Middlesex
discussion
Reviews that are just grossed out by the topic are not reviews
date
newest »
newest »
Kelsey wrote: "It's both annoying and disappointing to see how many people found the mere inclusion of a compassionate telling of intersexuality and incest to completely block any enjoyment of the book."Kelsey, that's the great thing about America - we all have the freedom to express our opinions, even in the same room with those who might disagree. Be sad if you must, but please don't "tsk tsk" those with differing opinions.
That being said, I heartily concur with your comment's title - one of the many functions of this site is to submit reviews on those books we have read. We should do just that, and save our personal views for a forum whose purpose is for debating sexuality/morality. I'm not saying we can't *have* certain feelings about intersexuality, just that in my opinion Goodreads truly isn't the place to discuss them.
Good post!
The other great thing about America is the access to information we have, and the "ick" factor is not a thoughtful review, it's just someone's ick factor. :(
I thought this book was a very thorough discussion of the subject (transgendered). The incest was necessary to the story. This is probably the only book I've ever read about incest that did not upset me--It was told in a very matter of fact way that wasn't meant to shock or titiltate, which really grosses me out. I'm surprised anyone would trash this book for the gross-out factor, as I found it very low. There are much, much worse portrayals of incest all over the place.
Kelsey wrote: "The other great thing about America is the access to information we have, and the "ick" factor is not a thoughtful review, it's just someone's ick factor. :("Agreed. :)
I really enjoyed this book. It has been awhile since I read it, and I read it as part of our book club. We all enjoyed it and thought it was a great read. I was kind of fascinated by the transgendered topic and did some more research into it after I read the book.I agree Lena, the incest storyline was necessary to the story and I thought it was written really well.
I do think one has to have a more open mind when reading something like this, although as far as the "ick" factor...no not everyone is going to like it.
I do find it sad that people would be "grossed" out by transgendered or intersexed. We are all the same, humans.
Some people just have lower gag thresholds than others. For instance, my older sister, who is very traditional, read The Red Tent and was just beside herself because of two sentences that talked about (I believe, I don't have the book in front of me) how Laban, the reprobate father of Leah and Rachel, forced himself on some sheep. She couldn't get past that image. It might have been her introduction to bestiality. If you asked her about that book, the sheep part would be the first thing she would talk about. I actually got her a copy of Middlesex last month for her birthday. I don't think she'll have a problem with the incest or being intersexed. She might have a problem with the strip club and the scene with the boys, though. I'm hoping that's far enough in the story that she doesn't get completely thrown off.
I have other family members who have the same quirk. I'll be reading a book and thinking about how much they'll love it and then-BAM-a scene will come up that I know will have them calling me up and yelling, "Why would you give me this book?"
It doesn't have to be sex, either. My younger sister was upset because I gave her a book of stories (Because They Wanted To by Mary Gaitskill) that had a story in which a babysitter leaves the job before the mother comes back. Now, Mary Gaitskill writes very frankly about sex (I'd never give it to my older sister), but it was that scene that bothered her.
Personally, I can't stand animals being abused. It makes me sick. I also haven't been able to read A Clockwork Orange or watch the movie because of the violence. Every time I reread The Women of Brewster Place, I skip over the graphic rape scene. Everyone has things that are hard for them to digest or that make them uncomfortable. I wouldn't say that having these things means someone is ignorant or reactionary.
I guess it seems reactionary to me because I don't pick up books for comforting beach reads, and I guess I think it's important that art and literature "go there". My brother used to say to me that "it's important to read things that you disagree with, and that bother you, because how else are you going to understand what you agree with and enjoy?"Not everyone has to agree, of course, but then I wonder, if you are so bothered by a book that you put it down, why go on goodreads and be like "Um, ew! Lame." It's totally unhelpful to other readers.
@Kelsey, can you expand on your "comforting beach reads" comment? It sounds like you are saying that the purpose of literature is to shock us and make us uncomfortable. Is that right?Also, do you personally read many books that you disagree with? Specific examples would be nice.
Oh goodness no, I don't mean that the PURPOSE of anything is to shock! No no I much more mean that I go into reading assuming that I will probably come across something I don't know or like.
I personally don't enjoy books that make me too uncomfortable. The things that bother me are rape/incest, so when I gave this book to my sister, she couldnt believe I liked it. I think the incest didnt bother me because it was consensual--of course, that might be the very reason other people object to it!
I think, like any art, there is a point at which literature should make you uncomfortable or at least challenge you in some way in order for it to be good. If a piece of lit is just "nice," then it really doesn't have the right to be considered "good literature" in my book. Literature is about examining the world through an author's (or a character's) lens, and a "nice" book isn't going to really do that effectively.
Are we talking challenging like the examples I gave, or some other type of challenging? If it's different, (and I think it must be) could you give examples?
I like literature that makes me think deeply or see something in a new light or something I've not seen before. It doesnt have to make me uncomfortable. If all the books I read made me uncomfortable, I'd stop reading altogether. It's human nature. I do think that some of the greatest books I've read made me uneasy or uncomfortable, but certainly not all of them. But all of them made me think, and usually feel something as well. An example is A Separate Peace. I read that book several times, and it never made me uncomfortable. But I still think about it often, even years later.
But maybe you weren't even talking to me, Mickey!
No, Lena, I was asking Sara to clarify her statement. My mistake! I should've used names.
Sorry! :)
No, it was my fault.
The Philosopher's Apprentice: A Novel by James Morrow is a great example of a book moving people outside of their comfort zones. This book has it all. I really enjoyed it.
Mickey wrote: "Are we talking challenging like the examples I gave, or some other type of challenging? If it's different, (and I think it must be) could you give examples?"Mickey, I was alluding to the term in regards to your statement, yes. I really feel that art should push you to the threshold of your tolerance and make you ask why you draw the line where you do. I don't mind people having boundaries, as long as they know WHY they have those boundaries and don't just employ them arbitrarily or because someone else told you that line should be there. One of the beautiful things about literature is that a challenge like that can sneak up on you, unlike in the visual arts where you usually know what you're confronting right away. I love the fact that this medium is so good at "ambushing" the reader with new horizons with each page.
Farrah wrote: "I really enjoyed this book. It has been awhile since I read it, and I read it as part of our book club. We all enjoyed it and thought it was a great read. I was kind of fascinated by the transgende..."I agree totally. Grow up people!! It's something like 3 in 1000 births.
I love the fact that this medium is so good at "ambushing" the reader with new horizons with each page. Yes! :D
Sara wrote: "I think, like any art, there is a point at which literature should make you uncomfortable or at least challenge you in some way in order for it to be good. If a piece of lit is just "nice," then it really doesn't have the right to be considered "good literature" in my book"I don't think the mere inclusion of graphic material elevates a book to a work of art. If we rated books like we do movies, you would find that the best books are throughout the spectrum of ratings. War and Peace, Les Miserables, and The Mill on the Floss could be PG. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, The Brothers Karamazov, and 1984 might be PG 13. Of course, there would be R's (Lolita) and G's (Persuasion), too.
Sara wrote: " I really feel that art should push you to the threshold of your tolerance and make you ask why you draw the line where you do."
When I think of this idea of art being a place to 'push you to the threshold', it reminds me of a discussion I heard regarding this subject. I was listening to a podcast where the two podcasters watched a movie that had been banned in Canada. The movie was part of the new genre in horror films called 'torture porn'. Part of the time, the podcasters narrated what was happening in the movie. (It was really graphic, and I wasn't being assaulted with the visuals.) The other part was a discussion about censorship and art in general.
At the end, they both concluded that, because they had a discussion about the merits of the film, the film had risen to the level of being artistic and now had a value to society. That bothered me for a while, and after thinking it over, I realized why: they thought they could change the nature of the film with words, almost as if they were performing a modern-day exorcism. Now, instead of being base, brutal, and visceral, it belonged in the realm of the intellect and I don't think that was possible. You can try covering something with words, but it doesn't change what it fundamentally is.
Mickey wrote: "Sara wrote: "I think, like any art, there is a point at which literature should make you uncomfortable or at least challenge you in some way in order for it to be good. If a piece of lit is just "n..."I didn't say that graphic nature made something innately artistic. I said that good art should challenge the reader in some way or somehow unhinge them. This doesn't necessarily require some sort of graphic or offensive material--just a perspective that shakes you from your perceptions, even if just a little.
You're rating the books you listed based upon a modern perspective. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was hugely radical for its time for writing very frankly about mental health care. The book actually had a significant impact upon the mental health care industry.
Les Miserables was another book that had a huge public impact at the time, partially due to Hugo's marketing push, but also due to the controversial nature of the material. The people found the book immoral, in fact, so it certainly pushed a lot of negative buttons in its day from people who didn't want to talk about or confront the issues it raised.
What I'm really discussing is the idea that good literature should make you examine or question something. It should challenge you in that it should make you THINK or question a perception. Not all books in the accepted canon do this, but I really believe that to be considered "great," a story needs to have a basis in solid writing AND be able to assert a new perspective upon the reader or at least make them question or examine something they already believe or understand. Great literature takes you outside yourself, even if just for a little while, and hopefully helps you understand the world through new eyes, something achieved in a gorgeous way with Middlesex. Definitely great lit in my book (no pun intended).
Sara wrote: "You're rating the books you listed based upon a modern perspective. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was hugely radical for its time for writing very frankly about mental health care. The book actually had a significant impact upon the mental health care industry. "
@ Sara, I'm not rating the books based on a modern perspective. I'm rating them based on graphic material, like they do with movies. That's what we've been talking about. We weren't talking about whether they were innovative in subject matter or controversial/influential at the time. I wrote a post about what people had a visceral negative reaction to and I used the term "gag threshold". When you started talking about how art and literature need to be challenging, I asked you for examples of what you meant by 'challenging' to clarify your position, and you told me that the ones I used in my post(featuring bestiality, child abandonment, animal abuse, and graphic violence) were what you had in mind. Now, I find out that you meant something else. When people talk about something so abstract as what makes good literature, it's necessary to be as specific as possible and give examples as to what is meant so everyone's views are understood properly. There was some confusion in my mind about yours. I was under the impression that you thought that good literature had to be either disturbing or disruptive on some level for the reader and the more disturbing, the better the literature. Enough said on that subject!
@Mickey, That's what I thought she meant as well. I dont believe good literature has to be disturbing, but I do think it should "make you see the world through different eyes." Actually, I think Sara has said both of these things in the above posts. Middlesex to me fits in the second category.
Mickey wrote: "Sara wrote: "You're rating the books you listed based upon a modern perspective. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was hugely radical for its time for writing very frankly about mental health care. T..."Yes, but my point was that Les Miserables WAS considered graphic in its time. It was considered downright indecent, in fact, by numerous parties, and was actually labeled "immoral" by critics. So you seeing it as more "tame" comes from a modern perspective, which was what I was commenting on. But enough about that.
Good lit does have to be disruptive, which is why you may have misunderstood my statement. I'm not talking about violence or taboo topics, per se, but I am talking about forcing you to see something new (and sometimes perhaps something you don't want to see) or something familiar in a new way. My attempt was to point out that a writer will do many shocking things in order to get you to see from her point of view. Something can be disturbing without being "graphic," and it often is. T.S. Eliot's "The Hollow Men" is incredibly disturbing, for example, but isn't "graphic." However, its juxtaposition of symbol makes it an exceptionally freaky read. Technically, C.S. Lewis even does the same thing with his book, Till We Have Faces. Rachel Swirsky is another pro at this--she has a novella called "A Memory of Wind" available on Amazon for Kindle that is breathtaking (TOR probably offers it through their website as well). If the author doesn't take you to a place of vulnerability somehow, then she hasn't done her job, and all three authors mentioned above are experts at this, whether their material is graphic or challenging in other ways.
I guess I just didn't state my point completely enough; my apologies for that. Eugenidies was using this perspective to force the reader into a new worldview in a way that challenges the reader. In this case, it's controversial because of some content, but all good literature should do the same, in some way, by shaking you out of your own perspective and showing you something different, and perhaps something that you weren't ready to see before. Both points are linked.
Hi Sara. I'm new to this debate, but I love what you're saying. I certainly personally came away from the book with a less black and white view about sexuality. Very well written and "disturbing" book.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
A Separate Peace (other topics)
Middlesex (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
The Philosopher's Apprentice (other topics)A Separate Peace (other topics)
Middlesex (other topics)
Also the reactionary tone against "trendy hipster topics" in regards to the hermaphrodite and gender themes when, in reality, intersexual people are hardly trendy.
I'm reading Middlesex concurrently with Sexing the Body by Fausto-Sterling and it really enhances a medical and political understanding of the history of intersexuals in America and Europe.