Take a photo of a barcode or cover
beefmellington 's review for:
Poor Things
by Alasdair Gray
This book was an absolute masterclass in its criticism of the medical field, politics, and the patriarchy. Drawing from multiple perspectives it gives a tongue in cheek commentary on how women's stories are told by men, how women from the past are dealt with by those in the future, how society treats women, and how the press treat ambitious outspoken women who make history.
This story, written by Bella/Victoria's husband, then retold and "fact checked" by Alasdair Gray was a wonderful way to "show not tell" how many men who consider themselves feminist allies talk over a woman's own account of her reality, end up siding with each other, and relegating her own story told in her own words to a handful of pages at the back of a book about her life where she states much of the book was a work of fiction - all while attributing her success to a man named God violating her personal autonomy (in her husband's recollection, of her choice to kill herself) to reanimate her into someone that will love him and sexually fulfill him.
Most of the book, as told by her husband, was men who told her they loved her while they contrived to take away her ability to choose her own path by giving her a few options and telling her choosing one of those was true freedom. From Godwin to Archibald, Wedderburn to Astley, Blessington to Blayton Hattersly - all looked to control Bella financially, sexually, and socially.
Victoria's account was, for the reader a little jab like "ah so you got pulled in by the Victorian aesthetic did ya? Got stars in your eyes for Frankenstein and the whole Gullivers Travels thing huh? Well bully for you I guess but I just ran away from my war criminal first husband and started living with this other guy I fell in love with and yeah I did worship him as a God a bit, but isn't that love?"
I find it SO interesting that the movie chose not to have any of the main character's letter (the only part of the book told by her directly) in any way involved in the plot of the movie, further cementing a man telling this woman's story without her own voice in it while appearing to be a first person POV! Was it intentional? I don't know, but it ended up continuing this piece of art across mediums to win further awards with even less of Book Victoria's own words. Don't get me wrong I loved the movie as well and I'm so glad I watched it first, but wow this book, much like the movie, is going to have me thinking for a very long time.
This story, written by Bella/Victoria's husband, then retold and "fact checked" by Alasdair Gray was a wonderful way to "show not tell" how many men who consider themselves feminist allies talk over a woman's own account of her reality, end up siding with each other, and relegating her own story told in her own words to a handful of pages at the back of a book about her life where she states much of the book was a work of fiction - all while attributing her success to a man named God violating her personal autonomy (in her husband's recollection, of her choice to kill herself) to reanimate her into someone that will love him and sexually fulfill him.
Most of the book, as told by her husband, was men who told her they loved her while they contrived to take away her ability to choose her own path by giving her a few options and telling her choosing one of those was true freedom. From Godwin to Archibald, Wedderburn to Astley, Blessington to Blayton Hattersly - all looked to control Bella financially, sexually, and socially.
Victoria's account was, for the reader a little jab like "ah so you got pulled in by the Victorian aesthetic did ya? Got stars in your eyes for Frankenstein and the whole Gullivers Travels thing huh? Well bully for you I guess but I just ran away from my war criminal first husband and started living with this other guy I fell in love with and yeah I did worship him as a God a bit, but isn't that love?"
I find it SO interesting that the movie chose not to have any of the main character's letter (the only part of the book told by her directly) in any way involved in the plot of the movie, further cementing a man telling this woman's story without her own voice in it while appearing to be a first person POV! Was it intentional? I don't know, but it ended up continuing this piece of art across mediums to win further awards with even less of Book Victoria's own words. Don't get me wrong I loved the movie as well and I'm so glad I watched it first, but wow this book, much like the movie, is going to have me thinking for a very long time.