Scan barcode
A review by lizshayne
Confessions of the Fox by Jordy Rosenberg
challenging
dark
funny
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
WTF did I just read, but in a good way??
I should have read this while I was reading for my quals, Rosenberg's analysis of deconstruction and 20th-21st theory was extremely illuminating.
I have no idea how to talk about this book. Although so much of the point of the book is about the inability to talk and what other means we have at our disposal for the body to make/inscribe meaning. I love the interplay between text and context, the constant pushing at the question of what is now versus what was and how do the two interpenetrate and also academics pissed off at large public universities is just *chef's kiss*
I'm too tired to think so we'll leave it at that and go to bed.
ETA: Because I was exhausted, I missed the bit about the book's performance of the book. The way in which it recapitulates the insertion of queerness into history in a way that parallel's the queer reader's discovery of their own queerness and retells the story of personal history through that lens. The book is about how we have always been here and how the reading and rewriting and the (impossibility of) archive does not break history, but allows it to exist at all. Anyway, the more I think about it, the mroe I love it in all its absurdity.
I should have read this while I was reading for my quals, Rosenberg's analysis of deconstruction and 20th-21st theory was extremely illuminating.
I have no idea how to talk about this book. Although so much of the point of the book is about the inability to talk and what other means we have at our disposal for the body to make/inscribe meaning. I love the interplay between text and context, the constant pushing at the question of what is now versus what was and how do the two interpenetrate and also academics pissed off at large public universities is just *chef's kiss*
I'm too tired to think so we'll leave it at that and go to bed.
ETA: Because I was exhausted, I missed the bit about the book's performance of the book. The way in which it recapitulates the insertion of queerness into history in a way that parallel's the queer reader's discovery of their own queerness and retells the story of personal history through that lens. The book is about how we have always been here and how the reading and rewriting and the (impossibility of) archive does not break history, but allows it to exist at all. Anyway, the more I think about it, the mroe I love it in all its absurdity.