Scan barcode
lesbianbarista's review against another edition
slow-paced
1.0
If this book was trying to say something, even having finished it, I still do not know what it was. Throughout my reading, after the first 20 or so pages, there was something that continued to strike me the wrong way but I could never put my finger on it. So I kept reading, hoping that feeling would be relieved or I'd be able to pinpoint exactly what it was. It wasn't until I finished it, with the feeling still here and a few days later to digest, that I figured it out.
There is no definitive statement, response, or even a thesis that I can blatantly pin down other than "women have had it rough in literature" (which, yes they have). It's recounting the brutality both in fiction and history that women have been facing for thousands of years, crammed into this state of victimhood. I was enjoying it for a while, all of this information presented, a way to shame Joseph Campbell and his research of heroics, ignoring the pain and suffering of women that it was built on. I was eager, but it never came. More and more tales were presented, but that was all. Nothing was said about them other than "woe! woe to these women!"
Later in the book Tatar calls modern heroines carbon copies of men (WHAT! she screams to herself when reading).
But the choice to recall these tales, myths, and legends, while citing modern authors like Madeline Miller but ignoring Emily's Wilson's translation of The Odyssey (which was published four years prior) was bizarre, to say the least. A modern translation that shed light on some female heroines was not in this book... about heroines. And it's not the first time Tatar ignores women, authors and characters, to serve a... blase point.
Perhaps this is my own jaded view and perhaps Tatar isn't the person to tackle this topic, but the complete lack of any queer female authors or characters was an odd thing to leave out in a book about giving voice to silenced women. And integral part of Alice Walker's The Color Purple is Celie's queerness and that is shamefully left out. There are also Black women in Jordan Peele's Get Out being tortured, stolen, sold into modern slavery by Rose and her family, yet Tatar only mentions the men (which, silencing a Black woman's voice is an ENTIRE thing so...) The blatant erasure, or plucking out only what fit, of these women in a book about women, again, being erased or silenced serves to counteract the entire point of this book.
And don't even get me started on her Trickster chapters. The ridiculous and ludicrous claim that women, who are claimed to be modern-day Tricksters, are only mirroring male behavior is a self made counter point to the opening of her book, that a story can change when the lens of our main character is changed. That a story in a woman's hand is vastly different than a story in a man's. Which... should logically serve for tropes. She claims that Lisbeth Salander from Stieg Larsson's The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is reminiscent of her male counterparts rather than creating "a unique female identity". So it's a dangerous dip into gender essentialism, that men should only have certain stories and women should, what? Judging off this book I would never know because it is never once stated how to make a story more "feminine" (which, in itself, is a foolish statement) to counteract the "masculine" (more male dominated stories).
The women she critiques are, by Tatar's own definitions, heroes, not heroines, so why focus the end of the book on them? A book on deepening a gender divide rather than loving that men and women's roles (which can be equated to masculine and feminine and take the gender expectation out entirely) in a modern world can be swapped interchangeably.
The final point of my tried, but ultimate lack of, enjoyment was the focus on male creators (directors, authors, etc) and their accomplishments of writing female characters while taking the time to claim that Gone Girl could have been misogynistic, one of the few novels mentioned at the end that was written by a woman. Praise the man, damn the women, an age old tale.
This novel could've been so great but simply ended up as a disappointment. Little was said other than breaking down the history of female literature and claiming that modern heroines are "carbon copies" of their male counterparts.
There is no definitive statement, response, or even a thesis that I can blatantly pin down other than "women have had it rough in literature" (which, yes they have). It's recounting the brutality both in fiction and history that women have been facing for thousands of years, crammed into this state of victimhood. I was enjoying it for a while, all of this information presented, a way to shame Joseph Campbell and his research of heroics, ignoring the pain and suffering of women that it was built on. I was eager, but it never came. More and more tales were presented, but that was all. Nothing was said about them other than "woe! woe to these women!"
Later in the book Tatar calls modern heroines carbon copies of men (WHAT! she screams to herself when reading).
But the choice to recall these tales, myths, and legends, while citing modern authors like Madeline Miller but ignoring Emily's Wilson's translation of The Odyssey (which was published four years prior) was bizarre, to say the least. A modern translation that shed light on some female heroines was not in this book... about heroines. And it's not the first time Tatar ignores women, authors and characters, to serve a... blase point.
Perhaps this is my own jaded view and perhaps Tatar isn't the person to tackle this topic, but the complete lack of any queer female authors or characters was an odd thing to leave out in a book about giving voice to silenced women. And integral part of Alice Walker's The Color Purple is Celie's queerness and that is shamefully left out. There are also Black women in Jordan Peele's Get Out being tortured, stolen, sold into modern slavery by Rose and her family, yet Tatar only mentions the men (which, silencing a Black woman's voice is an ENTIRE thing so...) The blatant erasure, or plucking out only what fit, of these women in a book about women, again, being erased or silenced serves to counteract the entire point of this book.
And don't even get me started on her Trickster chapters. The ridiculous and ludicrous claim that women, who are claimed to be modern-day Tricksters, are only mirroring male behavior is a self made counter point to the opening of her book, that a story can change when the lens of our main character is changed. That a story in a woman's hand is vastly different than a story in a man's. Which... should logically serve for tropes. She claims that Lisbeth Salander from Stieg Larsson's The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is reminiscent of her male counterparts rather than creating "a unique female identity". So it's a dangerous dip into gender essentialism, that men should only have certain stories and women should, what? Judging off this book I would never know because it is never once stated how to make a story more "feminine" (which, in itself, is a foolish statement) to counteract the "masculine" (more male dominated stories).
The women she critiques are, by Tatar's own definitions, heroes, not heroines, so why focus the end of the book on them? A book on deepening a gender divide rather than loving that men and women's roles (which can be equated to masculine and feminine and take the gender expectation out entirely) in a modern world can be swapped interchangeably.
The final point of my tried, but ultimate lack of, enjoyment was the focus on male creators (directors, authors, etc) and their accomplishments of writing female characters while taking the time to claim that Gone Girl could have been misogynistic, one of the few novels mentioned at the end that was written by a woman. Praise the man, damn the women, an age old tale.
This novel could've been so great but simply ended up as a disappointment. Little was said other than breaking down the history of female literature and claiming that modern heroines are "carbon copies" of their male counterparts.
helenmeigs's review against another edition
2.0
Interesting thesis that is simply repeated approximately 2000 times. SO repetitive.
dominiquevinc's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
ketutar's review against another edition
5.0
I don't quite agree with her about everything, but enough to enjoy this book.
I found it very inspiring and thoughtworthy.
I found it very inspiring and thoughtworthy.
runslikesnail's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
medium-paced
4.0
authoramandafernandes's review against another edition
informative
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
5.0