So Esquire magazine recently posted a list of “The 75 Books Every Man Should Read” on their website. Esquire being Esquire – that is to say, a men’s magazine that had its glory days in the era of Mad Men and that seems to be aimed mostly at old farts (and aspiring old farts) — only one book of the 75 was written by a woman. (That’s 98.67% male, for those of you with lady brains who can’t do the math.)
The internet being the internet, some people noticed that the list was a wee bit heavy on the dudes, even for a men’s magazine, and pointed this out. The bloggers at the Joyland Publishing blog suggested that while the books on Esquire’s list were “mostly fantastic,” it might behoove men to pick up a book or two written by a woman once in a while. And so, with the help of some of their readers, the two assembled a list of “250 Books By Women All Men Should Read.” (Why 250 and not, say, 75? Because they got a lot of suggestions.)
Here’s a little one-question quiz for you all: What title did W. F. Price at The Spearhead give his post on the controversy?
A) “Some Great Suggestions for Books by Women You Guys Might Want to Read.”
B) “Did You Know There Are Female Authors Besides The Chick That Wrote Harry Potter?”
C) “Feminist Publishers: Force Men to Read Women’s Lit”
Yep, the correct answer is C, of course. Apparently a couple of bloggers suggesting some books by women that men “should” read is some kind of Gestapo-like imposition upon men by “Feminist Publishers.” Price grouses:
[I]it strikes me as rather mean-spirited of females in the publishing industry to denounce even ineffectual efforts to introduce men to literature. By all accounts, publishing has come to be dominated by women, and men are reading far fewer books than women these days. Given this state of affairs, you’d think that the women in the industry might be a bit gracious and let the boys pick and choose which titles interest them.
But of course that won’t do, because feminists must find fault with any and everything men are involved in. …
The implication [of the Joyland Publishing blog post] is that men should be forced by political pressure to read female writers (sometimes these feminists come off as whiny, annoying girlfriends complaining that “he just won’t listen to me!”).
Or, you know, it might just be that the writers of the blog post, and those who wrote in with suggestions, really enjoyed the books in question and thought that dudes might just enjoy them too. Sort of like when a friend tells you that you should totally watch the movie Dogtooth, because it is so fascinating and creepy and awesome. Or when I tell you right now that you should go watch Jane Austen’s Fight Club on Funny or Die.
Naturally, the comments from Spearheaders were even more ignorant and obtuse than Price’s post. The basic theme: Bitches can’t write for shit (as far as I know).
In case you think I am offering an unfair characterization of the, er, debate, here’s one Spearheader’s contribution to the discussion:
when a man says “no, I won’t read your literature”, you have to respect that, bitch.
And another’s:
I basically do not read anything a wimminz has written, not even in my favourite genre of science fiction, because every single time I have tried they have been unmitigated fucking crap full of feminazi girl power bullshit and emotional baggage and basically very little hard SF…
And still another’s:
I never read anything written by women unless it happens to be instructional and related to work. Pretty much all the fiction I’ve ever read is by and for males. If I read some non-fiction for fun it’s always got a male author. I realized a while back that my cd collection is about 98% male. When I was a kid I never thought about it, it just came naturally. Now that I’m older I intentionally avoid anything by women.
It’s always,er, instructive to see what some random guy who apparently reads mostly instructional manuals has to say about the literary controversies of the day.
There were, of course, more thoughtful analyses, like this earnest comment from the excitable, exclamation-point-happy David K. Meller:
Women write for an audience of their own level–to wit themselves! Most men are simply too intelligent to be interested in what passes for literature scribbled by women! …
Correct me if I am wrong, but is most woman’s “literature” one more kvetch klatsch of women–or girls–getting together to complain about, to defeat, or to evade the workings of us evil, letcherous, abusive, horrible M-E-N! There is no point in men reading such drivel …
There may be better days coming; when women are once again taught the arts of pleasing men, in their creating a comfortable environment for the chosen man in their lives, and when they again will use their ability to read to discover new and better ways to do this, and their ability to write to communicate these truths to others of their sex! Until that happens, literacy for women, much less dominance in authorship, editing, and publishing has been, and is, a BLOODY MESS for everyone, especially men!!
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
Yes, women should really only be allowed to read and write if they are reading or writing instructional manuals on how to cook and give better blow jobs, possibly at the same time.
PEACE AND FREEDOM!! to you too, good sir.
Speaking of which — the blowjob bit, not the PEACE AND FREEDOM!! — the commenter calling himself dragnet suggested that young men such as himself were simply too busy to read much of anything. They have other priorities:
The vast majority of my reading is for work, research, and classes. …
Frankly, I’d rather be getting laid than reading a novel after a grueling work week. The three or four hours I sometimes have free on the weekend when I’m not working or working out or sleeping or eating, I’d rather be out with my friends or getting serviced by whatever girl I’m with at the time.
It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a penis, must be in want of some girl to service it.
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!1!!
Anyway, ladies and manginas, any good lady books you want to suggest for the dudes of the world?
I fail at HTML because I have not yet fought the Zombies (though I managed the à)
I vote no. Bothari was complicated. He was bad, and victimized people, but since he was never a caricature of an evil villain, he was also somewhat sympathetic. He was also a victim of horrific treatment himself, and it is clear that those experiences shaped his character. Which doesn’t change that his actions were inexcusable. I think a lot of his story was about him trying to find limits to contain his own dark side, and that trying mitigates its existence. But his strategy for containing it had to be entirely external, based on what was “proper” and not on an internal moral compass. In one of the early books, Cordelia says something like “Even Bothari fears Bothari,” and I think that sort of sums up his whole character. That’s part of why I like the series–the elder Elena’s rage is presented as totally justified, and so is the younger’s hurt, and Bothari is responsible for both, but we don’t get to write him off as evil. (Hey, look! I get verbose when I talk about books I like.)
Good, because I felt that he was a man who was driven to do terrible things but with the kindness of the honourable ones he was able to avoid being the terrible person.
I am in the first book of the Miles Vorkagian series so I am reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaally hoping that Ms Visconti learns why her “revenge” was hollow at best.
Bee, don’t compare Chelsea Handler to the awful Tucker Max! Her book “My Horizontal Life” is actually quite good. She’s politically, er, problematic in various ways, but is often quite hilarious. I’m usually skeptical of books by comedians — a lot of the time their humor doesn’t translate well to the printed page — but she’s a pretty engaging writer.
Also, Diana Wynne Jones (small tear, she died recently) writes excellent sci-fi/fantasy – largely YA but not all. She, JKR, and Robin McKinley are pretty much my favorites. Oh, and Eoin Colfer, but he’s a dudely dude who writes great female characters – Benny and Babe is wonderful, and he’s pretty well known for that Artemis Fowl thing also. 😉
Did you read the two books from Cordelia’s perspective that come chronologically before the first “Miles” one? I read them first, and I think they really make the whole thing more ambiguous. My interpretation was actually that Bothari sort of WAS a terrible person. It just wasn’t really his fault, and he could avoid some of his baser urges by following some strict rules. I ended up feeling simultaneously that Bothari had a raw deal, but that Elena’s rage (and revenge) weren’t unjustified. I felt sympathy for her for the hell Bothari put her through, but also for him, for circumstances that led to him being the kind of monster who could do the things he did.
Oh, and for post-apocalypse worlds, I cannot over-recommend Suzanne Collins’ The Hunger Games trilogy which I read straight-through ten times before I could set the books down for a bit. Masterful.
Post-apocalypse is the beginning of ZomWorld.
H8terz.
I found the first book to be a bit stiff, but it was the first thing Lois had published.
I really commend the “Chalion” books. Among other things they do a really good (better, I think than the Vorkosigan sagas) job of worldbuilding, and her religious themes in those books is really well done.
A much better job than most in that there is religious strife, and even where there isn’t, “strife” there is sectarianism, and heresy and all sort of realistic treatment of a subject which is always complex.
MRAL hating WoT makes perfect sense to me actually xD B/c it’s pretty much how he sees life.. with these massive differences between men and women and constant obsession with those differences (and those differences being actually solidly defined by each gender’s ability to use magic)… and since he hates real life, the book (and the female chars) would be all too familiar to him xD
(YMMV obv, but speaking just for me, I’m not a fan of WoT, but there was a time in my life I ate up the books xD I guess it was my Twilight xD )
Gah! How do I keep missing the most fun commenting times! Go Stephen King, and Hyperbole and a Half, and and and….
See, my problem is that I don’t pay attention to authors… Sorta the same way with actors in movies, but you actually see them on screen. So I couldn’t tell you whether I like female authors or not, because I don’t know which ones they wrote! Sigh…
Also is this a record for how fast a post went from “David posted it” to “3 pages of comments”? Or just a record for one that didn’t involve NWO? xD (<3 the sharing of love of fiction btw 😀 )
Ami: It’s what happens to a blog when the comments build community. It also requires some level of moderation.
No Patricia Highsmith on that list? I thought guys loved Mr. Ripley.
Tucker Max isn’t “literature” obviously, but he’s funny as fuck. I’d recommend Maddox to fans.
Tucker Max is only funny if you a) admire douchesbags and b) believe everything people (i.e. said douchebags) tell you.
If you’re trying to find something that’s ridic juvenile and gut-punchingly funny at least Michael Swaim and Seanbaby are free.
Leroy and Pecunium, since I read the Cordelia books first, my sympathy was more for Bathori because I viewed his being what we consider evil a result of his being mentally ill more so then what was wrong with Prince Serg and Admiral Vorrutyer. They acted that way for fun-he knew his preferred behavior was wrong so he sought ways to mitigate or even stop it by searching for those who would help him check his worst impulses.
Ms Visconti’s rage was fully justified against Serg and Vorrutyer, but I cannot feel it is against Bathori because Bathori, even though it was the wrong way to go about it, was trying to do right by her. Then again, I know the whole story so maybe that is causing me to feel other then I should. :/
Tucker Max is actually not a douchebag, and that attitude is indicative of our misandric society. He acts like a privileged arrogant woman, essentially, dismissing women he meets at bars for minor flaws and talking shit about them for said flaws bluntly, in his book (analogous to cruel bathroom gossip of women). Yet only Max is called out on it. Why? Misandry.
Bee, don’t compare Chelsea Handler to the awful Tucker Max!
I should emphasize: I don’t know that much about her. I haven’t read her books and rush to mute E! after “The Soup” is over. I really can’t stand what I’ve seen of her, though. Midgets as a substitute for humor doesn’t work for me, and as far as what I’ve heard about the book, the “quest for sex with a black man” thing really turned me off — the fetishizing of a race, I mean, not sex with a person of a different race.
That said, she is very popular, and I am hardly The Very Model of Pristine Taste. I still love you, David. Mwah!
Tucker Max is not a douchebag; Tucker Max acts privileged and arrogant – which is it?
Or is it only acceptable if a man acts privileged and arrogant, but a high crime if a woman does it?
Wait, so women gossiping in a bathroom (which you have experience with… how?) is both a) somehow different then all your talk about alpha and beta and fat fat fatty omegas and b) the same as a published book?
OK he is a douchebag, but no moreso than half the population.
a. No.
b. Pretty much yes.
By no I mean yes.
“My name is Tucker Max, and I am an asshole. I get excessively drunk at inappropriate times, disregard social norms, indulge every whim, ignore the…”
Generally if the first thing in a self authored description of yourself is that-then…yes, you are a douchebag.