Introduction

Examines Elizabeth Bishop's treatment of colonial settings through the complex lens of queer complicity with oppression, exploring how her work navigates the intricacies of identity, power, and desire in a colonized landscape.
Focuses specifically on two of Bishop's significant poems: "Brazil, January 1, 1502" (1960), which reflects on the initial encounters during colonization, and "Crusoe in England" (1971), a recontextualization of the Robinson Crusoe narrative that interrogates themes of race and colonial dynamics.
Discusses the intersection of queerness, colonialism, and the representation of the natural world, revealing how pastoral and antipastoral literature shapes and is shaped by these themes.

Queer Complicity and Colonialism

Jasbir Puar critiques the myth of transgressive queerness, introducing the idea that not all queers are inherently resistant to oppressive structures and that some may directly or indirectly support settler colonialism.
This intersection explores how colonial ideologies can dehumanize certain bodies while simultaneously permitting others to benefit from or ignore this complicity.
Bishop's works challenge readers to examine queerness in the context of the colonial domination of Indigenous peoples, urging a re-examination of historical complicity in oppression and resistance.

The pastoral tradition is historically linked to colonization and dispossession, often celebrating an idealized view of nature that masks the violence and exploitation inherent in colonial practices.
In contrast to typical pastoral themes, Bishop's poetry illuminates the complexities, contradictions, and uncomfortable aspects of identity and desire, giving voice to marginalized narratives.

Identifies two distinct antipastoral forms within Bishop's poetry that complicate traditional pastoral motifs:
- Ironic Pastoral: This form challenges the perceived simplicity and beauty of the pastoral genre, revealing the dark realities and historical violence lurking beneath its surface.
- Dystopian Antipastal: Presents a starkly pessimistic depiction of nature and human experience, contradicting classic pastoral ideals and reflecting despair in colonial contexts.
Both poems encapsulate the ongoing struggle between the desire for connection with nature and the troubling acknowledgment of one's complicity in colonial violence.

The poem opens with nature's greeting, implicitly suggesting a shared complicity between the observer and the conquistadors.
The speaker's observations create an ironic distance from the romanticized portrayal of colonization, prompting readers to question their own historical narratives.
The stark depiction of Indigenous women fleeing to the jungle juxtaposed against the violent advance of colonial soldiers raises profound questions about complicity, solidarity, and the roles of different bodies in colonial narratives.

Identifies a significant shift in focus from visual observation to an emphasis on auditory experiences, bringing Indigenous women's songs into contrast with the invasive tunes of the colonizers.
The relationship between the speaker and the Indigenous figures is revealed as complex and fraught, with the speaker's desire intertwined with a recognition of the historical violence perpetrated against these communities.
Bishop's work underscores the precarious nature of identifying with marginalized identities while posing the risk of appropriation and exploitation of their narratives in a colonial framework.

In this poem, Bishop reinterprets Defoe's classic narrative of Robinson Crusoe, applying an ironic lens that critically re-examines the implications of colonial relationships.
Crusoe's dynamic with Friday is filled with both intimate affection and underlying colonial subtext, complicating traditional narratives of companionship and loss.
The imagery of a world defined by persistent rain and decay serves to symbolize a grotesque and hollow vision of the pastoral, reflecting the ongoing impact of colonialism.
Emotional responses within the poem juxtapose nostalgia with acknowledgment of colonial complicity, calling into question the ethics of longing for a past that involved such violence.

Both poems exemplify postlapsarian pastoral, where idealized visions of nature are only appreciated in retrospective melancholia.
They reflect on the loss of an untouched natural world, starkly contrasted with the grim reality of ongoing colonial destruction and the erasure of Indigenous cultures.
Bishop addresses the narrative of Indigenous disappearance, effectively criticizing the narratives that justify acts of colonial violence through the lens of societal progress.

The poems explore how nostalgia and emotional pathos can unwittingly serve as accomplices in perpetuating colonial narratives, allowing readers to confront uncomfortable aspects of their understanding of history and identity.
While Bishop’s poetry is rich with emotional resonance, it also unpacks the complexities of queer identity against the backdrop of systemic oppression and colonial legacies.
The suggestion that queerness in Bishop's works is relational, often entangled in and subsumed by the brutal framework of colonialism, challenges many postcolonial readings that may overlook the intrinsic complicity in these narratives.

Concludes that Elizabeth Bishop's nuanced representation of queerness intertwined with colonialism compels a reconsideration of literary forms and their complexities, where nostalgia, loss, and complicity intermingle in challenging ways, provoking fundamental questions about identity, resistance, and the enduring legacies of colonial narratives.