Brilliant interview with the author Marilyn French in today’s The Times. Virago is republishing The Women’s Room, to mark its 30th anniversary. French is a feminist of the type with which I most identify; a militant, old-school 70s activist. One of my earliest childhood memories is of sitting on the floor in front of my mother’s bookcase, thumbing through the dog-eared pages of the thick novel, its harsh black cover a symbol of the bitterness I would later come to understand as the expression of Woman’s doomed place in society.
Looking at the picture of the 77-year-old French this morning, I was encouraged to see a tough-looking woman; she is after all the author of what 30 years ago was considered a brave, daring, groundbreaking book, has since survived cancer, and unlike many other feminists of that generation, has become neither a complete sell-out, nor has she given up and resigned herself to her culturally-prescribed destiny. She is also pictured in full make-up and dressed in bright colours; a far-cry from the manly scariness of the late Andrea Dworkin. This is what we need to see; a feminist who is a Woman; as French herself points out, the likes of Margaret Thatcher could only be accepted as Prime Minister by becoming a pseudo-male: the Iron Lady. Here, we have an integral feminist, someone who has been instrumental in shaping our cultural inheritance, but who has done so unapologetically embracing her femaleness.
So where has she been? And where are all the other women like her? What has happened to their voice? What have we, the next generation, done for our “daughters”?
Two points she makes in the article (crudely paraphrased below), which really stand out for me are:
(1) That literary conventions are not merely technical devices, but actually mirror our societal attitudes. We need to look no further than art, literature and media to see that these conventions have regressed in the last decade. There are no real feminist ideas portrayed on screen that are not satirised.
(2) That although we live in a world that principally values money and power, yet what is considered to be “women’s work” – and what, due to the economic workings of society, remains largely performed by women – is unpaid. What kind of value are we placing on even contrived roles for women in society? That their work is either unpaid, or they are forced to take on the characteristics of Man?
I feel ashamed and sad. While I agree with French that we don’t have the choices we think we do (it is impossible to have everything, and rigid societal conventions, work practices and tax systems mean that it is largely women who stay home to take care of children), I think that we take for granted what our Sisters went through for us. The tireless campaigns, demonstrations, daring books that were written… what have we done to carry on their good work, and what sacrifices are we making for the next generation?
Looking at the picture of the 77-year-old French this morning, I was encouraged to see a tough-looking woman; she is after all the author of what 30 years ago was considered a brave, daring, groundbreaking book, has since survived cancer, and unlike many other feminists of that generation, has become neither a complete sell-out, nor has she given up and resigned herself to her culturally-prescribed destiny. She is also pictured in full make-up and dressed in bright colours; a far-cry from the manly scariness of the late Andrea Dworkin. This is what we need to see; a feminist who is a Woman; as French herself points out, the likes of Margaret Thatcher could only be accepted as Prime Minister by becoming a pseudo-male: the Iron Lady. Here, we have an integral feminist, someone who has been instrumental in shaping our cultural inheritance, but who has done so unapologetically embracing her femaleness.
So where has she been? And where are all the other women like her? What has happened to their voice? What have we, the next generation, done for our “daughters”?
Two points she makes in the article (crudely paraphrased below), which really stand out for me are:
(1) That literary conventions are not merely technical devices, but actually mirror our societal attitudes. We need to look no further than art, literature and media to see that these conventions have regressed in the last decade. There are no real feminist ideas portrayed on screen that are not satirised.
(2) That although we live in a world that principally values money and power, yet what is considered to be “women’s work” – and what, due to the economic workings of society, remains largely performed by women – is unpaid. What kind of value are we placing on even contrived roles for women in society? That their work is either unpaid, or they are forced to take on the characteristics of Man?
I feel ashamed and sad. While I agree with French that we don’t have the choices we think we do (it is impossible to have everything, and rigid societal conventions, work practices and tax systems mean that it is largely women who stay home to take care of children), I think that we take for granted what our Sisters went through for us. The tireless campaigns, demonstrations, daring books that were written… what have we done to carry on their good work, and what sacrifices are we making for the next generation?
No comments:
Post a Comment