullough
and Thaw?
A. I think Bishop Tuigg asked them to make some concessions to
those parties, which they declined to make. I think the bishop's idea
was to have some little concession made, and the difficulty might be
adjusted as between the men and them. That was declined on their
part.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. What reason did they give?

A. The reason, so far as I understood it at the time it was given, was
this: That they would not make any arrangement with men that
were in open rebellion against law, and everything of that kind—
could not recognize anything of that kind.
Q. What did your committee do then?
A. We came back to the city again, and there was a meeting in the
afternoon, and I was at the mayor's office again in the afternoon.
The mayor appeared to be entirely powerless. He had no police to
do anything with, that amounted to anything. After that we then
went to work and organized a citizens' meeting, which was perfected
on the next Monday morning, and everything was done by those
men that could be done. I do not think I ever saw men work more
earnestly in trying to protect the city, and railroad, and everything
else.

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. At whose instance was the citizens' meeting organized—who were

the movers in it?
A. The first I recollect of it was the bulletin boards that were put out
on Sunday—that was as soon as the citizens could be got together.
Q. What bulletin boards?
A. The bulletin boards of the Post, and, I think, the Dispatch, the
Commercial and Gazette, and I think the Chronicle and Leader. They
are nearly all in that neighborhood. I think Mr. Barr was at the
organization of the meeting. He was at the meeting they had on
Sunday and Monday morning. The citizens were called together
again and adjourned until Monday morning. There were a good
many of our leading manufacturers that were out of the city, their
families were out in the country, and they had gone out on Saturday.
Q. How long did that crowd you speak of in Allegheny City, that you
ran into on Saturday nights—how long had that crowd remained in
force there?
A. They were there I think nearly all that night. They were away the
next morning. When I came up the next morning they were not
there, that is, there was no crowd in comparison to what had been
there—perhaps not more than usual there.
Q. There were some there?
A. There were some few that were there. They had possession then
of the trains.

By Senator Yutzy:

Q. The strikers had?

A. The strikers had possession of the trains on Sunday morning.
They were in possession there at that time.

By Mr. Lindsey:

Q. How many were engaged in actual riot and arson out at Twenty-
eighth street, when you were there with the bishop?
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookname.com