MAJOR SPOILERS

read this because i absolutely despised the message of the movie, and i had to see for myself just how bad the source material is. i was very pleasantly surprised to discover it is an unbelievably disloyal adaptation.

first, i think this version of lisa and tammy's story was so real, and sad, and lovely. what was reduced to a misogynistic, comedic b-plot in the film was heartbreaking and sincere, carrying true emotional weight, especially from lisa's point of view.

and second. i keep coming back to the use of the glen ridge case (which is of course never mentioned in the film) as a point of reference and comparison and as something that stays on Mr. M's mind throughout the book. it drives home a very specific point about "good men". M's disgust and hatred towards the rapists he does not know ("she wanted it" is a counterpoint he repeatedly dismisses, because he recognises she was not really able to consent), as well as towards the men who defend them, is in direct opposition to his own admitted jealousy of his friend who has committed statutory rape of a 15 year old student. it is much easier to condemn the actions of strangers than those of a peer, but it's more than that: rape is never defined by which boundary of the woman was violated, but by which (social or personal) boundary a man is not willing to violate. in the glen ridge case the girl is disabled, and the assault is violent. M finds this morally reprehensible, and therefore recognises it as rape. in tracy's case, she is smart and ambitious and he finds her attractive, and very importantly, she was never physically coerced. in his eyes, the boundaries jack crossed were not tracy's, but his own, for cheating, and his wife's, by doing so while she was pregnant.

constant sexual remarks are made about several students by the male staff throughout the book (in the film they illustrate this by having him watch high school themed porn), but fuelled by thoughts of jack's actions, M lets this escalate. he chooses to fantasise about fucking tracy "without tenderness" while trying to get his own wife pregnant, all the while trying to teach his students that rape is wrong because "the strong must protect the weak". he does not care if a woman is violated, if a girl is hurt: what he cares about is the social idea of a “good man” and the boundaries which define the role. what stops him from pursuing tracy is not any kind of concern for her, or even a moral understanding that it would be wrong to. it's the knowledge that it would make him the kind of man who, like jack, violates these ethical boundaries.

this is why he resents tracy, views her as manipulative, and goes out of his way to punish her. it's the same question of morals vs. ethics that the film poses in the beginning (and very quickly abandons). M has no moral objection to viewing his own underage student as a sex object, he’s just mad that he is not allowed to act on this due to social restraints. i don't think he ever understands this; i don't think most “good men” ever do. it's only after being caught purposefully sabotaging tracy, for reasons he cannot explain other than a deep rooted hatred, that he begins reflecting on his own actions, and even then, i don't think he ever quite reaches the right conclusion, neither on what drove him nor why his actions were so wrong. his biggest regret remains failing to uphold an ethical standard. the effects this has on tracy are inconsequential.

frankly, i find this book neither funny nor lighthearted.

Content Warnings

A review by mulders Election by Tom Perrotta

MAJOR SPOILERS

A review by mulders
Election by Tom Perrotta