Re: CHAT: Conlang and Writers

Irina Rempt wrote:

> > It's not the radical feminism that's the problem.  It's not GOOD
> > feminism, radical or otherwise. And it's not good story-telling.
>
> Ah, I thought that was just me :-)
>
> > You want a feminist novel that is chilling, gripping, and
> > beautifully told, go read _The Handmaid's Tale_, by Atwood. I got
> > as far as the men's club chapter in E's novel, where they all sit
> > around and make jovial and patronizing remarks about women, and I
> > thought what a pale imitation this is of the "Don't let the
> > bastards grind you down" chapter in Handmaid.
>
> I didn't read _The Handmaid's Tale_ until after I'd finished _Native
> Tongue_ (yes, I managed) and ploughed through a few chapters of _The
> Judas Rose_ (which is infinitely more tedious, perhaps because it's
> even more pushily political). You're right that Atwood did it much
> better, though I still don't agree with the feminist issues - I
> simply don't think men and women are enemies. Perhaps because I've
> never had any quarrel with men in general and those that I've had
> with individual men were much like those with individual women: about
> issues nothing to do with gender.
Okay, I should have put "feminist" in quotation marks.  Atwood's novelis good
because it's a terrific science fiction novel, told by a master
narrator.  Men and women aren't necessarily "enemies" even in the
Handmaid's tale, but the premise is a harrowing one: that women are
coopted in the near future to make babies for a right wing Christian
Oligarchy.  If anything, Atwood's criticisms are directed at the Christian
right more than they are at men.  But that's not the case for Elgen, who
just seems generally pissed off, and her anger deforms her writing--
a perfect example of what Virginia Woolf inveighed against.

I wish I could get hold of her LAadan grammar, though.

Sally Caves
etc.