Chapter 12: The Current Lesbian Canon, as It Stands

⚠️ Spoiler Warning: This guide contains detailed spoilers for the entire novel. Proceed only if you've finished reading or are comfortable knowing the plot.

Summary

Jill Gutowitz opens by contrasting the bleak scarcity of queer representation in her 2003 adolescence—when spotting a single queerbait moment on MTV felt like surviving the Oregon Trail—with today’s abundance of lesbian movies, Instagram accounts, and YouTube compilations. She argues that this past scarcity forced generations of queer people to “collect the implicit,” creating an ongoing, ever-expanding list of things that feel queer even when they are not officially gay. She calls this list lesbian canon. Using Neve Campbell as a prime example (a straight actress whose energy, bangs, tank tops, and roles in Wild Things and Scream read as deeply Sapphic), Gutowitz demonstrates how canon is built on vibes, essences, and coded details rather than explicit identity. She then presents her own (partly serious, partly humorous) inventory of canon items, organized into categories: liquids (oat milk, vape juice, rosewater), fashion (denim, leather dusters, track suits), the elements, people and their body parts (a long list of 90s/2000s brunette actresses, plus specific features like Brie Larson’s back muscles), fictional characters (Gerri from Succession, Lola Bunny), places (the moon, Oregon, art museums), apps, animals, weather (hail described as “getting fisted by nature”), concepts (invisibility, anxiety, the multiverse), blessed objects (every book, weighted blankets, bagels), and more. She concludes by noting that the list is amorphous and constantly debated—making the list itself queer. Gutowitz expresses gratitude for existing in both worlds: having survived the homophobic past while now safely saving photos of St. Vincent and Cara Delevingne to her camera roll, feeling like a lesbian pioneer.

Key Events

Contrast of eras: Gutowitz compares her 2003 reliance on MTV queerbait clips with the current availability of explicitly queer streaming content.
Definition of lesbian canon: She explains that canon, normally an “official” storyline in fan fiction, becomes an inside joke applied to anything queer people feel seen by—people, objects, concepts.
Neve Campbell example: Presented as the model case: a straight actress who still qualifies as lesbian canon because of her energy, roles, and aesthetic.
Presentation of the list: Gutowitz catalogs dozens of items across categories such as liquids, fashion, people, fictional characters, places, weather, concepts, and blessed objects.
Reflection on the list’s nature: She notes that the list is always changing, being added to and debated, and that its fluidity is itself queer.
Personal conclusion: She positions herself as a pioneer who experienced both the grueling lack of representation and the modern ease of accessing queer content.

Character Development

This chapter is an essay, not a story with characters. However, the author develops her own persona as a witty, nostalgic archivist who earnestly collects and catalogs queer cultural touchstones. She portrays herself as a survivor of the “lesbian drought” and now a grateful inhabitant of a more visible queer world. The “characters” in her canon—Neve Campbell, Winona Ryder, Eliza Dushku, etc.—are not developed beyond their assigned queer vibes; they serve as examples of how implicit queerness is read onto straight celebrities and fictional figures.

Themes, Symbols, or Motifs

Implicit queerness: The core theme—queer people historically had to read gay subtext into mainstream media that never confirmed it. This act of interpretation becomes a shared survival mechanism.
Scarcity vs. abundance: Gutowitz frames the loss of control over when (and whether) one could see queer content as formative. The Oregon Trail metaphor symbolizes the difficulty of finding representation.
Subjectivity and in-group humor: Lesbian canon is not objective; it’s a fluid, debated list that only makes sense within the queer community. It functions as a bonding tool and a way to reclaim cultural artifacts.
The body as evidence: Many items on the list are specific body parts (Brie Larson’s back, Blake Lively’s moles) or physical attributes (bangs, tank tops), suggesting that queer desire attaches to fragmented, visual cues.
Magic and transformation: The inclusion of witches, shapeshifting, and the multiverse links queerness to themes of transformation and hidden identity.

Why This Chapter Matters

This chapter crystallizes the book’s central argument that queerness has always existed in the margins of popular culture, waiting to be seen by those who need it. It provides a humorous yet heartfelt documentation of a collective queer habit: turning scarcity into abundance by declaring almost anything “lesbian canon.” Gutowitz’s list is a primary source for understanding how a generation of queer women and nonbinary people built a culture from breadcrumbs. The chapter also validates the emotional labor of finding representation and celebrates the creative act of reclamation.

Study Questions and Answers

1. According to Gutowitz, what makes Neve Campbell a prime example of lesbian canon, even though she is straight?
Neve Campbell’s energy, her typical bangs and tank tops, her role as a tomboyish goth character in Scream, and her queer-coded performance in Wild Things all combine to make her feel Sapphic. Gutowitz argues that the essence of her work and presence overrides her public heterosexual identity.

2. How does Gutowitz distinguish the scarcity of queer representation in her youth from the current landscape?
She describes having to wait hours for a single queerbait moment on MTV, like a Britney–Madonna near-kiss, with no ability to record or rewatch. Today, she notes, queer teens have explicit lesbian movies, Instagram accounts, and compilation videos at their fingertips—though she admits mainstream lesbian films still often follow tragic or self-hating tropes.

3. Why does Gutowitz consider the list of lesbian canon itself to be queer?
Because the list is “amorphous” and in a “constant state of flux”—it is repeatedly added to, debated, and policed. This malleability, the ability to change and reshape, is presented as a fundamentally queer trait.