![]() ![]() She opens up this chapter by contrasting what men and women tend to appreciate about women. They’re lobotomized and infantilized MPDGs. Yes, ladies and gents, the Ideal Woman is a Manic Pixie Dream Girl, only worse. However, she ignores all context, any historically relevant information, and at times, the plot of the novel in order to make her point.īut, before we get into all of that, you should watch this:Īlso, I love Anita and Feminist Frequency. I don’t mind that she’s gone to literature as her examples– the pieces that she’s chosen (Thackeray’s Vanity Fair, Dickens’ David Copperfield, Hugo’s Toilers of the Sea) are fantastic works, and reflections of their times. She’s essentially proof-texting these women, ripping them out of context and refusing to give us information that would be useful in making any kind of decision. I realize that not every single person has gone through a graduate program in English, but her approach to literature is maddening. This chapter, like the previous ones, introduces the literary characters that she will continue to reference through the rest of the book, and, just like last time, her presentation of these characters is disingenuous at best. The qualities listed under “Angelic” are “Understands Men,” “Inner Happiness,” “Character,” and “Domestic Goddess.” Under “Human” are “Femininity,” “Radiates Happiness,” “Has Radiant Health,” and “Childlike.” However, this diagram is just a summation of the ground she’s already covered, so let’s tackle that. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |