New around here? Register your SA Forums Account here!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
knees of putty
Apr 2, 2009

gottle o' gear!
I have just finished the 2nd part. Oh boy. I wouldn't say I'm enjoying it, but it's certainly a challenging vision of patriarchy. The obsession with the Mongolian spot seemed reminiscent of the mark that appears on Toru's face in the Wind Up Bird Chronicle. Is there a particular reverence attached to such spots in Korea/Japan?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

knees of putty
Apr 2, 2009

gottle o' gear!
A pretty good choice for BOTM. Kang synthesises some really complex ideas around feminism, patriachal society, and anxiety. I like the reading of mel mudkiper and enfys - it's pretty convincing. What also struck me is not just the lack of agency of Yeong-hye, but the almost entire absence of voice. Even though the book is pivoted around her withdrawal, her motivations are purely articulated by the antagonist. We do not know at all what she is attempting to achieve, we can only observe the reaction of others to the only freedom of choice that Yeong-hye appears to have. All three of them resent this freedom.

Also interesting to me is the vegetarianism - it made me think that this was partly about how meat eaters generally respond to vegetarianism. Many people consider you mad or at least a bit strange not to eat meat. Being vegetarian can often be viewed as a rejection of a patriachal society. At one point the doctor refers to Yeong-hye as anorexic. It's a fairly accurate portrayal of anorexic nervosa - sufferers have an irrational fear of food often resulting from societal anxiety, and no pleas to eat are successful.

knees of putty
Apr 2, 2009

gottle o' gear!
Surely it's not necessary to identify with a character to be successful. It's a very solipsistic view that in order to gain understanding or insight one has to take that person's viewpoint. That's part of the joy of this book - the viewpoint shifts around, each offering a new vision of a single person's journey. A kind of stretched Rashomon. Was the family so unreal and amplified that they were unbelievable? I'm not so sure. Certain aspects were amplified to draw out some unpleasant features of the male psyche, but the family was sufficiently normal to provoke shock at their reaction to a somewhat benign and trivial move to stop eating meat. We can read into it of course that they were not reacting to becoming vegetarian, but to the refusal to accept husband/father instruction. If you think this is unreal, just have a look at a prominent feminist's twitter feed.

knees of putty
Apr 2, 2009

gottle o' gear!
Lots of women in the west find themselves unable to just divorce or leave. That's why places like women's refuges exist.

Yes it is a sick message - the idea that in order to gain freedom, one has to adopt a form of nihilism and retreat into oneself. To me that empowers the themes, not corrupts them.

knees of putty
Apr 2, 2009

gottle o' gear!

Corrode posted:

I gotta say as frustrating as it is for the strange robot man to make the same post ten times as he fails to grasp that every book is not about elf wizards triumphing over chaos lords, it has brought out some interesting analysis so good work y'all.

I'm with this view too. Not too hopeful for Lud in the Mist though.

knees of putty
Apr 2, 2009

gottle o' gear!

Rand Brittain posted:

Arguably Lud-in-the-Mist is about elf wizards triumphing over the patriarchy. Sort of.

Yes, but if I can't relate to the elf wizards then I demand a refund.

knees of putty
Apr 2, 2009

gottle o' gear!

Mel Mudkiper posted:

It is kind of ironic that for how generally disinterested I am in fantasy my favorite literary sub genre is Magical Realism.

This month's book is basically magical realism, though of a more prosaic version than you're in to - it's not bad, and deeply rooted in folk tales. It's hard to get away from Fantasy as a genre being moribund though. It just has nothing to offer, apart from being some kind of comfort blanket.


Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Any genre term will, as you say, pop if you squeeze it hard enough, but the corrollary to that is that almost any genre has something in it that's worth reading. There's something in the local Barnes and Noble fantasy section that you'd profit from reading, almost certainly.

It's really difficult for me to agree with this. Yes, there may be some small benefit, but it's so slight that you'd be better off daydreaming. More than that there's an opportunity cost - that time spent reading that crap could be much more profitably spent elsewhere.

knees of putty
Apr 2, 2009

gottle o' gear!

Abalieno posted:


"That crap" is genre fiction, of course. As if only those who explicitly embrace bigotry can be bigots.

Not at all. I enjoy a lot of genre fiction. I've read a lot of fantasy in the past, but I rarely find it has something new to offer. I think the only exception that I can readily think of is Earthsea and in particular the last book, but you know, opinions vary.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

knees of putty
Apr 2, 2009

gottle o' gear!
Heh, I'm not sure it's elitist to think Gibson, Stephenson and Martin can't write for poo poo.

  • Locked thread