You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
2.94 AVERAGE
2.94 AVERAGE
emotional
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
This has been an interesting read, especially considering when it was published. The novel dives deep into topics of sexuality, desire, and the life of a woman navigating the world through her body and her choices. I really appreciate how bold and unapologetic the story is, especially for its time—dealing with themes that were incredibly controversial back then and still can make people not want to read the novel today (it is still one of the most banned novels….).
However, I couldn’t help but feel a bit conflicted while reading it, particularly as a 21st-century gay man. There’s a sense that John Cleland, the author, poured a lot of his own fantasies and desires into the character of Fanny. It’s like Fanny’s story is less about her and more about fulfilling the male fantasy, as a friend said, the male gaze is ever present, and defines her experiences with sex. After everything she goes through, ultimately, she settles down in a heteronormative marriage with children. And sure, she’s happy, but why is this the resolution? It feels a bit forced, like Fanny’s journey needed to culminate in this traditional ending to satisfy societal norms—or maybe just the author’s.
One of the things that really irritated me was how sexuality in the book is treated. It’s all good and fun as long as it aligns with what a straight man would want to see. The exploration of lesbian love is handled almost like a playful discovery, which is cool in a way, but then you have the stark contrast in how male-male relationships, at least the one instances of it present in the book, are treated as criminal. It’s frustrating because, even though the book was groundbreaking in many ways, it still couldn’t escape the shackles of the time’s prejudices. It makes you wonder—if Cleland was already diving into such taboo topics, why not go all the way and challenge all forms of sexual expression?
And after finishing the book, I did some digging and found out that Cleland himself was possibly a repressed homosexual. That adds another layer to the whole thing, doesn’t it? It’s like the book is a product of its time but also a reflection of the author’s internal struggles. So, while I can appreciate Fanny Hill for its boldness and historical significance, I can’t help but feel a bit let down by the way it handles sexuality, particularly from my perspective as a modern reader.
However, I couldn’t help but feel a bit conflicted while reading it, particularly as a 21st-century gay man. There’s a sense that John Cleland, the author, poured a lot of his own fantasies and desires into the character of Fanny. It’s like Fanny’s story is less about her and more about fulfilling the male fantasy, as a friend said, the male gaze is ever present, and defines her experiences with sex. After everything she goes through, ultimately, she settles down in a heteronormative marriage with children. And sure, she’s happy, but why is this the resolution? It feels a bit forced, like Fanny’s journey needed to culminate in this traditional ending to satisfy societal norms—or maybe just the author’s.
One of the things that really irritated me was how sexuality in the book is treated. It’s all good and fun as long as it aligns with what a straight man would want to see. The exploration of lesbian love is handled almost like a playful discovery, which is cool in a way, but then you have the stark contrast in how male-male relationships, at least the one instances of it present in the book, are treated as criminal. It’s frustrating because, even though the book was groundbreaking in many ways, it still couldn’t escape the shackles of the time’s prejudices. It makes you wonder—if Cleland was already diving into such taboo topics, why not go all the way and challenge all forms of sexual expression?
And after finishing the book, I did some digging and found out that Cleland himself was possibly a repressed homosexual. That adds another layer to the whole thing, doesn’t it? It’s like the book is a product of its time but also a reflection of the author’s internal struggles. So, while I can appreciate Fanny Hill for its boldness and historical significance, I can’t help but feel a bit let down by the way it handles sexuality, particularly from my perspective as a modern reader.
This was so clearly written by a man. I don’t know how to describe it other than smut
Well, I read this because it was on a list of books to read before you die. I'm not really sure why, except that it's pretty shocking that such blatant pornography was written in the 19th century. I started zoning out during the sex scenes and didn't really care what happened to Fanny. It tried to have a good message at the end, but felt tacked on and completely opposite to what the rest of the book seemed to be saying.
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Homophobia, Rape, Sexual content
Moderate: Ableism
Minor: Miscarriage
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
I really enjoyed it, but like all books written before like the 1950s, it took a long time to read. It was never boring or really dry, it's just the word choices and sentence structure in classic books needs a bit more care and attention than a book written and published today.
This is one of those books whose fascination lies in the fact that this is a predecessor to other works. This is the formulaic porn novel: poor country girl flees to the city looking for work after the death of her parents' deaths and she lands herself in a brothel. "You want me to have sex with people...? Ohh, okay." There is some plot regarding Fanny's morality, but for the most part, this is very episodic with Fanny having all kinds of sex with all kinds of people. You like two women? Here's a scene for you. You like orgies? Here's a scene for you, etc. etc.
Be prepared for the purplest of prose. Balls are once described as "the globular appendage, that wondrous treasure bag of nature's sweets, which revelled round, and pursed up in the only wrinkles that are known to please." This is occasionally arousing, plus it's interesting to see the descriptions through Fanny's eyes, but generally, it makes this a hard book to get through.
The end and the beginning are really where the interesting plot lies, and I won't ruin it for you, but I'll tell you that there's a weird sort of closure to it--maybe worth reading for the implications there, if you have anyone willing to discuss the politics of porn writing with you.
Be prepared for the purplest of prose. Balls are once described as "the globular appendage, that wondrous treasure bag of nature's sweets, which revelled round, and pursed up in the only wrinkles that are known to please." This is occasionally arousing, plus it's interesting to see the descriptions through Fanny's eyes, but generally, it makes this a hard book to get through.
The end and the beginning are really where the interesting plot lies, and I won't ruin it for you, but I'll tell you that there's a weird sort of closure to it--maybe worth reading for the implications there, if you have anyone willing to discuss the politics of porn writing with you.