Scan barcode
michellechien930's review against another edition
3.0
Read Marge Piercy's Woman on the Edge of Time for my Utopia seminar, and although I enjoyed the brief dive into the feminist utopia, found Piercy's novel a bit too whimsical and archaic for my personal taste. I did appreciate its impact, however, in matters such as pregnancy, patriarchal society, domestic violence and feminine futurity. Feminist utopias are interesting in that it is a thought experiment; a clean slate to imagine and think about a brand new society without modern connotations. It is a non-direct way to criticize and think about the world that we live in- while constituting hope for a better future.
steveatwaywords's review
challenging
dark
emotional
inspiring
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
This is my first novel of Piercy's after many years of loving her poetry. And for many reasons, I was rewarded for this sustained immersion into her thinking.
While this book falls into the category of science fiction, it is better understood as speculative fiction (and social commentary). A woman who is forced into mental institutions (in the early 1970s) is able to time travel to a future utopic society. To be sure, the utopia has come about only following the worst practices of apocalyptic consumption-capitalism: it struggles in the aftermath; but its people have learned an ethic (and matched morality) about sustainability and life which--for its time, especially--is hugely forward-looking, especially in terms of gender, sexuality, and child development. These sections, coupled with a future language which is at once as familiar as it is paradigm-shifting, make the book a valuable experience.
Where Piercy has more trouble is in sustaining the story and its significance across past and future. There are some tempting discussions about the malleability of time, of the power of "responders" like our protagonist Connie, and of the responsibility we have to ourselves. Implementing these future-thinking ideas into the 1970s, however, was often forced and at times neglected or forgotten. The resolution to the novel feels equally . . . irresolute in this way. Yes, our Connie grows into her moment, but its nature is quickly narrated and left unexamined. One wonders if she needed "the future" at all to enact it and what might we have said had she done so. (And this is not because the novel is brief; its nearly 400 pages with long asides into the descriptions of meals, bandages, and the biographies of minor characters.)
It is, in part, the nature of a lot of science fiction from this era to offer its themes through "heady" trips into other-spaces; and readers are often left to make of the experiences what they will. I'm thinking of almost all of Huxley, a lot of Heinlein, Daniel Keyes, Harlan Ellison, and even some of LeGuin. In this sense, Piercy's novel has like company. But I could not help thinking that its resolution fell somewhat short of the author's future vision.
While this book falls into the category of science fiction, it is better understood as speculative fiction (and social commentary). A woman who is forced into mental institutions (in the early 1970s) is able to time travel to a future utopic society. To be sure, the utopia has come about only following the worst practices of apocalyptic consumption-capitalism: it struggles in the aftermath; but its people have learned an ethic (and matched morality) about sustainability and life which--for its time, especially--is hugely forward-looking, especially in terms of gender, sexuality, and child development. These sections, coupled with a future language which is at once as familiar as it is paradigm-shifting, make the book a valuable experience.
Where Piercy has more trouble is in sustaining the story and its significance across past and future. There are some tempting discussions about the malleability of time, of the power of "responders" like our protagonist Connie, and of the responsibility we have to ourselves. Implementing these future-thinking ideas into the 1970s, however, was often forced and at times neglected or forgotten. The resolution to the novel feels equally . . . irresolute in this way. Yes, our Connie grows into her moment, but its nature is quickly narrated and left unexamined. One wonders if she needed "the future" at all to enact it and what might we have said had she done so. (And this is not because the novel is brief; its nearly 400 pages with long asides into the descriptions of meals, bandages, and the biographies of minor characters.)
It is, in part, the nature of a lot of science fiction from this era to offer its themes through "heady" trips into other-spaces; and readers are often left to make of the experiences what they will. I'm thinking of almost all of Huxley, a lot of Heinlein, Daniel Keyes, Harlan Ellison, and even some of LeGuin. In this sense, Piercy's novel has like company. But I could not help thinking that its resolution fell somewhat short of the author's future vision.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Forced institutionalization and Medical trauma
Moderate: Medical content, Domestic abuse, Grief, Confinement, Panic attacks/disorders, Gaslighting, Emotional abuse, Schizophrenia/Psychosis , Suicide, Injury/Injury detail, Self harm, Sexual content, Abandonment, Addiction, Death, Drug abuse, Physical abuse, Violence, and War
blub3rry's review against another edition
dark
hopeful
informative
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
dalyandot's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
hopeful
inspiring
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
Classic feminist utopian tale Contrasting life of Connie - victim of violence and psychiatirc abuse in 1970s New York with her travels to a future world of equality and peace. Tense, atmospheric, believeable. One of my favourite books that I have re read over the years
kandi_of_the_future's review against another edition
1.0
I generally feel an obligation to finish books I start. And usually I like time travel in a book. But after 150 pages and feeling dread at the thought of reading further, I abandoned this one. Maybe it gets better, but I found it was long and tedious to read and I just could not connect with any character. Maybe it is a landmark book and maybe the best of it is at the end, but I will just have to take everyone’s word for it. This book remains abandoned for me, I’m on to the next.
strwbry575's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
This book explores utopia/dystopia through time travel and the struggles of women. The majority of the book is world-building with a very slow moving plot. It is philosophical more than action-based.
mollyreiser's review against another edition
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
sad
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
4.0
rhiawillson's review against another edition
3.5
Interesting depiction of a Utopia that prioritises community, lack of labels, love of art and connection over career and capitalism - we love to see it. Ngl I would have decked Luciente if she kept going on about random little life happenings while I was about to get a lobotomy.
smaksimo's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
nicole_schmid's review against another edition
challenging
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
I find this book hard to rate. I appreciated the future it depicted. I liked the commentary on mental institutions, sexism. I found it fascinating how environmentalism was already around in the seventies and it alongside gender-nonconformity were discussed enough to appear in a book. I also really liked the future person's reaction to our time.
I find this book lacking in terms of emotional impact. Mostly, it felt like a factual retelling. There's descriptions of the main character crying or getting angry, but I never really felt alongside her. Now, could be that that's just the writing style that was popular in the seventies (I haven't read enough books from that time period to judge), but from a modern POV, it felt lacking. The sequences of the future also seemed unnecessarily drawn-out, more like bits of worldbuilding than actual events with great personal impact. It also felt like Connie's reactions weren't really realistic. I'd immediately be asking who this idealistic future is going to war with; I'd be horrified with the other future and not just go "Well, same as in my time".
I feel like it might be a bit problematic that a white writer tackle such a loaded topic as racism etc., from the perspective of an American-Mexican woman nonetheless, but as I don't really have any insights into the author's background nor do I belong to a minority group, so I don't think I can really coment on that aspect.
While I don't quite regret reading this book, I also wouldn't really recommend it.
I find this book lacking in terms of emotional impact. Mostly, it felt like a factual retelling. There's descriptions of the main character crying or getting angry, but I never really felt alongside her. Now, could be that that's just the writing style that was popular in the seventies (I haven't read enough books from that time period to judge), but from a modern POV, it felt lacking. The sequences of the future also seemed unnecessarily drawn-out, more like bits of worldbuilding than actual events with great personal impact. It also felt like Connie's reactions weren't really realistic. I'd immediately be asking who this idealistic future is going to war with; I'd be horrified with the other future and not just go "Well, same as in my time".
I feel like it might be a bit problematic that a white writer tackle such a loaded topic as racism etc., from the perspective of an American-Mexican woman nonetheless, but as I don't really have any insights into the author's background nor do I belong to a minority group, so I don't think I can really coment on that aspect.
While I don't quite regret reading this book, I also wouldn't really recommend it.