and oren, don't call me a theoryhead based on this post

I'm reading Elizabeth Grosz's Architecture from the Outside: Essays on Virtual and Real Space . As part of the introduction, the editors included an interview about the theories, ideas included in the text. In the extensive interview Grosz discusses queer spaces. One of the interesting points she discusses is the metaphor of the closet. She calls the closet "both a prison and a safe space." "This is its appeal both for the gay community and heterocentric social structure. The closet allows people to not be seen as gay but to feel safe as gay." Her larger point is that space does not imprison because space is never "fixed or contained, and thus is always open to various uses in the future." And this next point is what I am most struck by: "Space is open to how people live it. Space is the ongoing possibility of a different inhabitation. The more one disinvests one's own body from that space, the less able one is to effectively inhabit that space as one's own." What interests me is the way this might be applied to virtual space and identity as well as materiality. Is materiality contingent on how invested our physical bodies are in a particular space? If so, how might we think about writing spaces like blogs? And perhaps Grosz addresses this later in the text. I'm curious to how and if she discusses cyberspace and the body or lack of body in that space.

Though the text is a bit intense (meaning dense) I'm enjoying the way it's making me stretch intellectually.