Heather’s answer to “How certain can we be that what Mineko wrote in the novel about herself is true? A. Golden’s Memoir…” > Likes and Comments
61 likes · Like
A. Golden has a Harvard degree in Japanese art though. I'm neither white nor a male nor an anti-feminist but I don't see where this argument is relevant. Nobody's assuming A. Golden is trustworthy because his work is clearly fiction. But Mineko's work has the impression of being more historically accurate, in which case we need evidence other than testimony before we take it for historical fact.
I sure hope you post this kind of bad faith questioning under every autobiographical work of nonfiction you come across, T. Huong, else your singling out of this one in particular will look rather foolish.
That’s not the point here. I’m just rather surprised that people are giving a work of historical fiction a hard time for historical ‘inaccuracy’ when he clearly put a lot of effort into researching the culture. It’s called fiction for a purpose. But when Mineko writes a work that claims to be historical fact, everyone gives her a free pass and say yeah that’s legit.
Also, please come up with an argument that addresses the actual topic of debate instead of just questioning the limitations of the other person’s mental capacity, otherwise you will loook rather foolish :)
T. Huong, A. Golden has totally lost his trustworthiness as a writer when he decided to mention Mineko Iwasaki's name in his novel. Enough said.
John, I agree that he may not have respected Mineko’s confidentiality and for that she has every right to be upset. But that bears no relation to the actual validity/worth of his writing, which is a separate matter. I’d like to listen to different opinions so long as they actually address the issue I’m discussing. Thank you.
Concrete power imbalances in the form of collective economic wealth, humanizing representation, and socialized hierarchies of violence existing between different demographics, both contemporary and historical, have shaped what the status quo, and thus the uncritical portions of the mainstream, defines as "actual" validity and worth. Your refusal, T Huong, to interact with epistemological paradigms that do not adhere to status quo ideologies only showcases your own ignorance when it comes to the varied nature of present day schools of literary criticism and narratological structures, and doesn't in fact make any headway into ameliorating your argument.
In more banal terms, the Internet is not your white boy oyster. Get used to it
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
T Huong
(new)
Sep 21, 2017 09:25AM
A. Golden has a Harvard degree in Japanese art though. I'm neither white nor a male nor an anti-feminist but I don't see where this argument is relevant. Nobody's assuming A. Golden is trustworthy because his work is clearly fiction. But Mineko's work has the impression of being more historically accurate, in which case we need evidence other than testimony before we take it for historical fact.
reply
|
flag
I sure hope you post this kind of bad faith questioning under every autobiographical work of nonfiction you come across, T. Huong, else your singling out of this one in particular will look rather foolish.
That’s not the point here. I’m just rather surprised that people are giving a work of historical fiction a hard time for historical ‘inaccuracy’ when he clearly put a lot of effort into researching the culture. It’s called fiction for a purpose. But when Mineko writes a work that claims to be historical fact, everyone gives her a free pass and say yeah that’s legit. Also, please come up with an argument that addresses the actual topic of debate instead of just questioning the limitations of the other person’s mental capacity, otherwise you will loook rather foolish :)
T. Huong, A. Golden has totally lost his trustworthiness as a writer when he decided to mention Mineko Iwasaki's name in his novel. Enough said.
John, I agree that he may not have respected Mineko’s confidentiality and for that she has every right to be upset. But that bears no relation to the actual validity/worth of his writing, which is a separate matter. I’d like to listen to different opinions so long as they actually address the issue I’m discussing. Thank you.
Concrete power imbalances in the form of collective economic wealth, humanizing representation, and socialized hierarchies of violence existing between different demographics, both contemporary and historical, have shaped what the status quo, and thus the uncritical portions of the mainstream, defines as "actual" validity and worth. Your refusal, T Huong, to interact with epistemological paradigms that do not adhere to status quo ideologies only showcases your own ignorance when it comes to the varied nature of present day schools of literary criticism and narratological structures, and doesn't in fact make any headway into ameliorating your argument. In more banal terms, the Internet is not your white boy oyster. Get used to it
