Scan barcode
A review by cherrie_bluhd
Breasts and Eggs by Mieko Kawakami
4.0
I have contradictory feelings about this book. Even having finished it a couple of weeks ago my feelings about the book aren't particularly fixed in my mind. On the one hand, it feels very embued with second-wave, out-of-date feminism in that its construction of womanhood falls almost exclusively along the lines of the 'female body', rather than the idea that womanhood and feminity are less concretely fixed than that, and instead are more social, societal, and internal. Its ideas of 'woman's issues' are tied to periods, pregnancy, and body image, which I feel is territory that has been covered many times by second-wave feminists in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, and I wouldn't have normally been interested in a book covering familiar ground unless it took a unique (and trans-informed) view. Instead, this book's understanding of trans politics feels very surface-level. Though perhaps ill-informed good intentions and vague 'cultural differences' (I know nothing about trans politics in Japan) can explain its poor portrayal of trans politics, I am still unsatisfied with the disrespect the book implies in its exoticizing curiosity and misgendering of a trans person, and think if the author thought enough to include trans politics in the book, she could have done much better to portray them with respect.
Still though, after complaining about the book so much, I did give it four stars. Despite feeling that some parts could definitely and tangibly be improved, the book still impacted and affected me. I liked the writing style and I actually liked some of the ways it explored the body politics of womanhood. This was actually why it was so particularly frustrating that the books portrayal of trans politics was so subpar -- because the book seemed to be arguing against fixed understandings of women's bodies. By portraying women as entitled to and able to find empowerment in modifying their own bodies (through breast augmentation and otherwise) and separating the more mental, emotional desire to have sex from the physical possession of 'sex organs,' Kawakami touched on a lot of ideas that are essential to queer and trans politics. The book seemed to argue at times that the 'female body' has never been fixed, or had one specific meaning or connotation to it. That the 'cis female body', too, is changeable and full of incredible variation. Liberation, empowerment, and meaning look so different for so many different people. This is so much of what is essential and elementary in queer and trans politics! Which is why it was so frustrating for ideas of queerness and transness to be dismissed or ostracized from the text. I wish it would have gone further to explore the philosophical and practical implications of some of its own plot points.
Still, I enjoyed much of the book and, as I said before, much of it felt intertwined and not antithetical to queer/trans issues. It was well-written, thoughtful, and engaging. Some of the questions - such as questioning the impulse to reproduce - really stuck with me. But, ultimately, I think the book would have been much more impactful if it explored the implications of its own ideas a little further.
Still though, after complaining about the book so much, I did give it four stars. Despite feeling that some parts could definitely and tangibly be improved, the book still impacted and affected me. I liked the writing style and I actually liked some of the ways it explored the body politics of womanhood. This was actually why it was so particularly frustrating that the books portrayal of trans politics was so subpar -- because the book seemed to be arguing against fixed understandings of women's bodies. By portraying women as entitled to and able to find empowerment in modifying their own bodies (through breast augmentation and otherwise) and separating the more mental, emotional desire to have sex from the physical possession of 'sex organs,' Kawakami touched on a lot of ideas that are essential to queer and trans politics. The book seemed to argue at times that the 'female body' has never been fixed, or had one specific meaning or connotation to it. That the 'cis female body', too, is changeable and full of incredible variation. Liberation, empowerment, and meaning look so different for so many different people. This is so much of what is essential and elementary in queer and trans politics! Which is why it was so frustrating for ideas of queerness and transness to be dismissed or ostracized from the text. I wish it would have gone further to explore the philosophical and practical implications of some of its own plot points.
Still, I enjoyed much of the book and, as I said before, much of it felt intertwined and not antithetical to queer/trans issues. It was well-written, thoughtful, and engaging. Some of the questions - such as questioning the impulse to reproduce - really stuck with me. But, ultimately, I think the book would have been much more impactful if it explored the implications of its own ideas a little further.