Take a photo of a barcode or cover
tiny_kiwi 's review for:
The House of the Seven Gables
by Nathaniel Hawthorne
DNF. Bits of horrific historic racism aside...haha, no--let's talk about it, because I see no one else mention it.
CW: Racism, genocide, murder, manifest destiny, Jim Crow, minstrel blackface performers, period-typical sexism/racism/(antisemitism if you squint) and the accompanying language. I'll also pay it safe and include a warning for non-explicit pedophillia/statutory rape/Old-man+Young-woman trope so read further for more details if you need to decide if you want to engage.
There might also be more...but I dunno because I DNF.
This is an old work--obviously it will reflect the attitudes and prejudices of the time, there is no way to escape that; I acknowledge it.
But just as when we choose to continue engaging with other old racist works, like some of Disney's films, the problems must be continually called out--otherwise we continue to obliquely pardon them. We are not so far removed from the problem of racism that it can be safely ignored as a relic of the past. It is still very much a modern problem. Therefore, let me explicitly state that this work is racist. It has it other issues too, but other reviews have covered them, so I won't belabor those points.
Part this book revolves around a deed of land that drives plot by providing a point of contention and something to argue over...A plot of land that native people were screwed out of as part of all the false treaties common to their treatment at the time and as a part of the concept of manifest destiny. This book *distinctly* mentions the land as having been something the native people had signed over & given up (implying a previous ownership) and yet was described as having no visible signs of being previously inhabited. -_-
And let's not get into the blackface minstrelsy cookies. *Sigh*
The book is a slog at times, it's true. I am generally adept at reading historical works while keeping the attitudes and circumstances of the time in mind, but the casual racism really kept jolting me out of it and turning it back into slog status. Honestly, even if you can set aside the "-isms"--it just feels like he's trying out a genre and not altogether succeeding at it, but to be fair--the genre was generally a little ridiculous and what I'd today call melodramatic anyway. If this was modern, I'd tell him to just go for a few more rounds with an editor and maybe get a co-writer, although the bones of it are ok (....for the historical gothic romance genre.) I might try to get back into it for the sheer nonsense of it all, but I'm not strong enough yet. Gotta gird my loins a bit first.
CW: Racism, genocide, murder, manifest destiny, Jim Crow, minstrel blackface performers, period-typical sexism/racism/(antisemitism if you squint) and the accompanying language. I'll also pay it safe and include a warning for non-explicit pedophillia/statutory rape/Old-man+Young-woman trope so read further for more details if you need to decide if you want to engage.
Spoiler
An old man sexually oggles & lusts over a teen/young adult even though he does not actually assault her. The signs of her having reached puberty/sexual maturity are remarked upon by the author and are exciting to the character. The narrative tries to excuse this.There might also be more...but I dunno because I DNF.
This is an old work--obviously it will reflect the attitudes and prejudices of the time, there is no way to escape that; I acknowledge it.
But just as when we choose to continue engaging with other old racist works, like some of Disney's films, the problems must be continually called out--otherwise we continue to obliquely pardon them. We are not so far removed from the problem of racism that it can be safely ignored as a relic of the past. It is still very much a modern problem. Therefore, let me explicitly state that this work is racist. It has it other issues too, but other reviews have covered them, so I won't belabor those points.
Part this book revolves around a deed of land that drives plot by providing a point of contention and something to argue over...A plot of land that native people were screwed out of as part of all the false treaties common to their treatment at the time and as a part of the concept of manifest destiny. This book *distinctly* mentions the land as having been something the native people had signed over & given up (implying a previous ownership) and yet was described as having no visible signs of being previously inhabited. -_-
And let's not get into the blackface minstrelsy cookies. *Sigh*
The book is a slog at times, it's true. I am generally adept at reading historical works while keeping the attitudes and circumstances of the time in mind, but the casual racism really kept jolting me out of it and turning it back into slog status. Honestly, even if you can set aside the "-isms"--it just feels like he's trying out a genre and not altogether succeeding at it, but to be fair--the genre was generally a little ridiculous and what I'd today call melodramatic anyway. If this was modern, I'd tell him to just go for a few more rounds with an editor and maybe get a co-writer, although the bones of it are ok (....for the historical gothic romance genre.) I might try to get back into it for the sheer nonsense of it all, but I'm not strong enough yet. Gotta gird my loins a bit first.