Take a photo of a barcode or cover
stefhyena 's review for:
After Sappho
by Selby Wynn Schwartz
challenging
emotional
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Is it a novel? A very long prose poem? A history? An alternative history? (All histories are to some extent alternative histories it depends how many liberties the writer took)? A work of scholarship?
Those questions make it sound dry. It wasn't dry. Some parts in the middle were slow moving and repetitive. It was not a book to eagerly finish in one night it benefitted from a slower pace. It's broken into chunks to allow you to travel slowly on days when you need to, to read more frivolous stuff next to it.
But it was also entertaining, joyful at times (exasperated but determined in others)> I don't know if all those women (and Oscar Wilde) were in fact so woven together or if that's a fancy of the author. It works because it creates/recreates Sappho in them, in history, potentially in us. As a writer I found the attitude to feminist writing in the book really refreshing and motivating (and upon finishing the book I actually did do some of my own writing which is why this review is hours later).
It's a very very feminist book. But the story of women wanting something other than wife-and-mother-and-victimhood needs to be told and retold until the powers that be get it until the powers that be include women more. The complications and disagreements were not erased. Some women continue to be defiantly women and some choose to break out from a gender they never chose. Most do both to some extent. As an AFAB non-binary person I saw myself in "Sappho" (which is all of us) in the book. Also Sapphic love in the book includes but is not limited to sex (if I understood right) which was refreshing. As a side question- was Radclyffe really that much of a bore or does the author just dislike Well of Loneliness? I assume there is research behind Hall's conservatism. How depressing!
I love that when women refuse to be victims and break out in wild and joyful ways the book shows that they are not perfect, pure or even necessarily Utopian (except in hedonistic ways) they can still be wrong. Not victims. Not angels. But free and complex. Also I love that Sapphic love is shown to lurk at the heart of what women are in essence. Normally I would stay clear of essentialism but this was a good and subversive use of it (and the way it comes out is not exactly deterministic).
I'll keep this one to read (slowly) again some time. A very worthwhile read for any sapphist or feminist writer.
Those questions make it sound dry. It wasn't dry. Some parts in the middle were slow moving and repetitive. It was not a book to eagerly finish in one night it benefitted from a slower pace. It's broken into chunks to allow you to travel slowly on days when you need to, to read more frivolous stuff next to it.
But it was also entertaining, joyful at times (exasperated but determined in others)> I don't know if all those women (and Oscar Wilde) were in fact so woven together or if that's a fancy of the author. It works because it creates/recreates Sappho in them, in history, potentially in us. As a writer I found the attitude to feminist writing in the book really refreshing and motivating (and upon finishing the book I actually did do some of my own writing which is why this review is hours later).
It's a very very feminist book. But the story of women wanting something other than wife-and-mother-and-victimhood needs to be told and retold until the powers that be get it until the powers that be include women more. The complications and disagreements were not erased. Some women continue to be defiantly women and some choose to break out from a gender they never chose. Most do both to some extent. As an AFAB non-binary person I saw myself in "Sappho" (which is all of us) in the book. Also Sapphic love in the book includes but is not limited to sex (if I understood right) which was refreshing. As a side question- was Radclyffe really that much of a bore or does the author just dislike Well of Loneliness? I assume there is research behind Hall's conservatism. How depressing!
I love that when women refuse to be victims and break out in wild and joyful ways the book shows that they are not perfect, pure or even necessarily Utopian (except in hedonistic ways) they can still be wrong. Not victims. Not angels. But free and complex. Also I love that Sapphic love is shown to lurk at the heart of what women are in essence. Normally I would stay clear of essentialism but this was a good and subversive use of it (and the way it comes out is not exactly deterministic).
I'll keep this one to read (slowly) again some time. A very worthwhile read for any sapphist or feminist writer.