Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.4 AVERAGE
3.4 AVERAGE
i might put myself in a comprising position were i to admit i do not enjoy joanna russ' the female man. luckily i could not understand a word of it, so cannot comment either way.
challenging
dark
fast-paced
There was so much cleverness in the writing, and the feminism is still as necessary today as ever, but the structure and flow was so oblique and confusing, I couldn't finish it. A lot of the time I was left asking, what is this bit and how does it realte to anything else? A shame.
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Loveable characters:
Yes
Moments of this book were amazing, and still relatable. I wasn't a huge fan of the story structure which started to make it a drag to read. I do love the ending.
CW: n-word, r*pe
Hard to read, story doesn't flow, reads more like poetry than a story. Must have been an exciting, subversive read back in the 70's though. Still is rather.
Hard to read, story doesn't flow, reads more like poetry than a story. Must have been an exciting, subversive read back in the 70's though. Still is rather.
Have incredibly conflicting feelings about this one, but ultimately it lands on frustration.
Russ is an incredibly powerful author, and delivers a strong, heartfelt and undoubtedly necessary polemnic against men. But that is what this book is; it is a serious of rants and scenes portraying quite how awful men are and can be. Man = bad. I get this- honestly, I really do; I try my hardest to be aware of my incredible privelege in daily life, and atone for the sins of my sex wherever possible. While we're far from perfect, society really has come a long way since the 70s when this was written. This means that we're left with the pure, unbridled anger of Russ's writing- the big problem is that it's unfocused. This book is so all over the place, in narrative voice, in context, in setting; we jump scattershot from one thing to the next. Mainly, it seems, so we can be exposed to more evilness of Man. While, again, this was and still is necessary, it doesn't exactly make for enjoyable reading. It ends up being deeply frustrating, and eventually tedious.
I'm of the opinion that when writing a book, especially a novel, you should still have some sort of coherent central narrative, and that's where The Female Man falls down. I know Russ can write coherent, incredible work- the style here is intentional, but what point she may have been trying to make with the choice is slightly lost on me.
Written partly as a response to The Left Hand of Darkness by Le Guin; this does not compare favourably at all. There we have beautiful prose, characters and a fully crafted world. Here we have glimpses of brilliance that Russ steadfastly refuses to bring together, and I just really wish she had.
For when her brilliance shines, it is blinding. It's just way too far between in this book for it to be worth reading.
Russ is an incredibly powerful author, and delivers a strong, heartfelt and undoubtedly necessary polemnic against men. But that is what this book is; it is a serious of rants and scenes portraying quite how awful men are and can be. Man = bad. I get this- honestly, I really do; I try my hardest to be aware of my incredible privelege in daily life, and atone for the sins of my sex wherever possible. While we're far from perfect, society really has come a long way since the 70s when this was written. This means that we're left with the pure, unbridled anger of Russ's writing- the big problem is that it's unfocused. This book is so all over the place, in narrative voice, in context, in setting; we jump scattershot from one thing to the next. Mainly, it seems, so we can be exposed to more evilness of Man. While, again, this was and still is necessary, it doesn't exactly make for enjoyable reading. It ends up being deeply frustrating, and eventually tedious.
I'm of the opinion that when writing a book, especially a novel, you should still have some sort of coherent central narrative, and that's where The Female Man falls down. I know Russ can write coherent, incredible work- the style here is intentional, but what point she may have been trying to make with the choice is slightly lost on me.
Written partly as a response to The Left Hand of Darkness by Le Guin; this does not compare favourably at all. There we have beautiful prose, characters and a fully crafted world. Here we have glimpses of brilliance that Russ steadfastly refuses to bring together, and I just really wish she had.
For when her brilliance shines, it is blinding. It's just way too far between in this book for it to be worth reading.
Potentially a good book, but I found the author to be too smug for my tastes. It was probably this passage that did it, and I paraphrase: "I anticipated all of your counterarguments, and I'm right, so nyaaah."
Not so much, no.
Not so much, no.
I don't even know what to rate this book. I can't tell if it was good or not. I think I'd need to read it again to even begin to understand it. I know it's a classic of feminist sci-fi; some say it was the first of the genre.
adventurous
challenging
reflective
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I had forgotten how much I enjoy new wave sci-fi. Unapologeticaly artsy, poetic, experimental and weird.
(Good) sci-fi is often social critique. There is utopian, this-is-how-it-should-be sci-fi. There is dystopian, this-is-how-it-will-turn-out-if-we're-not-careful sci-fi. There is allegorical, this-is-actually-our-society-if-you-squint sci-fi. Then there is this novel, which is pretty uncategorizable. It mixes in a little utopia (Janet's timeline), a little dystopia (Jael's timeline), a little alternate history (Jeannine's timeline). But mainly it just presents the world's ills bluntly and baldly (but lyrically and poetically), daring you to deny that this is in fact the way things are.
Truly a brilliant and multifaceted work of genius. But not for everyone. Read it if you want to be confused and punched in the gut and yet enjoy every second of it.
(Good) sci-fi is often social critique. There is utopian, this-is-how-it-should-be sci-fi. There is dystopian, this-is-how-it-will-turn-out-if-we're-not-careful sci-fi. There is allegorical, this-is-actually-our-society-if-you-squint sci-fi. Then there is this novel, which is pretty uncategorizable. It mixes in a little utopia (Janet's timeline), a little dystopia (Jael's timeline), a little alternate history (Jeannine's timeline). But mainly it just presents the world's ills bluntly and baldly (but lyrically and poetically), daring you to deny that this is in fact the way things are.
Truly a brilliant and multifaceted work of genius. But not for everyone. Read it if you want to be confused and punched in the gut and yet enjoy every second of it.
This was a wild ride I’m not sure I completely understood, but there are parts here that resonated deeply (as well as parts that are no longer relevant). To modern eyes a bit of it comes across as gender-essentialist, which is definitely a valid talking point.
However, the passages detailing the experience of (young) lesbians growing up in a straight world: 10/10 incredible. Will haunt me for a while. As will the various descriptions of the male/female double standard, because a lot of it is still so very, very apt.
This book angry, queer, and still mostly worth a read.
However, the passages detailing the experience of (young) lesbians growing up in a straight world: 10/10 incredible. Will haunt me for a while. As will the various descriptions of the male/female double standard, because a lot of it is still so very, very apt.
This book angry, queer, and still mostly worth a read.