Cynthia’s answer to “For those who 'eye' read the book, did you think the unconventional punctuation served a worthwhile…” > Likes and Comments
7 likes · Like
Except there was only one character who explored gender indentity. The others were conventional heteros, lesbians, feminists, etc
You don't understand my point. You said "This is not an uncommon technique used ... to explore ... traditional paradigms [that] do not ... reflect the fluidity of today's gender identities". My point was that only one character of the 12 was exploring gender identities, so your reason would be a very strange one on that basis, i.e. using 1/12 of the novel to decide on the entire punctuation method.
Yes, but I feel the author decided to use a technique to show that the pronouns and punctuation we use, embedded in what many believe is a historically patriarchal and binary canon, don't necessarily reflect the fluidity of the human experience - gender-based roles, identity, and more. My mistake was ONLY mentioning gender identity. (Brevity is sometimes the soul of wit.) The point is, it's an unusual technique for many people, but it's not a random choice.
No, I didn't think it was random. However the use of pronouns in that context were only put into Meghan/Morgan's head, nowhere else. I do see your point, but I have heard that Evaristo used the punctuation she did to give a different flow to the work, i.e. a kind of prose poetry. I'm not sure she succeeded in that, but it definitely was thought provoking.
It definitely challenged me. Generally I'm a stickler for punctuation and pacing! When the reading frustrated me I was aware of the old cannons and while I still respect those rules, it was a definite reminder that many people have a different perspective than mine and their experiences are valuable and interesting.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Chris
(new)
Mar 04, 2021 12:58PM
Except there was only one character who explored gender indentity. The others were conventional heteros, lesbians, feminists, etc
reply
|
flag
You don't understand my point. You said "This is not an uncommon technique used ... to explore ... traditional paradigms [that] do not ... reflect the fluidity of today's gender identities". My point was that only one character of the 12 was exploring gender identities, so your reason would be a very strange one on that basis, i.e. using 1/12 of the novel to decide on the entire punctuation method.
Yes, but I feel the author decided to use a technique to show that the pronouns and punctuation we use, embedded in what many believe is a historically patriarchal and binary canon, don't necessarily reflect the fluidity of the human experience - gender-based roles, identity, and more. My mistake was ONLY mentioning gender identity. (Brevity is sometimes the soul of wit.) The point is, it's an unusual technique for many people, but it's not a random choice.
No, I didn't think it was random. However the use of pronouns in that context were only put into Meghan/Morgan's head, nowhere else. I do see your point, but I have heard that Evaristo used the punctuation she did to give a different flow to the work, i.e. a kind of prose poetry. I'm not sure she succeeded in that, but it definitely was thought provoking.
It definitely challenged me. Generally I'm a stickler for punctuation and pacing! When the reading frustrated me I was aware of the old cannons and while I still respect those rules, it was a definite reminder that many people have a different perspective than mine and their experiences are valuable and interesting.
