When we are presented with the idea interactions of success stories Pauelo Coelho’s book “The

alchemist” book do

The protagonist and the author have a few ways of presenting the theme of reproductive

futurity, and enforcing gender roles. One of the first encounters is when Santiago is talking to the

King through the beginning of the book. The King goes on to describe what he thinks the idea of

a person legend is. To try help him achieve his dream of reaching his treasure, which essentially

allows for the structure of a theme of trying to achieve endless capital to fulfill a meaning in life,

and this ideology sustains and makes capitalism inevitable within this utopia that the author has

created. The theme of the book starts to become ‘change for the better’ and ‘becoming the best

person you can be’ which is how Coelho represents reproductive futurity, because that inherently

excludes queer folk since they are not being able to become a part of this ‘change’ because they

are not able to reproduce and then they would become the antithesis of the utopia since a major

theme of this book is a heteronormative notion of love and reinforcing gender roles. At the end

of the book. Fatima is a girl that at times can distract our protagonist from trying to reach his

personal legend, because he thinks that he is so gorgeous, because women and treasure are pretty

much exchangeable. The role of Fatima is also just to be almost just be a motivation to help him

and the not character being a human themselves. There are two ways love is presented in the

book. The first way is the idea love can only been done out of the urgency of reproduction.

Queerness has no longer became an identity, but rather a structural position against society. This

leads to Overkill. queer bodies symbolic ascription to death makes them threaten to

heteronormative beings. They are posited in the position of the anti-ontological whereby

gratuitous violence shapes their relationship to the very values of civil society. [Stanley 12]

“Overkill names the technologies necessary to do away with that which is already gone. Queers
then are the specters of life whose threat is so unimaginable that one is ‘forced,’ not simply to

murder, but to push them backward out of time, out of History.” The protagonist’s definition of

love described on page 150 “[Love is] what makes the game become the falcon, the falcon

become man, and man, in his turn the desert. Lead into gold, and makes the gold return to the

earth.” This intentionally exclude queer folk, because of the idea as the man being able to do this

mystical thing, and the mindset that you have to conform to what position society wants to be,

and be complacent with it if you aren’t a man, which is how reproductive futurity functions, and

using the reference to gold becoming the earth again is how capitalism functions, and the

justification for environmental degradation, because using rhetoric of “clean coal” by trump is

the same thing as this material of exploitation is a cycle of life, and it will help us in the long run,

but the only things that these things have done have continued capitalism, which is how

reproductive futurity functions. Paulo Coelho has had a history of enforcing gender binaries and

reinforcing the idea of so called gender roles. [Reilly 07] “‘Women lost this feminine side by

trying to be feminists. I’m totally against this. I think that we are different genders, so we have to

get the best of ourselves.’ And he goes on to remark that: ‘In the end, what we must share are our

opposites…If you are just one – if you think like a man or behave like a man, if you try to go for

the same rights – you lose this beauty of the feminine soul.’” Which shows that the author has

this sort of bias, and we can see this occur within the book such as the lack of in depth, and

complex characters that appear to show feminine traits, and treated at times as capital in the book

instead actual humans, For example at the beginning of the book we meet our first female

character that we encounter who is nameless, but never have any true dialogue past page 6

except the protagonist referring to her as something that needs to be impressed so she won’t

cheat on him as if it some object that will wonder off lack of presence from Santiago, and the
text goes on to state that “for the past few days he had spoken to them about only one thing: the

girl, the daughter of a merchant who lived in the village they would reach in about four days. He

had been to the villager only once, the year before. The merchant was the proprietor of a dry

goods shop, and he always demanded that the sheep be sheered in his presence, so that he would

not be cheated on.” This is how the patriarchy operates in terms rhetoric, and epistemological

assumptions within Santiago and Coelho make. I am not trying disregard any critiques of

feminism, but rather we need to recognize the intersections of queerness and feminism within the

context of this book. The author use of omens and signs are inherently bad, because they have

only become commodified by capital in modern society i.e. things such as advertisements, which

shows that Coelho’s interpretation is outdated, and can’t account for things that are happening

current. These omens and sign are bad because, they become a product of telling us of what we

are not and not we are able to do specifically in the context of big cooperation’s. For example,

when we approach the Vivint arena we can see advertisements of things such as makeup for

women, which are these omens which Coelho that he is talking about, but these ads are bad

because they are trying to teach non- binary folk and women that they need to regain the beauty,

which Coelho thinks is gone. which is how these people are commodified into capital for the

pleasure of men. This is what will lead to things such as economic inequality, because when we

reduce this gender into an object this justifies the idea that men are the only people that can take

superior jobs, because these people are only objects and are built for “Our” pleasure, and this is

also exactly what is represented with all the females in the book. Change in the sense of trying to

gain capital has only empirically exacerbated the problem for queer folk and women.
Cites