Why Women Aren’t Welcome On the Internet:
Two hours later, a Palm Springs police officer lumbered up the steps to my hotel room, paused on the outdoor threshold, and began questioning me in a steady clip. I wheeled through the relevant background information: I am a journalist; I live in Los Angeles; sometimes, people don’t like what I write about women, relationships, or sexuality; this was not the first time that someone had responded to my work by threatening to rape and kill me. The cop anchored his hands on his belt, looked me in the eye, and said, “What is Twitter?”
*
Rebecca Mead on Jennifer Weiner. Thoughtful, open-ended. Manages to work in George Eliot, obviously.
*
Have you read Sisterland, the latest Curtis Sittenfeld yet? I just finished it after a long hiatus, and I want someone to talk about it with. I also just really love Curtis Sittenfeld’s novels.
*
Jaya’s etiquette site takes on the concept of housewarming registries.
*
Get tiny eu-mails from a Clean Person.
*
An alternative way to be a woman on the internet.
*
Tumblrs of Note: LOL My Thesis
*
This adorable gift for a child was recommended to me by The Bartender, who pointed out that modern children may have no idea what these things are.
*
Angela Merkel: 2 legit 2 know she broke her pelvis
*
Emily Rapp, who lost her son Ronan to Tay-Sachs, is having another child. This essay is very difficult to read, but written with the fire and honesty that’s been present in everything she writes. I also recommend her earlier memoir, Poster Child, about the experience of having her foot amputated at the age of four, and what it was like to literally be the poster child for the March of Dimes.
*
Tags: feminism, link roundup, the internet
“Illuminating that which has been destroyed by time… and fire.”
Definitely my favorite thesis summary, and also obviously I am going to read that entire site this morning, so thanks. My SIL and BIL both have doctorates in kind of obscure fields (Chaucer and then something to do with Latin and Greek?), and now I kind of want to ask them to do this about their thesis.
My favorite’s “So, this random crusade-era Arabic text that no one has ever read is probably so obscure because GIRLPOWER.”
I can’t stop giggling at “They knew a thing or two about computer security in 1641.”
“If you set the bar lower, a larger proportion of people will meet your expectations.” Yup.
I read a bunch of books over the holidays and am now in even more of a reading mood than before, so Sisterland looks great. (But I have not read it.)
The Emily Rapp piece really is beautiful and hard to read.
What was told to me when I started Sisterland, and I think is accurate, is that the weird plot is not always successful, but the relationship between the sisters, and the portrayal of high school, makes it 100% worthwhile. Which I think is also true for the central conceit of American Wife (which I loved, but, again, the idea it was about the Bushes wasn’t hugely important to me). And Prep is absolutely perfect, and agonizing to read.
I loved American Wife until it introduced the Husband, then I just stopped picking it up. Between Prep, the one after Prep and American Wife you can really tell Sittenfelds taste in men.
That tiny librarian kit appeals to me DEEPLY. I was a child who organized her books by genre and author’s last name and attempted to start an in-house lending library, so…
I feel sorry for all you suckers out there who are too young to have wasted substantial hours of your middle school lives flipping through the manual card catalog drawers and calling it “research” so no one bugged you and you could just seem really smart and dedicated but really it meant you didn’t have to talk to anyone which was the whole point of middle school.
Computers ruin everything.
Sisterland! Mostly for the line “Ithaca. So this was to be my punishment.” (relevant to my interests) but also for the sisters themselves. Not enough happened though.
*edit* lots happened. But the structure left me unsatisfied. Maybe that was the point.
I was so so so mad through the last few chapters.
The sisters are so good! But I think was was too amped after American Wife so when I finished Sisterland I was completely deflated. I was like, I DO NOT ENJOY BEING TEASED. But then I think maybe Twins isn’t quite the brilliant subject matter it seems to be because that second Niffineger (sic) novel was also about twins and also had an annoying ending. But then, there are good novels about twins – Lotte and Lisa / Secret History so It is possible.
*rambles on into the distance*
My IRL book friend and I discussed it, and she felt the same way, but I felt like there WAS this huge cataclysmic event, it was just different from the one we’d been told to expect. And even though they had built this great life, all it took was one action to tear it all down. I love that shit.
LOL My Thesis has effectively eaten up myself and a small pocket of friends into its endlessly entertaining maw, I’m glad a whole new swath of people are about to be undone by it (forever favourite: “People have a quantifiable physical reaction when you show them sad/gross pictures; except college students – they’re dead inside and react to nothing.”).
Oy, that Amanda Hess piece is hard-hitting and incredible, it’s been making the rounds the last few days and my facebook/twitter feeds are abuzz with it. What appalls me the most is just how internet-stupid law enforcement is, in general. How long have we had the internet? I feel like not knowing what Twitter even IS, regardless of whether or not you’re personally on it, is a majorly odd thing, not to mention the fact that there are people out there who still think the internet is some mysterious alternate universe and that the people you come in contact with online are somehow not real human beings. It’s infuriating. And obviously it’s legitimately damaging, if women cannot be taken seriously about their online harrassment by law enforcement because of these attitudes about the internet in general.
I’ve found that the police are not helpful unless, as Amanda writes, there’s a direct and immediate threat to your safety. When I thought there was an intruder in my house, the police were there within 5 minutes. When someone stole my social security number, opened a new credit card and racked up $2,500 in charges, the police refused to do anything and told me “you could be lying,” even though I had my credit report showing the guy’s address.
Ugh. I got followed into my apartment complex a few years ago from the public transit system (I ran and lost him, thankfully) and when I called the cops they took 45 minutes to arrive and then pretty much implied that it was probably a neighbor (I remain 99.9% sure it was not, based on the behavior and the fact I knew most of my neighbors at least by sight and he was completely unfamiliar) and I was being ridiculous and wasting their time. So that’s my experience.
I know, even though I’d heard about most of those incidents or others like them, seeing them all in one article like that was so excruciating I couldn’t finish reading it.
Ugh this is so frustrating! I’d like to think the police could do more, but I’m not sure that’s a realistic goal, for reasons others have identified. Of course, somehow convincing the harassers to do something else with their time would be nice, too, but goodness knows how to do that.
I suppose if someone came to me and said “hey, I can get you the political clout you need to create a solution, what do you think it should be?” perhaps amending the Communications Decency Act to hold Twitter or similar providers liable for allowing the harassment would be a realistic improvement.
I signed up for Tiny Letters from A Clean Person and got an email that addressed me as “My Little Dust Bunny.” Jolie, you are such a delight.
Not gonna lie, signing up for Tiny Letters from a Clean Person was probably the highlight of my morning. Getting the email to “My little dust bunny” warmed my soul just a bit.
That’s it, signing up now. That is ADORABLE.
Aww thanks guys! (And thank you Nicole for the link love!) I’m going to get the first newsletter out (hopefully!) today—I’m almost done with Deadspin Squalor for the week and then I’ll get to pecking. xoJK
Heart broken because the link isn’t working right now. So sad. In other news, I washed my dishes after dinner tonight and not two weeks from now as per usual.
It’s back up and running—tinyletter embargoed my first email but also managed to bunk my entire account in the process. Uffa! (Thrilled to hear about those dishes!)
OMG that tiny librarian kit. I would’ve LOVED that as a kid–as I recall, I actually made a homemade version. I would set up shelves of books, and a teeny desk with one of those old-fashioned bells that you tap the top of to make it ring, and I would make everyone in my family choose books to “take out,” and then I stamped the little cards with a rubber stamp.
This was one of my favorite games when I was about four. The librarian enthusiasm has faded slightly over the years, but you better believe my bookshelves are organized by genre and then alphabetized.
There are many of us who were tiny homemade librarians! Come join us upthread!
Is it completely terrible that when I found out about Angela Merkel’s broken pelvis, my first thought was “I can’t wait to see what Kate McKinnon does with this on SNL”?
There is gchat evidence that I immediately said this to Mallory.
DITTO
oh god this is unrelated but I am so sick please come over and cure me or kill me
Flu? Plague?
Do you have the fever/chills/sore throat/hacking cough/sinus pain that took out my office over Christmas? If you do, don’t try using only honey and ginger root like I did and get some actual medicine.
we’ll probably send you care packages if you give us a p.o. box.
or should we just put “CO: pocket-witch, San Francisco” and hope it works
If I were there I would make you soup and watch all the Thin Man movies with you while we googled Myrna Loy and read the resulting trivia aloud to each other.
THIN MAN CURES ALL
everyone I know is sick or was sick very recently (including me!). Something I’ve noticed that may or may not comfort you is that it only lasts about 3 days (rarely 4). Unfortunately, day 2 tends to be worse. I’m so sorry!!
The thing that helps you live through the cold that is going around is the magic claritin-D, the 24 hour kind. Its over the counter because sudafed, but if you are like me and hate interacting with pharmacists, I’ll say the horror of eye contact and conversation is worth the result. Try and take it before 3pm or you might be jittery when you are trying to sleep. Those of us who have caught “The Cold” as we’re calling it around here, are calling the 24 hour pill the “Magic Pill.” You will have air in your lungs again and be able to watch the 2hr downton abbey premiere with only mild coughing spasms.
Oh, that’s terrible. Unfortunately, I’m out of the Bay Area visiting my sister, or I would try to help.
Sadly, I don’t know how to heal you. (At this point I first inserted a joke about killing you, but in light of the first link, it seemed somewhat in questionable taste.) I recommend herbal tea, lots of it. Regular tea will do, but the right sort of herbal will give your nose the motivation it needs to be able to start smelling things again.
Here is my cure for everything:
Hot and sour soup
A hot, steamy shower (if you can get one of those Vicks shower things that adds the eucalpytus to your shower, so much the better)
Tea (or just hot water) with lemon and honey
Watch something with Muppets in it
Sleep
[ self promote ]
GUYS MCSWEENEY’S PUBLISHED MY SILLY THING
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/benjamin-moore…
[ /self promote ]
Also, is LOL My Thesis making anyone else want to go back to undergrad? (maybe that’s not the appropriate response)
Aww, congrats!!!!
Aiee thanks!!!
Your silly thing was very funny and I enjoyed it greatly. My favorite is Lesbian Poster (of course).
It is everyone’s favorite duh, it would be best if it was a real color. Thanks!!
Aaah, those are all amazing. A friend of mine once described a color as “rental apartment beige” and it has stuck in my mind, as will these.
HAH right? Bad real estate has a certain tint.
Love it absolutely.
“Dorito”
crunchyyyy. Thanks 🙂
Disclaimer: I love Curtis Sittenfeld’s novels, even A Man of My Dreams. PREP made me cry uncontrollably on an airplane! The warmest of hugs to this wonderful author.
That said, I did not love Sisterland. Too much buildup, not nearly enough payoff – though perhaps that was due to the structure. It didn’t have the emotional resonance of her earlier novels, which tend to hit you in the gut and right between the eyes at the same time. I hated Kate by the end of the book, but was that the point? Who knows.
I loved Kate, maybe because I identify deeply with her. Minus the psychic and twin things, you know.
I feel the exact same way about all of Sittenfeld’s books.
Just bought my friend’s four-year-old that little library kit. NO REGRETS.
Did anyone see the Dear Prudie yesterday where the guy wanted to tell his parents that the baby they were giving up for adoption died? I feel like that guy should have to read Emily Rapp’s essay on actually losing a child every day until he gets why that’s the most insensitive, idiotic idea ever conceived.
WHAT
edit: you are twenty years old and living with your in-laws and got pregnant on accident and didn’t want to keep the baby so WHY WOULD YOU TELL THEM* YOU WERE PREGNANT.
Also: “My in-laws are going to hound the adoptive parents!” THEN DON’T TELL THEM WHO THEY ARE.
Jeeeeeeesus.
*I realize that any number of things could have happened that resulted in the in-laws finding out about the pregnancy, but this whole thing seems INSANE to me.
I know, they’re young and clearly at their wit’s end, but whhyyyy.
From a purely tactical perspective, can you imagine having to pretend to be a bereaved mother for the REST OF YOUR LIFE? Do they think that shit just goes away??
SURELY there is some sort of rule there where you keep the adoptive parents’ information confidential anyway, right?!
You would think! I feel like this poor couple is not thinking clearly, at all.
There’s someone in the Slate comments saying they were in the same situation and the father’s family sued to stop the adoption (?!), causing the adoptive parents to back out. Regardless of what they do, step two needs to be “get away from these crazy monsters”.
Oh yeah, I’ve written about both why people harass online, and about how it’s pretty much impossible to prosecute people for online crimes like threats, harassment, even full on identity theft. It’s pretty much a fucking mess. Outlets need to take more responsibility for how their technology is being used (anti-social behaviour proliferates on Twitter because Twitter, by doing nothing, makes it acceptable. They should have a whole department to investigate and deal with abuse, but that costs money, so I doubt it’s ever gonna happen), and law enforcement is basically too fractured to take on cases where people live in different states or even countries. I personally think the internet should fall under its own international jurisdiction (and this has been proposed), but I don’t see thing happening until something really, really bad happens.
It’s stunning to think about the levels of protection and security you’d have to put up around yourself preemptively to avoid this actually impacting your real life, if you also wanted to have your real life and your online life be tied together in a public, visible way.
Actually, that’s probably an impossible dream.
I don’t think there is or should be a distinction between “real life” and “online life.” They are both real. In fact, this kind of contributes to the problem. If you see online spaces are not real spaces, you’re more likely to act antisocially because it’s “not real.”
Right, but say you’ve been building a career in – whatever, journalism, writing, speaking – since pre-internet (or at least pre-twitter-era-internet) days. You’ve established your brand. You’ve had to expand that brand into this new arena. And in doing so, you’ve opened yourself up to all these assholes who think it’s okay to bait online for fun.
Is there any way to go in and create the wall of protection about your public (online or ‘irl’) self, that would keep your private self private? Not allow a stalker to figure out your email, your phone #, your physical address, your family’s vulnerabilities?
What I should have said before is “private life” instead of “real life” – the impossibility of keeping that private self private/safe while still having a public persona, both online and otherwise.
Not unless they figure out an unbreakable computer encryption.
Tell me what you’ve written about why people harass online! I would love to read that.
lol my thesis kind of makes me think I could handle grad school.
Here’s what I’m thinking about, on cyber crime.
So my kids are in middle & high school, and in the past 3-4 years the issue of cyber-bullying has become a hot topic. Kids are being educated not as much about how predators will slither through your gaming console and abuse you while you’re playing World of Warcraft, but more about how sending sexts and reposting videos and comments has real-world, devastating impact.
Not that the problem is solved, by any means, but at least if you say ‘cyber bullying’ to a school cop, they know what the hell you’re talking about. As do the kids. And there have been stories of “anonymous” threats being traced back to their sources, chatter among the kids that they’ll be found out, that it’s cruel, that it’s not cool.
I’m wondering if there will be a trickling up effect as these kids age and expand their online presence, not just of people less likely to go there to start with, but more importantly, a shame culture wherein cyber bullies who currently think it’s hi-fuckin-larious and get voted up or at least not banned for their behavior begin, instead, to be treated as the pariahs they are.
(Not that there shouldn’t be effective cyber-crimes procedures NOW, and more accountability from some providers, but I’m just wondering about this issue anthropologically and wondering if you think this is likely to happen.)
Well, I already bought an old card catalog so my daughter will know what it is (also holy crap, you can store ALL your junk in there), might as well get the library kit as well!
This is unrelated, so my apologies, but when are the Feel the Burn and Eat Me columns coming back? I love them both!
apparently there are feel the burn videos coming sometime this year!!! so exciting.
YES, you’re going to love them! We also had one on lunges a few weeks ago, and there is an Eat Me on Thursday afternoon!
I just bought the last library kit to put away for my currently-almost-three-year-old. SORRY only not really. I just wish there had been two, so I could have bought one for her friend, whose mom is a librarian. I will scour the internet for more.
Well, that was easy:
http://www.amazon.com/Little-Librarian-33619/dp/B…
(I bet there’s a way to make sure The Toast gets a cut if you’re going through Amazon. Nicole? Mallory? Affiliate link?)
You’re a doll! I’ve changed the link in the main post to an Amazon affiliate one. BUY THOUSANDS OF THEM!
Love love loved Sisterland! Would love to discuss at great length. I actually felt like she reached into my brain and pulled out some of my feelings about being the parent of young children. The sister stuff was great, too – how complex and miserable and impossible and essential being a sister can be. And trying to be the good daughter, and failing in such a drastic fashion. It was definitely one of my favorite books of the year.
Companion to lolmythesis: http://disco-urself.tumblr.com/
Disco is not life; its time is not your time; in it you will not be reconciled to death.
And, of course: http://discourseontheotter.tumblr.com/
Okay, a small FEELINGSBOMB re: the Mead piece.
I have been a big fan of Jennifer Weiner since “Good in Bed” came out. I don’t care for Mead’s insistence on the implausibility of the happy ending of “Good in Bed” (i.e. fat-girl Cannie landing an attractive husband).
I feel it’s notable that Cannie herself is ambivalent and doubtful of Peter’s love specifically because she has been told her whole life, most significantly by her father, that her worth as a person is less because she does not fit society’s definition of beautiful or even attractive.
I mean, I know that Weiner herself calls her novels modern fairy tales, thereby suggesting that they contain fantastic elements, but it bothers me that “fat girl finding love” is something Mead thinks falls in that category. Indeed, as a fat girl who was abandoned by her dad but still managed to find love with a decent, attractive person, many of Weiner’s plotlines (but particularly “Good in Bed”) feel pretty realistic to me.
/feelings
I am also a big fan of “Good in Bed” and I had a lot of feelings about this piece! I think generally your criticism is correct, in that it’s not fantastical for a fat protagonist to land an attractive mate, but I think it does feel forced in the novel. Not because Cannie is fat and her doctor is hot, but more because the doctor is such a vaguely drawn character. Every time I read the book he just seems like a handsome deus ex-machina, not like a real person, which is too bad because Cannie is such a wonderful, fully realized character.
I suppose that’s fair. I think the reader learns more about Peter in “Certain Girls” to discover that he is generally a quiet, sober person, which maybe doesn’t come out very clearly in “Good in Bed,” leading him to seem flat/vague. So it would be understandable that a first-time reader of “Good in Bed” would make such a criticism.
I might also suggest that the Peter’s characterization is necessarily vague because Cannie herself, our narrator, is deliberately keeping him at arm’s length, making her narration unreliable. But that’s pretty weak, so I wouldn’t argue strongly for that interpretation 😉
I’ve admired Jennifer Weiner since “Good in Bed,” even though I’m not much on fairy-tale endings. And I would definitely recommend “Good in Bed” to a friend looking for a good read, over the supposedly more prestigious “Woman Upstairs,” which I abandoned a third of the way through. (I kept thinking, “what’s the point of this book”?)
Any Jincy Willett fans out there?
I just read Sisterland this weekend!!!!! Curtis Sittenfeld is MY FAVORITE AUTHOR. It was no American Wife but I loved Sisterland like whoa.
I have a confusion of feelings about Jennifer Wiener. She’s right to stick up for women, but also, it does feel like she does it to help herself and…her books ain’t literary. I guess if they review Tom Clancy or John Grisham in NYTimes, then she’s owed a review, but I get a little frustrated when she’s snarking on the Shelia Heti’s of the world or getting upset with the idea that there’s something different between gorgeously written fiction where not everyone is clearly good or bad and the endings are ambiguous and the characters are unlikable versus somethings that’s easy to read, short on beautiful craftsmanship, and ends with the good people getting the good things and the bad people getting the bad things.
And I don’t look down on her books, but they do something different to reading LITERATURE. It’s like Shonda Rhimes being all, “How insulting to call my show a guilty pleasure, as if it’s crap!” I agree and disagree with her. There is something dismissive about the way the popular things are treated- see the quote from the NYTimes person, Ms. Paul in the article: “As the last free-standing newspaper book review in the country, we feel all the more responsible about covering the territory, and meeting our readers where they are, which means not only the high and the low, but also the vast middle.”
The vast middle. A burn? A truth? Things we consume that aren’t low enough to be camp/trash/guilt, but things that aren’t high enough to say, “here’s a serious person, doing serious person things”. Being appealing to most people is enough to get you thrown in the trash. Reviewer attention versus size of people consuming it: http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/tvandradi… not being a parallel thing.
Conclusion: Yes: Sexism, No: Jennifer Wiener Work =True Art, Maybe: Unfair focus of criticism?
I think it’s more complex than this. Weiner’s main point is less that the NYTBR and other lofty periodicals are not covering HER work, but that they are not covering work by women authors, period. This is complicated by the fact that the majority fiction written by women is commercial fiction (as distinguished from literary fiction).
So not only is the NYTBR largely excluding literary women authors (often using space to plump the same male writer’s work repeatedly, e.g. Franzen’s “Freedom”), the nature of publishing today is that the NYTBR’s choice to exclude commercial fiction necessarily hurts women authors (and their readers) more than men.
I do get her main point full and applaud her for it. I would pay good money to watch Jennifer Wiener throw softballs at a dunk tank full of Franzen. I’ve bought more of her books alone than I have read of all the other authors mentioned in that article. She’s totally right about NYTRBs and the sexism that criticism includes for female artists.
But if you read through there’s an interesting flavor of how bitter Jennifer Wiener is about what in her words is women authors who make it into the capital L literature “throwing shade”.
The article has her responding to statements by Claire Messud, Meg Wolitzer and Adelle Waldman, and it’s clearly personal. The responses to Messud and Waldman really stand out because the first one, where Messud says, “if you are reading to find likable characters you have a problem” was directed at a reviewer/interviewer and I think Messud is SO RIGHT. If you are a book critic and your review consists of, “wouldn’t be friends with this person= book sucks” you are in the wrong job. But Wiener in her response is all, “it hurt because Messud said I was doing it all wrong”. And it’s interesting, because did she? And Walman says something about not being chick lit and Jennifer Wiener hits back with, “oh ok, this is the cover art that says REAL LIT” and it’s like, ok if you hate that Waldman dissed commercial work, you are going to turn around and keep it going back at her?
The thing I’m interested in from this article is the question that’s raised obliquely about what right women artists have to critique the way they’re lumped with other women artists? Is it “throwing shade” if a woman who gets attention says, “My book isn’t one of those books with a martini glass and engagement ring on the cover?” Or is that ok to say? Is it an insult to books with a martini glass to differentiate yourself? It’s clearly some sexism per the Caitlin Moran rule of “are the men doing it?” because Franzen as best I know has never had to be like, “my work ain’t a Tuesday’s with Morrie thing, ok? It’s not a Stephen King novel with green and black cover.” But if he did say that would Stephen King be getting mad about how Franzen isn’t in solidarity, or would Stephen King be like, “yep that’s right, I’m a horror dude who writes popular shit, and it isn’t what Franzen is trying to do, and who cares, I’m way rich.”
Same thing with Scandal/Greys Anatomy. That is not great TV. It’s not. It’s not groundbreaking writing, stories or acting. It is very fun TV and it does bust all kinds of barriers- for women and gays and minorities, and I love it for that. It’s good in the sense that it’s so fun to ride along in that show. But is it fair for Rhimes to be upset that people think of it as a guilty pleasure? Are we not allowed to call anything by women trashy or middlebrow or guilty pleasure or beach reads until we get equal rep in the NYTRB?
In defense of Scandal – I think it’s more than a guilty pleasure. Someone (I don’t remember who, maybe Anne Helen Peterson?) wrote a piece comparing it to Breaking Bad (which I haven’t watched), and argued that it’s comparably complex, but people don’t take it seriously because the character development is set against a flashy and soapy backdrop rather than against the gritty but “realistic” world of meth dealers, I guess. Crazy stuff happens on Scandal, but it’s often besides the point of the character development.
I have watched anything Shonda ever put on TV, including Private Practice, and I dunno. I mean, I have no guilt that I watch it, and maybe it’s unfair to call it a guilty pleasure but if there’s such a thing as the “vast middle” it’s totally there. It falls somewhere solidly in good work, not great work. It is head and shoulders above all her other shows in how tightly it’s written in that you end each episode on such a rush, but Scandal has the same completely workmanlike and terrible cadence that all Shonda’s shows have with the repeat phrase from sentence 3 times thing, and the long story thing and there’s just…weakness. I’m not a breaking bad viewer so I can’t compare, but it’s not the Wire in terms of realistic dialogue, great acting, incredible work, etc. It’s like 24.
Now, I think it would be interesting to compare how some other shows that are not great, therefore are “vast middle” shows maybe get a critical boost to the higher eschelons wrongly? Say, Lost, or 24 or Homeland, or even the Toast’s own beloved Sherlock, which should be a guilty pleasure if ever I saw one, maybe all merely “good shows” that got some kind of critical extra boost because of macho subject or posturing by the showrunners (aka men) who managed to get themselves some extra privilege credits to be taken more seriously than they should have been given quality?
But I think this speaks exactly to my point. Are middle level works by women artists actually undervalued great works? I’d argue not, but on the flip side I’d argue that maybe things we’d put squarely middle level if they didn’t come from someone with access, are being boosted up to the higher levels as “art”. Again, haven’t seen breaking bad.
Ooh, follow up, because that brought out my main questions/points:
Q
1. Are middle level works by women artists actually undervalued great works?
2. Is it wrong of a woman artist working at a higher level than “vast middle” to point out and fight against being placed in the middle because it kicks dirt back into the faces of middle level/aka more commerical/easier work?
A. (my answers)
1. Mostly not, because most things aren’t out of the middle, probably a few, especially for genre writers- sci fi, mystery.But clearly some men are getting boosted up; Eugenides would have such a different Time Traveler’s Wife, Oprah’s book club level of being taken seriously if he had boobs .
2. I don’t think it is wrong for them to fight being put in the wrong box by dick critics because that’s not happening to men, except in men’s favor. But maybe it is wrong for everyone to sneer at the middle. Maybe we should abolish “guilty pleasure” as a term used to mean things that many people like, because it’s totally gendered?
So interesting! I would put Scandal in between Homeland and Sherlock, with Homeland slightly better and Sherlock slightly worse (haven’t seen Lost or 24). I think most people would rank Scandal as way below both of those, and some (not all) of those people would do so because Scandal is girlier and not as “realistic.” But yeah, it belongs in the middle, it’s no Mad Men.
Re: making a fuss about the box you’re put in – I think it’s legit. It’s sexism when literary fiction written by women is dismissed as genre fiction (romance, chick lit), and it’s sexism when “women’s” genre fiction is dismissed as less than “men’s” genre fiction (see romance vs. sci-fi — I can’t think of a George R.R. Martin in the romance genre. Even the super best sellers in romance, like Nora Roberts, aren’t taken as seriously).
You are 100% right about Jeffrey Eugenides (and I like his work).
I’ve been reading a lot about this and I’m starting to think that Jennifer Weiner is the Kanye West of the literary world.
Bear with me on this!
So, Kanye has on several occasions called out racism in the music and fashion industries and the response is often, no Kanye, it’s not happening because we’re racist it’s happening because you’re ridiculous and have a huge ego. Which, yes, Kanye is ridiculous BUT even if he wasn’t (or if he was ridiculous and white) everything he says about the industry would still be absolutely true. And I think that’s kind of the same for Jennifer Weiner, no her books aren’t works of art but that doesn’t meant that the discrimination against women in literary circles doesn’t exist.
I just started Sisterland last night, and I sort of wanted to put it down immediately because of how Vi’s sister responds to her sexuality. It kind of feels like being slapped in the face, to be honest, because I’ve gotten those responses myself. I’ve been asked why I don’t just date men if I’m capable of being attracted to them, and I’ve been asked if I’m only interested in women because men don’t want me. I don’t really want to spend all the time it takes to read a novel being reminded of all the homophobic microaggressions I’ve had to live through. I liked Prep, so I want to give Sisterland a fair chance, but is it going to be worth it for me or should I cut my losses now?