This year has not been the first time I have had the pleasure of encountering Patrick’s work. I was initially assigned his article on gay men in Seoul and Seattle last year for my gender studies paper. I’m ashamed to admit that I barely understood it yet alone appreciated it. The reading is very much the same this year as it was last, but I see it now a completely different light and I’d like to take a moment to reflect on that.
Not so long ago, just last year, I was a terrified first year student. In my gender studies they started to assign us weekly readings. When I first read Patrick’s article in week 3 of the course, I’ll be honest, I was lost. I couldn’t even begin to digest the content- for heavens sakes I didn’t even know what a journal article was. Upon my third or maybe even fourth reading of it, I was still confused. In all that reading I hadn’t engaged with the material at all. I didn’t really grasp how different his methodologies were and I certainly didn’t grasp his presentation of findings. How could there not be one ‘eureka’ answer to his research? Why wouldn’t his article give me a one sentence statistic about men coming out? This academia stuff was hard, I’ll tell you. I knew I liked his article better than the other stuffy ones I ended up reading that semester but that doesn’t mean I had any confidence in my understanding of his work. I muddled my way through essays citing his work but I should have done better. If only I would get a second chance…
When Patrick popped up again this semester I squinted at his name on the canvas page with only a mild recognition. I didn’t do the reading before the lecture admittedly, but I did do it afterwards. And when I did, I was delighted. I understood that article. Every damn paragraph went into my eyeballs, through my thick skull and into my squishy brain where it stayed. Not in one ear and out the other again like it did last year, it really stuck. How had I not noticed how unique his methods were? Drawing on his Pasifika worldview to inform the va between him and his interviewees? How special, how cool. I was no longer lost at the results section of the article. I was glad there was no singular conclusive answer- how dull and absolutely pointless would that be? Patrick’s work didn’t give me one answer, it gave me a web of implications that would be endlessly fascinating to research and untangle. I saw his work with fresh eyes, and I loved what I saw.
One year older, one year slightly wiser but definitely more aware of how university, research and reading stuff works, I wholeheartedly appreciate Patrick’s research. Now armed with critical engagement skills, I was able to understand the content. I have realised that the ‘je ne sais quoi’ Patrick’s work had was it’s thoughtful, prosaic style, as well as being groundbreaking with it’s research techniques (or at least groundbreaking to me). He’s inspired me not to shy away from who I am as a person and how I interact with what I research. His work is different and personal and academic. What more could I aspire to as a young student?
