Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Prof. Lisa Jardine: 'Men Prefer Fiction About Alienation And Violence.' So What?

By maynard in Media
Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 01:37:30 PM EST
Tags: Books (all tags)
Books

Recently, Charlotte Higgins, the arts correspondent of The Guardian, reported on the results of an Orange Prize for Fiction commissioned study by Professor Lisa Jardine and Annie Watkins where, according to the article, they interviewed: '500 men, many of whom had some professional connection with literature, about the novels that had changed their lives.' According to Professor Jardine, who was quoted in the article: "We were completely taken aback by the results," and was paraphrased by the reporter as saying: 'that they revealed a pattern verging on a gender cliché, with women citing emotional, more domestic works, and men novels about social dislocation and solitary struggle.' An interesting result even if, in a minor discrepancy, the Orange Prize Press Release on the study states that the researchers had interviewed '... 400 men from the worlds of academia, arts, publishing and literary criticism ...' and not 500. But what do her reported results mean, if anything at all?


The Orange Prize for Fiction was founded in 1996 to provide an outlet for female authors who had been '... passed over ...' out of concern for apparent literary discrimination by 'many of the biggest literary prizes [that] often appeared to over look wonderful writing by women.' Their goal is, through a literary prize, to help female authors find an audience among male and female readers. The Orange prize is privately sponsored by British telecom Orange, who publicizes their concern for social responsibility with numerous prizes and endowments.

Prior to this in 2004, Professor Jardine and had conducted a similar study of watershed fiction for women. According to the press release, in that study she also interviewed '400 women from the worlds of academia, arts, publishing and literary criticism [that] took part in the Orange Prize project including many previous judges of the Orange Prize.' who were each asked to select a title as their 'watershed book.' The books that made the top five watershed works for those women interviewed were such titles as 1) Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte; 2) Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte; 3) The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood; 4) Middlemarch by George Eliot; 5) Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. Primarily works which feature strong women overcoming societal limitations or relationship troubles to find solace through epiphany and catharsis.

With this second study complete, Professor Jardine offers certain contrasts between the types of books that men select compared with those the women had selected in her prior research. According to her the results show a highly divergent set of tastes, with '... almost no overlap ...' in the choice between genders. Whereas, according to Professor Jardine as quoted in the press release, the men: "... we interviewed had a tendency towards identifying themselves with angst-ridden books showing intellectual struggle, violence, personal vulnerability, catastrophe and the struggle to rise above circumstance ..." in comparison, according to The Guardian article, the women: '... readers used much-loved books to support them through difficult times and emotional turbulence, and tended to employ them as metaphorical guides to behaviour, or as support and inspiration.'

Further, according to her, men appear to lose interest in fiction once they enter early adulthood. Jardine, as quoted in the Guardian article, was surprised "... by the firmness with which many men said that fiction didn't speak to them ..." and when they did read fiction they 'preferred books by dead white men' with only Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird appearing on the list of top 20 female authors selected by men. She offered historian David Starkey's words who said, presumably about whether fiction provides a means of support or inspiration within his life, that: "... fiction, of any sort, has never worked on me like that ...". Jardine, summing up her results for The Guardian, was quoted saying: "On the whole, men between the ages of 20 and 50 do not read fiction." One of her study participants, leader of the British Conservative Party, couldn't even offer up any fiction which had inspired him lifelong, instead referring to Robert Graves's first world war memoir Goodbye to All.

When men do read literary work they select vastly different titles than women for their five most important novels: 1) The Outsider by Albert Camus; 2) Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger; 3) Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut; 4) One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez; 5) The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien. Why is this? According to Professor Jardine, as quoted in the Guardian article, she found that: "... men do not regard books as a constant companion to their life's journey, as consolers or guides, as women do, [instead they] read novels a bit like they read photography manuals." To her: "The men's list was all angst and Orwell. Sort of puberty reading ..." Which suggests to Professor Jardine that the literary profession '... is run by the wrong people ...' Further saying: "What I find extraordinary is the hold the male cultural establishment has over book prizes like the Booker, for instance, and in deciding what is the best. This is completely at odds with their lack of interest in fiction." Which is in stark contrast to her affiliated Orange Prize for Fiction, which honors only female writers.

What is a male reader to think of her statements? That men prefer different work than women seems an unextraordinary statement. Looking outside the insular world of the literary establishment shows a wide divergence between the tastes of men and women. Genre fiction, for example, is written and published primarily to attract a gender and demographic specific audience. Presumably the publishers of such material have conducted numerous market research analyses and know their buyers' habits better than do the buyers themselves. In the pulp fiction market, men tend to prefer spy and adventure, detective, and science fiction novels primarily, whereas women prefer romance, contemporary period, and mystery novels. Filmmakers understand and exploit this gender cleave as well, often naming categories of film shoehorned for men Guy Movies while those primarily for women Chick Flicks. Why should it surprise a University professor that such gender specific tastes in popular entertainment mirror the haughty world of literary fiction?

Perhaps the most distressing aspect of Professor Jardine's statements, from a male perspective, is the apparent bias implied by such condescending statements as that male readers preferred 'all angst and Orwell' and that this was 'puberty reading' for a gender that only read novels like 'photography manuals'. Are these really the statements of a University Professor? How is she to know the internal reasons why the men she interviewed stated the preferences they did? Her words read more like pop-psychology from the likes of Oparah Winfrey than true academic discourse.

Assuming her study results are valid, and not meaningless due to selection bias or -- for the cynical among us -- simply a means to present her predetermined results to justify the worthiness of the Orange Prize for Fiction, there are two underlying questions she doesn't even attempt to answer. The first: have men as a population truly stopped reading novels, or do they simply consider it entertainment and not 'a constant companion to their life's journey' as Jardine's statements seem to imply were asked. The second: is fiction about angst, violence, disenfranchisement, and solitary struggle truly not literary, as she seems to assert. Implied within her words is a value judgment about what is and what is not important for literary work. If one untangles the underlying assumptions of her words, Nobel Prize winning authors such as Albert Camus and Gabriel Garcia Marquez do not write literature. She seemingly claims it is not literary to write about violence or solitary struggle because such topics do not support readers through 'emotional turbulence' or do not seemingly provide a 'life companion' between their covers for readers. Yet are these subjects not important to men? Have men not waged war, fought intransigent and unemotional bureaucracies, pursued the singular prize of a woman, or sailed vast uncharted oceans with but a small crew to accompany them across the spans of history? Is this not the plight of man? Who is she to say such topics -- these things that men experience -- are not worthy of literary measure?

Or, perhaps, there's another explanation for why men aren't reading contemporary literary fiction. Suppose, instead, that there is a dearth of serious modern authors who speak for men, and this is the reason male readers have fled recent literary work. If so, might this be due to University level Creative Writing departments that do not nurture male voices about male issues because to do so seemingly violates the current norms of what is and what is not literary among the establishment; such material being verboten. If so, do Professor Jardine's results show a lack of interest among men because men don't enjoy reading, or because men don't enjoy reading the material she -- and the literary establishment she represents -- hoists upon us and terms: literature?

Or maybe Camus and Marquez and Salinger et all simply suck. And perhaps she's right, men don't read because they prefer the solace of 'photography manuals.' Right.

-------

Text Copyright ©2006 J. Maynard Gelinas.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License. Commmercial electronic duplication by Kuro5hin.org and/or its legal entity permitted.

An archived and updated copy of So Men Prefer Fiction About Alienation And Violence. Is That Bad? available at daduh.org

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Related Links
o Kuro5hin
o The Guardian
o Orange Prize for Fiction
o study
o Professor Lisa Jardine
o Annie Watkins
o Orange Prize Press Release
o outlet
o literary discrimination
o Orange
o social responsibility
o similar study
o Genre fiction
o market research analyses
o Guy Movies
o Chick Flicks
o Nobel Prize
o Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License
o So Men Prefer Fiction About Alienation And Violence. Is That Bad?
o daduh.org
o Also by maynard


Display: Sort:
Prof. Lisa Jardine: 'Men Prefer Fiction About Alienation And Violence.' So What? | 277 comments (243 topical, 34 editorial, 0 hidden)
It's interesting (2.93 / 15) (#2)
by SocratesGhost on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 06:55:22 PM EST

That she sees struggle and angst as lacking emotional.

-Soc
I drank what?


It's interesting (2.00 / 8) (#4)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 07:03:34 PM EST

That you see coherence and grammar as completely optional.


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]
meh. really are you guys worth editing for? (2.72 / 11) (#10)
by SocratesGhost on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 07:39:46 PM EST

Pearls before swine, I say.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
Taken under advisement (1.50 / 2) (#95)
by curien on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 02:59:32 AM EST

I'll just killfile you with my user-js and save us both the trouble.

--
We are not the same. I'm an American, and you're a sick asshole.
[ Parent ]
and yet (2.66 / 3) (#117)
by SocratesGhost on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 12:34:42 PM EST

your comment rating here tells me it's not working. ;)

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
Comment ratings should have timestamps :-} nt (2.66 / 3) (#126)
by curien on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:37:37 PM EST



--
We are not the same. I'm an American, and you're a sick asshole.
[ Parent ]
My time watching films about private schools kicks (none / 1) (#189)
by hackwrench on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 10:57:58 PM EST

in... No, you are the one worth doing your editing for.

[ Parent ]
Personally I find... (none / 1) (#258)
by zagloba on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 01:32:21 AM EST

Samuel Beckett and Henry Miller to be among the giants of 20th-century literature. So yes, in the right hands, they are completely optional. But as Warriner's noted, leave nontraditional grammar/syntax to those who know what they're doing. (I believe the textbook's words were "professional writers already have a strong sentence sense."


|He is a fool who only looks for truth where he knows he can find it.|
[ Parent ]
And what's even more interesting;.. (2.60 / 5) (#188)
by hackwrench on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 10:55:59 PM EST

I was wondering what could possibly be more emotional than social dislocation and solitary struggle?

[ Parent ]
this is why titanic was such a high grossing movie (2.70 / 17) (#5)
by circletimessquare on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 07:08:19 PM EST

the first 1.5 hours was pure woman's movie: sentimental mushy romance conquers classism

the second 1.5 hours was pure man's movie: everybody dies horribly

sure, you can have success with movies that appeal strongly to only women (dirty dancing), or only men (lethal weapon), but you can't ignore what men find appealing versus what women find appealing and expect success, nor can you try to mix up your attractions (romance and violence) in noncomplementary ways, or you wind up with something that appeals to no one

wait...

this story is about books? what?

people still read?

how quaint!


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

wrong again. (2.75 / 4) (#238)
by sllort on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 07:14:28 PM EST

I personally went to see it because I heard Leonardo DiCaprio drowned. Same with every guy I know who saw it. Like me, most Americans are suckers for a happy ending.
--
Warning: On Lawn is a documented liar.
[ Parent ]
So basically... (2.76 / 17) (#6)
by Wouter Coene on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 07:13:36 PM EST

So basically she's saying she doesn't like "male" fiction.

Well duh, as she herself pointed out males and females apparently have different tastes regarding their fiction. And she's a female. Doesn't take anybody with an academic degree to figure out her problem.

Her disparaging comments are simply because she has this strange notion that she is somehow superior. Not uncommon for a product of the misandric radical post-feminist community.

Best thing is probably to ignore her.

What I do find shocking is that the Orange Prize is apparently exclusively awarded to female writers. That kind of sexism hasn't been seen on this world since the times of the patriarchy. If us men did the same we wouldn't hear the end of it. Bloody hypocrites.

Oh, one more thing to add while I'm at it: what many people don't realise is that the raison-d'etre of the patriarchy basically was keep men under control. Nowadays women apparently feel the need to fulfill that function, by emotionally harassing males and considering us to be "childish".

I think it's time for the fourth wave.

Our new rallying cry: (2.28 / 7) (#63)
by LilDebbie on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:34:44 PM EST

"BACK IN THE KITCHEN, BITCHES!"

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
But what if I happen to like cooking? € (none / 0) (#107)
by Wouter Coene on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:08:39 AM EST

n/t

[ Parent ]
What's more (3.00 / 2) (#182)
by debacle on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 05:28:00 PM EST

What if you happen to like eating?

Would you really want a woman who can't appreciate The Catcher in the Rye making you dinner?

It tastes sweet.
[ Parent ]

GET OUT OF MY KITCHEN, BITCHES! (3.00 / 2) (#221)
by Russell Dovey on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 11:35:06 PM EST

no taste

"Blessed are the cracked, for they let in the light." - Spike Milligan
[ Parent ]

Maynard, I always enjoy your (2.00 / 6) (#8)
by terryfunk on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 07:23:23 PM EST

stuff. I will FP this when it leaves the queue.

I like you, I'll kill you last. - Killer Clown
The ScuttledMonkey: A Story Collection

Very nice article. Dr. J. is astonished that all (2.69 / 13) (#12)
by ElizabethBennett on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 07:51:05 PM EST

of you are not weeping and agonizing over what passes for contemporary fiction. Since, apparently, so many of you aren't, you must be victims of arrested development, trapped in adolescent rooms of your own. There can't be any other explanation. Good God. Can this woman actually be talking about men?

Perhaps, adult males don't read modern fiction for the same reason that lots of women no longer bother. It stinks. It isn't just men that are being failed by the current literary establishment. I read almost entirely non-fiction, and when I don't, I re-read such "life companions," as Dickens, Austen, Stevenson, Cather, and Tolkien.

I will vote FP.

Elizabeth! (2.00 / 2) (#15)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 08:59:24 PM EST

how ya doin? ;-)

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
hi livus....LizBen is... (2.33 / 3) (#16)
by terryfunk on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:15:19 PM EST

my wife. :)

I like you, I'll kill you last. - Killer Clown
The ScuttledMonkey: A Story Collection

[ Parent ]
Hush (2.80 / 5) (#18)
by ElizabethBennett on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:17:45 PM EST

Everybody was so sure I was a dupe.

[ Parent ]
It makes me feel better (none / 1) (#24)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:30:39 PM EST

I was beginning to feel quite rejected about the lack of a Fanny Price.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
For you, I'd say about $15.00 (2.50 / 2) (#186)
by rusty on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 09:15:18 PM EST

Or isn't that what you meant by a fanny price?

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
rusty (3.00 / 3) (#204)
by Tex two point oh on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 07:58:59 PM EST

is there any way to get crime detective story (hidden story) out of tex bigballs' hidden stories?

[ Parent ]
Um (none / 1) (#206)
by rusty on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:03:20 PM EST

I don't think I know what you're talking about.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
it was one of my brilliant works that was voted (3.00 / 3) (#207)
by Tex two point oh on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:06:44 PM EST

down.

if it's too much trouble b/c it's archived don't worry about it

[ Parent ]

No, I mean (none / 1) (#208)
by rusty on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:11:02 PM EST

Where is this "Tex Bigballs hidden stories" that you speak of?

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
link (none / 1) (#209)
by Tex two point oh on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:15:36 PM EST

link

[ Parent ]
Yeah, but (none / 1) (#210)
by rusty on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:18:49 PM EST

What do you want me to do to it? It's hidden. It doesn't get any more hidden than that. No one else can read it.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
repost it in a comment i want to read it again (3.00 / 3) (#211)
by Tex two point oh on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:20:41 PM EST



[ Parent ]
You should have saved a copy (2.33 / 3) (#212)
by rusty on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:22:26 PM EST

ror.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
:-) i always loved you rusty (3.00 / 2) (#213)
by Tex two point oh on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:23:17 PM EST

<3

[ Parent ]
couldn't you at least extract it out of the db (none / 1) (#236)
by maynard on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 02:37:05 PM EST

and email the text to him?

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
Cheapskate (none / 1) (#227)
by livus on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 03:36:45 AM EST

but yes, it was the entendre x2 that made me select that particular heroine.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
Cool! n (2.50 / 2) (#21)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:28:11 PM EST



---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
It's a slow Friday night. (2.00 / 2) (#17)
by ElizabethBennett on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:15:42 PM EST

How are you doing? Staying off the 11:00 news?

[ Parent ]
It's a rainy Saturday afternoon here (2.50 / 2) (#23)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:29:29 PM EST

But yeah, all's well. So... Mr Funk = Mr Darcy?

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
Actually, more like (2.66 / 3) (#28)
by ElizabethBennett on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:40:45 PM EST

Mr. Knightley.  Mr. Darcy has his attractions, but I prefer the rather cranky and plain spoken Mr. K.  

[ Parent ]
Interesting choice (2.00 / 2) (#36)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:58:27 PM EST

I can't decide which hero to prefer.

The last hero I can remember feeling admiration for was Gunnar Hamundarson in Njal's Saga and even there I'm torn between him and Njal.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Tell me about (3.00 / 2) (#39)
by ElizabethBennett on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:01:20 PM EST

Njal's Saga. What is that? Is this something Snorri Snorelson?

[ Parent ]
Make that Sturelson or something like. (3.00 / 2) (#41)
by ElizabethBennett on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:05:29 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Unknown author, circa 1280, Iceland (none / 1) (#45)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:11:40 PM EST

but a damn good read. My point was just that the guy is really "heroic".

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
Fucking A. [nt] (none / 1) (#65)
by Patrick Chalmers on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:35:48 PM EST


Holy crap, working comment search!
[ Parent ]
excellent article..+1FP when in voting queue.. (none / 1) (#14)
by dakini on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 08:43:38 PM EST



" May your vision be clear, your heart strong, and may you always follow your dreams."
A consideration (2.95 / 23) (#19)
by SocratesGhost on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:19:16 PM EST

1) Jane Eyre (1847)
2) Wuthering Heights (1847)
3) The Handmaid's Tale (1985)
4) Middlemarch (1871)
5) Pride and Prejudice (1813)
Average publication year: 1872

1) The Outsider (1941)
2) Catcher in the Rye (1945)
3) Slaughterhouse Five (1969)
4) One Hundred Years of Solitude (1967)
5) The Hobbit (1937)
Average publication year: 1951

"What I find extraordinary is the hold the male cultural establishment has over book prizes like the Booker, for instance, and in deciding what is the best. This is completely at odds with their lack of interest in fiction."

It seems like the apex of women's literature has for the most part stagnated while men's is much more contemporary.

-Soc
I drank what?


A more cynical perspective... (2.94 / 17) (#31)
by The Diary Section on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:45:38 PM EST

Major films and recent BBC adaptations
  1. Jane Eyre (1996/97/in production 2006)
  2. Wuthering Heights (1992)
  3. The Handmaid's Tale (1990)
  4. Middlemarch (2001)
  5. Pride and Prejudice (1995/2005)
  1. The Outsider (????)
  2. Catcher in the Rye (????)
  3. Slaughterhouse Five (1972)
  4. One Hundred Years of Solitude (????)
  5. The Hobbit (????)
On the British market I don't think you can discount the influence of the BBC serial adaptation and its spin-off into magazines and "celeb gossip". I remember after Pride & Prejudice particularly, I didn't go to a wedding that year where the bride's dress wasn't in that style.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]
Wasn't (2.83 / 6) (#38)
by bamcquern on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:01:15 PM EST

The Hobbit made into a cartoon? Catcher in the Rye and The Hobbit are both taught in American schools. In a survey One Hundred Years in Solitude was cited as journalists' favorite novel. All of the men's top five make predictable first forays into canonical (re: "serious") literature due to their wide availability and storm of mention in the media and the classroom.

(A more cynical perspective...)

[ Parent ]

I don't think so (2.66 / 3) (#48)
by The Diary Section on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:16:58 PM EST

Lord of the Rings was abortively made into a cartoon-painted-on-film thing. I don't believe they made a cartoon of the Hobbit, I thought the rights were locked up to this day actually.

As for teaching, see the parallel comment to this one. I disagree basically.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]

I wasn't (2.50 / 2) (#51)
by bamcquern on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:21:56 PM EST

talking about the Bakshi thing, I was talking about this.

But disagree? Eh, okay.

[ Parent ]

I'd never heard of that. (none / 1) (#60)
by The Diary Section on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:31:42 PM EST

Fair enough, but I don't think it has the same kind of grip on the mind as Mr Darcy clambering out of a pond did in the BBC version of Pride & Prejudice.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]
One other thing (2.90 / 10) (#47)
by The Diary Section on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:14:28 PM EST

All of the "female" books with the possible exception of Middlemarch (because its too damn long IIRC), are or were GCSE/A-level set-texts commonly given to students. Very notably this includes Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale as I know from personal experience. It went into the reading lists surprisingly quickly after publication.

Of the "male" books, only Catcher In The Rye makes it and does so controversially as many think its an "unhelpful" text. More nervous schools will choose something more "respectable" and uncontroversial from the first  list. The Hobbit I think is read in schools but is ostensibly for a much younger age group.

This might be an interesting contributing factor when you think about differing patterns of educational experience, participation and performance. It suggests to me the possibility that men may seek out literature slightly later in life (say, college age), whilst women settle on their favourites in their mid-teens(?). It also suggests why so many men don't read, if you've had to swallow those books which males just don't like, it might put you off for life.

Just a thought. The set-text issue definitely explains the presence of The Handmaid's Tale there to my mind. It is indeed quite a good novel but you notice its edged out, amongst other things, the other Bronte and Austen novels.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]

And yet she concludes the opposite (2.66 / 3) (#50)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:21:43 PM EST

That men stop reading fiction after the age of 20 and don't start reading again until 50 or above. Whether she's right - I don't know. But with a sample of only 400 men in the literary field, I find her results tough to take.

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
Here I am... (3.00 / 2) (#90)
by supersocialist on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 02:00:48 AM EST

...but am I further proof that she's a nutjob or the exception that proves the rule? Although I rarely literally read due to my eyesight, most but not all of the books loaded on my mp3 player are fiction. I recently finished The Time Traveller's Wife, which my girlfriend recommended, and American Gods before that. Before that, I read an Alan Watts book on "practical buddhism" (not his term) and A Brief History of Time before that. I would probably say that the most influential book I have read is The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, but possibly only to explode her head with it.

[ Parent ]
It's hard to read fiction when you (2.50 / 6) (#181)
by debacle on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 05:25:32 PM EST

Have a job, and are busy providing for your family.

On the other hand, getting fat and having babies leaves plenty of room for reading shitty fiction.

And I think that's basically what it comes down to. I don't read shitty books. I don't read shitty authors who read shitty books. Most men that I know who read have similar tastes.

Women will read anything.

It tastes sweet.
[ Parent ]

I don't know about where you're from. (none / 1) (#87)
by spooked on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 01:04:05 AM EST

But we studied The Outsider, both in the orginial french and the english tranlation at my public canadian highschool, in addition to Catcher.

Albeit the french version was taught in my french immersion Langue 12 class by a Frenchmen and the outsider was part of my AP lit and coposition class, during our existenisal section (we covered satre, kafka and kerkigaard too,) which was taught by a an avowed fan of the top five list female list in the article. Make what you will of that. I could have just been the programs I was in. The Lit class had four out of fifteen students that were male.

Seriously.
[ Parent ]
Re: (none / 1) (#110)
by Krakhan on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:43:01 AM EST

Yup, I remember studying originally french version of The Outsider too in my Grade 12 french immersion class, under a teacher who was a frenchmen as well.. What an odd coincidence. :P  Though, I actually havn't read the english translation at all, and I'm not sure if I'd want to.  Is the translation good?

I think this person in the article is so silly since I just finished taking a forms of fantasy course that included The Lord of the Rings (supposively a male tale according to this prof), as reading on there.  The male to female ratio in this class was essentially 1:1.

~ Krakhan
[ Parent ]

What school did you go to? (none / 1) (#128)
by spooked on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 04:02:14 PM EST

I was at Moscrop Secondary.

Seriously.
[ Parent ]
England (none / 1) (#119)
by The Diary Section on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 01:06:30 PM EST

where English lit at used to be mainly English in nature although I think things may have changed a little since I were a lad. Cranking though a half dozen or so Shakespeare plays alone takes up a fair amount of time and then theres the Romantics etc, the Brontes, Austen, blah blah. The raciest thing we probably did was Beckett.

My A-level English was small as well and I came top as it happened. Two of my classmates are now a film director in NY and a theatre producer in London. Another is a semi-famous author. My artistic output is mainly posting here...grades aren't everything eh.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]

I'm thinking the exact opposite (none / 1) (#108)
by MrHanky on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:40:15 AM EST

All the victorian romance stories are perfectly suitable for a young woman of 20, whereas most of the books listed as male readers' favourites are suited for readers of 16. Real statistics also supports that, since boys usually stop reading fiction at some point.

Also, I don't believe that you'd find your favourite books from forced reading in high school -- school sucks, and you're not going to enjoy any of it. Around here, Henrik Ibsen is among the most widely taught, but few people under 20 can stand him at all. Of course, he also happens to be one of the greatest writers ever.


"This was great, because it was a bunch of mature players who were able to express themselves and talk politics." Lettuce B-Free, on being a total fucking moron for Ron Paul.
[ Parent ]

s/Ibsen/Strindberg (none / 1) (#139)
by tetsuwan on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 05:52:17 PM EST

in Sweden
I didn't think much of Strindberg when I was in high school. Good thing I got to discover Lagerkvist by myself.

Njal's Saga: Just like Romeo & Juliet without the romance
[ Parent ]

Granted (2.60 / 5) (#52)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:22:17 PM EST

but remember, Austenmania comes in on the back of the Forster and Merchant Ivory stuff (Howard's End, Room With A View, Passage to India et al) which were already being marketted at the middle class older female viewer.

There's no Forster in that list; the list was made up by female academics, etc; and so it seems to me that  you might be putting the cart before the horse. If the list had been made up of twenty something Bridget Jones crowd I'd agree with you more readily.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Publishing and literary criticism? (2.75 / 4) (#59)
by The Diary Section on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:28:29 PM EST

I think we have evidence enough they certainly don't read enough quite honestly.

By the same token, what the hell is a children's book like The Hobbit doing in there if we are genuinely talking about a high-brow audience. Its clearly a sentimental choice because it really doesn't have a lot going for it as art, so I'm not entirely convinced we are talking purely about a sort of literary worthiness here where I would expect more convergence anyway.

Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]

I completely agree - wtf is "watershed" (2.66 / 3) (#68)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:42:32 PM EST

It seems to me that Jardine was looking for "favourites" - in my experience, if you survey people they will often differentiate between "important" canonical work, work they like personally, and work which they feel played an important part in their own life. Even a teenager is capable of making this distinction.

I get no clear sense of which category this article is dealing with - it seems to conflate them in the argument it makes.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Ah-ha! (2.85 / 7) (#74)
by The Diary Section on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 11:08:37 PM EST

Vomit bag ready?

When we talked to one another, and to the many wonderful women we interviewed or canvassed by questionnaire, the common ground in the responses concentrated itself around memory, a certain kind of nostalgia, a moment of personal crisis, or simply something that had been meaningful and thought provoking at a critical juncture.

With say Orwell, she is right than being terribly, terribly impressed by him is an adolescent thing, but as an adolescent I can remember being utterly floored by Nineteen Eighty-Four when I first read it and it changed how I thought about things from that day on. Same with Kafka, same with quite a lot of things she'd probably lay into.

And within her definition many factual books can have that alleged "watershed" effect, like say If This Is A Man (Primo Levy) or . Indeed, the notion that reading bloody Middlemarch might more reasonably be considered a more powerful experience is laughable.

Seems like she is moving the goalposts to me and in the end saying that adolescent male emo-ness is less worthy then female pre-pubsescent romantic wish fulfillment fantasies, which is just a silly judgement to pretend can or should be made.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]

Ugh. This reminds me (3.00 / 5) (#80)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 11:35:55 PM EST

of some of the postcolonial/diaspora debates - it seems all to often people feel that in order to validate something they have to tear down something else.

If she wants to have a touchy feely "I am Nostalgic; Hear me Roar" prize, then I hope her crew enjoy it - but I object to both the touting of this as being any more valid than anything else; and to the gendering of it, which smacks of essentialism.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Expired copyrights (3.00 / 2) (#217)
by kaol on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 09:29:16 PM EST

I'm sure that the fact, that the copyrights of those works favoured by women have expired long ago, hasn't gone unnoticed by the movie studios. I could imagine that they won't mind not having to pay royalties.

[ Parent ]
What I find extraordinary... (2.00 / 5) (#190)
by hackwrench on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 11:01:12 PM EST

is that she believes in such imaginary entities as "the male cultural establishment".

[ Parent ]
things that occur to me: (2.64 / 14) (#20)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:23:52 PM EST

I've read - and enjoyed - everything on both top 5 lists except The Hobbit (which I've read part of) and Middlemarch, and it seems to me that paradoxically the male list is much more emo than I'd have expected from the tone of this article, and the female list is more about the social.

Both lists however predominantly deal with the way in which the alienated individual fits with the society.

The Handmaid's Tale, for example, deals with violence, rape, and execution and is a lot more violent than the poignant Catcher in the Rye.

Was she asking two different questions of men and women or is this something that was added in here by you? Because a "watershed" book isn't the same thing as a "good" book or an "excellent" or even "important" book.  

Secondly, am I the only one who noticed that the male list is primarily twentieth century writers and the female list is almost all Victorian? The main difference I'd draw from this is that men and women are working with different "canons", that presumably they have different books pressed on them by their friends and relatives, than men do. And they may be working with different selection criteria. Come to think of it, in my own life, my mother owns Austen and Bronte, my father owns Camus and Vonnegut.
.

I have to say I started laughing at the conclusions you were drawing here. Jardine and her ilk (if an ilk she has) don't exactly hold the balance of power in the "Literary Establishment". If she's trying to "imply" - and I think she is actually trying to explicitly state - that the criteria on which the literary establishment chooses its Nobel prizewinners is wrong, doesn't that tell you something? She's a minority dissenting voice, not the major player you try to make her out to be.

Also, I don't see why you think a female reader would be any happier with Jardine than a male reader.

It's been well reported that women read more than men for a long time now (for whatever reason), but a glance at any list of winners for the prestige literary prizes will not show you a raft of "chick lit".

I'll probably +1 this but it does seem incompletely thought-through at the moment.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

academic Creative Writing departments (2.84 / 13) (#29)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:42:02 PM EST

Boy, I have to say that my experience with them is that her perspective absolutely dominates throughout. Try to write something from a male perspective, with violence or angst ridden text, and you will get a bad grade. Seriously. What's valued is relationship problems that cause emotional crisis which are further resolved through insight and cathersis. Guns strongly disapproved.

BORING!

 

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]

I laughed out loud! /nt (2.00 / 2) (#30)
by ElizabethBennett on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:44:59 PM EST



[ Parent ]
As my sister likes to say about modern literature: (2.83 / 6) (#33)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:46:56 PM EST

"Nothing ever happens!"

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
I've heard that, (2.50 / 2) (#32)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:46:15 PM EST

from you, in fact, if memory serves. (NZ creative writing is dominated by a rather masculine minimalist named Bill Manhire who runs his mafia from Wellington, so I bet the experiences here are different yet equally annoying)

I think you're giving too much weight to your creative lit adjuncts and their practices.

Are the nation's top sellers and prize winners really coming out of that mileau? Much less the world's?

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

The top seller right now is: (2.80 / 5) (#34)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:50:07 PM EST

"The Davinci Code" around these parts. You figure it out.

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
Exactly. n (3.00 / 3) (#35)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:56:06 PM EST



---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
Try to graduate from a program (2.80 / 5) (#37)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:58:50 PM EST

with that as your thesis. good fucking luck.

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
Huh? (none / 1) (#43)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:10:02 PM EST

I wouldn't touch creative lit with someone else's!  

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
Just worked out what you meant (3.00 / 4) (#46)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:14:06 PM EST

do you seriously think that the Da Vinci code is an example of Jardine style lit putting men off reading?!

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
No. It's just an example of what sells that (2.75 / 4) (#49)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:17:53 PM EST

is not taught by the literary establishment. God forbid I should want to write crap like that. The point is that you seemed to be arguing that literary programs don't teach how to write popular fiction and are therefore not relevant to the publishing industry. Yet if you want to graduate from a program you'll have to deal with these kinds of biases within the program.

As for whether these biases represent a real representation of what is and what is not literary - I leave that up to the article readers to decide.  

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]

No, my argument was that (3.00 / 3) (#57)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:27:18 PM EST

You argue that men do not read as much because they do not like the material available to them . Creative writing classes are not producing most of it, so how can they be responsible for it?

Literary programs are not relevant because they simply do not produce the work you're talking about.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Wait a minute (3.00 / 5) (#64)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:35:09 PM EST

I discuss popular fiction for one paragraph. Most of this is about literary fiction. And then I conclude that literary programs aren't providing a nurturing environment for male authors. Does it appear as though I focus on nonliterary fiction in the piece?

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
You appear to be applying the same principles, yes (3.00 / 3) (#69)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:50:35 PM EST

(meanwhile did you know that women still buy the majority of crime/detective fiction? They're also a prime audience for crime shows on telly. You'd probably be surprised if you checked out some market research on genre)

I'm beginning to think you've conflated two of your enemies into one here, namely:

PC creative lit (eg Jardine)
Top prize winning literary fiction (eg Nobel)

You argue that neither of them appeals to men, but you seem to blame one for the other, even though the one is extremely critical of the other, and this is what has drawn your ire in the first place.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

I made no such argument (3.00 / 4) (#70)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:54:20 PM EST

I have no problem with either PC lit or high nobel prize winning lit. Where did I say that in the article? I may have said, paraphrasing, 'no guns - boring!' but I was just joking.

I'm not arguing that the creative writing departments should teach Davinci Code crap, just that what they do teach is limited by the mindset that pervades Jardine's statements.  

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]

You blame them for your dearth (2.66 / 3) (#71)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:57:56 PM EST

"Or, perhaps, there's another explanation for why men aren't reading contemporary literary fiction. Suppose, instead, that there is a dearth of serious modern authors who speak for men and this is the reason male readers have fled recent literary work."

Unless you are now claiming to think the dearth is a God Thing (in which case you shouldn't have used perjorative language to describe it) then you do indeed take issue with whatever is causing it.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Reason equals blame and prejorative? (2.60 / 5) (#73)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 11:06:19 PM EST

I think this mindset is common throghout the literary establishment, both among creative writing departments and lit publishers. And yes, I think it focuses on material men may find uninteresting. But worse, I think it hampers the pool of available authors by limiting what is taught by schools. That is my points. And I think it's a reasonable one.

The issue of popular fiction and film is simply to argue that men haven't stopped reading, they've only stopped reading the stuff Jardine and her ilk considers 'literary.'

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]

Semantics (3.00 / 3) (#76)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 11:18:53 PM EST

meanwhile your argument is more convoluted - and holds less water - than I originally thought. Jardine is by no means the only source of the statistic, and the statistic is for fiction not just for literary fiction. (if you think watching a film also constitutes "reading" then you're far too postmodern for me).

For example Jonathon Heawood in the Guardian in 2004 -

"Why don't men read books? Despite the popular myth that women buy far more books than men, the overall sales figures for adult book are roughly equal. Of 216 million adult books sold last year, 99 million - almost half - were bought by men. Where women pull ahead of men is in fiction. According to research by Book Marketing Limited, only 44 per cent of men read fiction, compared to 77 per cent of women."

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

So women buy more fiction than men (3.00 / 3) (#78)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 11:21:17 PM EST

according to the study you cite. Was I arguing that men buy equal numbers of novels than women? No.

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
Mate, I'm feeling like Ouroboros here (3.00 / 3) (#82)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 11:44:23 PM EST

you said "they've only stopped reading the stuff Jardine and her ilk considers 'literary.'"  - are you now saying that you believe the percentage change is entirely made up of that category? If so I think Penguin and the studies again don't support your argument. If not what exactly did you mean?

I think I'm going to concede a general defeat here. I have no idea what you're trying to convey, and the more I try to understand you, it seems, the harder I find it to understand.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

That's within my comment (3.00 / 4) (#84)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 11:49:58 PM EST

not the article text. But there's no reason for you to "concede defeat". I think your point that we're arguing semantics is a fair one. And I'm not following up in this thread argue your vote one way or the other; vote your conscience.

Thanks for a fine thread. --M

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]

Heh. I thought the comment clearly referred (none / 1) (#92)
by livus on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 02:37:52 AM EST

to the argument in the article text.

I thought that you referred to the article's paragraph on popular fiction and cinema, given that in the comment you prefaced the bit that I quoted with:

"The issue of popular fiction and film is simply to argue that".

Perhaps I'm just excessively slow today.

But, yeah, it's been fun trying to understand - thanks.  

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

s god/good in my other comment. n (none / 1) (#72)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:58:34 PM EST



---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
"The Davinci Code" is very popular (3.00 / 2) (#54)
by dakini on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:23:54 PM EST

in my neck of the woods also..it seems everyone has read it, or is reading it..both men and women..

" May your vision be clear, your heart strong, and may you always follow your dreams."
[ Parent ]
/me bangs head against wall (3.00 / 3) (#58)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:27:35 PM EST

large dent in wallboard as gypsum dust coats my forehead

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
I have read The Davinci Code (none / 1) (#192)
by gzur on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 07:58:51 AM EST

And I am worse for it.

_________________________________________
"I'm not looking for work, but I wouldn't say no to a Pacific rim job."
[ Parent ]
I liked it better (2.60 / 5) (#219)
by SocratesGhost on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 09:46:27 PM EST

when it was called Foucault's Pendulum.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
Very very very true! $ (none / 0) (#268)
by gzur on Mon May 15, 2006 at 05:55:46 AM EST



_________________________________________
"I'm not looking for work, but I wouldn't say no to a Pacific rim job."
[ Parent ]
Your teachers weren't trying (2.50 / 2) (#40)
by bamcquern on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:04:18 PM EST

to teach you to write like a pussy, they were trying to teach you to write more carefully. You did say academic creative writing departments, too. Seminars and classes exist for writers of genre fiction or more casual fiction writing.

[ Parent ]
Perhaps. But must literary be also feminist? $ (2.75 / 4) (#44)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:11:08 PM EST



Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
That's not what I'm saying. (2.25 / 4) (#53)
by bamcquern on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:23:14 PM EST

I don't doubt that your writing department had weaknesses, but leaving guns and violence out of a story forces you to learn dramatic form and narrative discipline. I guess. Go read Dorothy Parker or something!

[ Parent ]
lol! $ (none / 1) (#55)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:23:58 PM EST



Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
Seems Jardine's not the only one w/ a grudge [nt] (none / 1) (#66)
by Patrick Chalmers on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:37:20 PM EST

nt
Holy crap, working comment search!
[ Parent ]
You 3'd me. Perhaps you agree? $ (none / 1) (#67)
by maynard on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:40:39 PM EST



Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
Having issues != liar [nt] (none / 1) (#104)
by Patrick Chalmers on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 07:17:13 AM EST


Holy crap, working comment search!
[ Parent ]
My friend wrote about guns (2.80 / 5) (#120)
by SocratesGhost on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 01:07:51 PM EST

he was a lit major and often he would submit classwork where guns figured in prominently. By far the biggest complaint was that they just didn't understand the jargon. "Let me get this right, this guy gets a luger and kills someone with it? Is that a type of cheetah?"

I'm exaggerating for effect but only slightly. After reading a lot of the comments on his work it occured to me that if the subject is typically "masculine" like sci-fi or action, writers need to spoonfeed every term as though the reader can afford a dictionary for Jane Austin but not for Tom Clancy.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
Theres a back story here perhaps. (2.90 / 11) (#22)
by The Diary Section on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:28:36 PM EST

Women buy nearly all published fiction and increasingly provide most of the criticism; literature hasn't been male dominated as a business in many years.

It is be noted that not even feminists can agree on the Orange prize. I heard a fairly vicious cat fight on Radio 4 a couple of months back from a writer who stated, I think reasonably, that she thought her stuff could compete with anything so why did she need to be put in a "special needs" category? The moderator had to break things up in the end amidst raised voices. Arguably the results of this study stand to reinforce the need for the continuation of the Orange Prize and the kudos and free lunches that go with it for those involved. In a world where the best paid writer on the planet is a woman, there is presumably a need for a new way of defining "female literature".

I also think they knew before they started what the outcome would be, the observations are obviously nothing new. Quite a few well-known writers (e.g., Sir Kingsley Amis) have mulled over the fact  that their libraries consist almost exclusively of books by people of the same sex.

Finally, Lisa Jardine is a troublemaker ("high media profile" indeed) as anyone who listens to Radio 4 regularly will know. Half the time I suspect she says these things with a view to being invited back in future to debate them. Whilst she wouldn't call it as such, I think there might be an element of YHBT here but in itself that doesn't mean there is any problem with your article.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.

Ah. So it's not that Jardine has an ilk (2.80 / 5) (#27)
by livus on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 09:38:20 PM EST

so much as a posse.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
A Posse of Ninja? (none / 0) (#275)
by grargrargrar on Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 06:03:49 PM EST

Ninja Trolls?

[ Parent ]
"The Hobbit" sucks. Like, really sucks. (1.60 / 5) (#62)
by Patrick Chalmers on Fri Apr 07, 2006 at 10:33:05 PM EST

Also, this woman doesn't know what the fuck she's talking about. "Puberty reading", indeed. Dipshit.
Holy crap, working comment search!
But it's true (2.16 / 6) (#106)
by MrHanky on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 08:39:28 AM EST

The Catcher in the Rye, Slaughterhouse 5 and The Hobbit are all books that are fine for a boy or a young man still growing up, but none of them should make any impression whatsoever on a man of 25 years or more. The same goes for Orwell.

Which makes me think that men may have answered the question differently, considering first and foremost which books made the most impression on them when they were young and impressionable, and perhaps the women considered books they read when they were in college and maturing intellectually.


"This was great, because it was a bunch of mature players who were able to express themselves and talk politics." Lettuce B-Free, on being a total fucking moron for Ron Paul.
[ Parent ]

Salinger makes a deeper impression upon (2.50 / 2) (#131)
by bamcquern on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 04:15:55 PM EST

a more sophisticated reader. He's wasted on the young.

[ Parent ]
only if you're sentimental enough... (2.50 / 2) (#143)
by tkatchevzz on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 05:56:22 PM EST

...to get teary-eyed over memories of youth.

(at 25, wtf? lol)

[ Parent ]

yeah cause suicide has limited appeal n/t (2.50 / 2) (#149)
by thankyougustad on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 07:22:39 PM EST



No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

[ Parent ]
I'm not just talking about (2.50 / 2) (#160)
by bamcquern on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:34:40 PM EST

Catcher in the Rye, and I don't think people should be turned off by themes of youth, alienation, ennui, &c., but sooner hints of provincialism and dimestore Toaism, although any of these criticism suggest misreadings.

Readers return to Salinger for his attention to story structure and the sentence on an atomic level. He's a virtuoso.

[ Parent ]

should? (2.50 / 2) (#150)
by thankyougustad on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 07:23:48 PM EST

you should shut up and let people decide for themselves what they want to read.


alright, I admit it, I love salinger and hopefully always will. I find your claim that he's for youngsters absurd. He's for whoever can draw some pleasure from him.

No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

[ Parent ]
People should read books based on their age? [nt] (none / 1) (#163)
by Patrick Chalmers on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 11:04:26 PM EST


Holy crap, working comment search!
[ Parent ]
No, we should all read Harry Potter all the time (1.50 / 2) (#166)
by MrHanky on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 08:01:33 AM EST

Or should we force our 10 year olds to read Dante?

There are loads of books that just seem to resonate with a specific age group. Many of them can be enjoyed by older people as well. That goes for all of the mentioned, including Harry Potter. But in much the same way that you wouldn't recommend Harry Potter to an adult, you won't re-read The Catcher in the Rye many times when you're well-read in contemporary and classical literature. There are so many other books out there, and The Catcher in the Rye, while good, just isn't interesting.


"This was great, because it was a bunch of mature players who were able to express themselves and talk politics." Lettuce B-Free, on being a total fucking moron for Ron Paul.
[ Parent ]

dude (2.75 / 4) (#176)
by thankyougustad on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 11:35:45 AM EST

that it isn't interesting is your opinion, man. a lot of people don't find de sade interesting either, but being ripping good satire places him firmly in the adult's camp. and for what its worth a lot of older people do seem to like harry potter. to each his own, huh, lest you become like the harpy who initated this study in the first place.

No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

[ Parent ]
The Catcher and the Rye (2.80 / 5) (#180)
by debacle on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 05:20:28 PM EST

Speaks to me every time I read it.

"Maturing intellectually" is a fucking oxymoron, anyway. A person is at thier pinnacle of intellectualism at age 3. Everything after that is downhill.

It tastes sweet.
[ Parent ]

Really disagree (2.66 / 3) (#241)
by The Diary Section on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 11:53:38 PM EST

This is why Catcher in the Rye is a genuine classic as a piece of art.

When you read as someone still growing up you identify with Holden which is what you are presumably talking about.

But when you read it as an adult it has a whole new register to it precisely because you know Holden is being an idiot and his obsession with "phoniness" is pointless and his advice and aphorisms are ultimately empty.

This is the quality that most great literature and drama has. Hamlet or Macbeth or The Tempest are similar, they have sufficient depth that they don't become irrelevant as you age, you see different things in them.

And Slaughterhouse Five is a book that makes a lot more sense to me as an adult than it did to me as a kid but perhaps I'm a bit backward or something.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]

I don't see a difference (3.00 / 4) (#242)
by livus on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 04:25:13 AM EST

the women's list is full of the kind of thing most women read as children or in their early teens. They may revisit it if they do a lit degree, but it appeals to the average 11 year old girl.

Case in point, number one on the list, Jane Eyre.   Lest you think I'm talking out my ass -
the BBC Women's page

excerpts:

I first read Jane Eyre at 12 years old I was unable to put the book down. It made me think about my own mortality for the first time...

I have read 'Jane Eyre' at different stages in my life. At 15, I really appreciated Jane's complete belief in her 'self' despite the overwhelming negative responses she received...

I first read this book when I was a child and it has haunted me ever since...

This was the first "grown up" book I ever read, probably at 11yrs old. I felt Jane's pain, and the injustice of her situation. So different from my own safe upbringing. I have read it since from a feminist perspective, and it is a tribute to Bronte's talent that the story stands up to this kind of scrutiny...

And, if that's too highbrow, Customer reviews at amazon include examples of this too.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Male Aloneness. (2.91 / 24) (#86)
by spooked on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 12:42:00 AM EST

Male Aloneness, which was first articulated to me in Samuel R. Delany's Trouble on Triton, is something that most women cannot understand or don't experience in modern culture or society. First, let me clarify what I mean by 'male aloneness.' It's not loneliness, as it's not the longing we experience but the way we live in society. Men are alone. Fundamentally alone, single, by themselves, removed. Women, as far as I can understand often act or make decisions socially. Not to say they have to consult their peers all the time, but it seems they overcome problems either socially, as a group or with group consensus, or verbally using language or communication with others as a solution. In my opinion, civilization would not be possible without this feminine trait. More to the point, I believe that society is the expression of this trait. Generally they act within, or as groups. Whereas acting outside of society, outside of consensus or without group support is a inherently masculine trait.

Keep in mind I'm talking in gross generalities but think about it: how many women do you know that aren't social versus the number of men that are? In grade school girl go the bathroom in groups, only the rejected, dehumanized girls that were bullied by everyone went alone. (I suspect that she wished that she had a friend or friends to accompany her, that the lack of social support antagonized her. Again, I'm sure there are women who grew up in such a situation and didn't mind being alone but they are few.) The boys went alone and enjoyed going alone, that having the gym washroom to yourself is a small joy and still is. Even the male counterpart to our rejected girl would probably wish for a protector rather than a confidant. How often to you men call up you friends on the phone simply to 'talk,' without any specific goal in mind?

Male aloneness is to be at ease being alone, it is a natural state. It's not uncomfortable or boring it allows us true freedom, a completeness. For a personal example, my roommate, if she's at home alone and come home, she instantly seeks my attention, even just to ask me how my day was, just to say hi. She'll hangout in my room just for the company, even if I'm completely ignoring her. Whereas when she walks in the door my mood shifts, from relaxed to attentive and I often hide in my room or just leave just so that I can maintain that 'aloneness.'

A women could never have written The Outsider or Catcher in the Rye. Mersault's actions must seem so alien to them, it's no wonder that they don't identify with it. But to myself, they're natural, understandable.

So what I don't understand is why we're talking about this femnazi's idiocy in the first place.

Seriously.
Women frequently (2.37 / 8) (#91)
by bamcquern on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 02:25:35 AM EST

identify with and appreciate both works.

Plus, I think you need to interact more often with people outside of your age group, class, race, gender, &c. Your generalizations are wrongheaded and mostly useless.

But I think you are all right.

[ Parent ]

Okay? (2.71 / 7) (#96)
by spooked on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:25:06 AM EST

I don't know. I didn't mean to imply that, if I specifically stated that these are, in fact, gross generalizations, and I was solely talking about personal experience. Mr. Delany is a old bisexual black man from harlem and I am a young straight white boy from vancouver. I can relate to one of the major points in his study on gender. I hang out with lots a different people. I guess only so different. I mean, I think the idea of hanging out with people because of their class, race, gender &etc is silly. I have mostly girl friends, but a fair number of guy friends too. I'm not really picky about race, but living in vancouver means most of my friends are either white, asian or east indian. I think everyone I know is in the middle class or there abouts.

Useless? Maybe. I don't really use the idea when dealing with women, but when I'm reflection upon myself. But to discribe it, it seems I have to contrast it with the other sex. I'm sorry if I don't ascribe to the idea that men and women are the same. I believe that there are masculine and feminine traits and that any single human being can have either or both of these in any combination. But being born/raised male or female just means that statistically one sex is like this or like that, but that the traits of any given single sample are random.

As far as the works are concerned, I agree with you, I'm sure that many women do, and that many women don't. My Lit teacher, whom I have a deep respect and admiration for, taught me all about both those works and existensialism, amongst other things. We had long, passionate discussions about the works in question. What I was refering to was the section in the article where these works were not in the top five like they were in the male top five. The reason I feel is that they deal with a distictly male trait in a male fashion, so males identify with them moreso. That's all. If that's wrongheaded, well, then I don't want ot be anything else.

Seriously.
[ Parent ]
I am troll supreme! (2.50 / 2) (#129)
by bamcquern on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 04:09:04 PM EST

Haha. I don't disagree with you on many of your points. I took specific exception to your short essay I would call "Male Aloneness." This trait I have seen residing in most of my female friends, including my oldest friend of ten years. Also, myself and many of my male friends crave company, talk and affection. As Jonathan Richman put it, "If you do want it, don't chicken out."

That's the generalization that's useless; if there's a division along male and female ranks in this matter, it must be 51% to 49% for each side.

I didn't mean to imply that you associate with others of different age, race and gender for the sole sake of their differences, but I think that when these ideas of yours coalesced you should have realized your experience was too limited to support your conclusions.

And, yeah, I think we lot—people—are all racist and sexist and ignorant and horrible, and that it doesn't hurt to now and again become putrid bleeding hearts or whatever it takes to understand a little better That Which is Not Us. My particular liberal shame is sensitive inquiry, and my favorite targets are those wiser and elder.

Finally, consider that these books to leave impressions upon those who had barely formed reading lives. I believe that most of those polled had not sufficient reading autonomy to resist those "watershed books" which were probably foisted on them at an age when they would influence and plant seeds of later nostalgia.

All of the top five of the men's books are obligatory reading for habitual readers of any gender, and the women's books belong to a similar canon, though one easier shaken as tastes develop.

[ Parent ]

I know enough to know that I know nothing. (none / 1) (#147)
by spooked on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 07:12:08 PM EST

Short essay? Maybe if we were still in highschool.

Seriously.
[ Parent ]
*whew* (2.66 / 3) (#191)
by garote on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 11:35:26 PM EST

Well I'm glad you pointed out that you don't strictly adhere to the generalization you described in the previous comment. That would have inspired a huge rant on my part. But if the generalization is rephrased, as you just have, into a trend, then I agree with you. I hesitate to pin the difference down to "aloneness" and the comfort found therein, but it's somewhere in that terrain.

I'd also like to point out that such a difference can be colored or even transformed within particular cultures. Take, for example, the camaraderie that the average Japanese businessman feels with his co-workers, compared to the relative isolation that his stay-at-home wife may endure.

[ Parent ]

Maybe you could answer me this: (2.66 / 3) (#98)
by spooked on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:31:10 AM EST

could Mersault's character believably be a women, without changing his actions, given the context and era? Would the text have been as effective?

Seriously.
[ Parent ]
I too (2.87 / 8) (#94)
by chizzadwick on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 02:52:04 AM EST

enjoy the aloneness you describe.

In particular, I often find myself informing others of the decisions I have taken, not to seek advice or approval, but simply to avoid the awkwardness of them not knowing.

[ Parent ]

+1 GOTH (2.66 / 3) (#142)
by tkatchevzz on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 05:54:50 PM EST

hail saton

[ Parent ]
No man is an island (2.91 / 12) (#97)
by curien on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:27:02 AM EST

The thing that women don't understand is that Donne's famous phrase is not a statement of simple fact as it is for women. Women obviously are connected to one another.

Men, on the other hand, naturally become islands if their own inertia remains unchecked. The subject phrase is so poignant not because it's a truism but because it is in fact an expression of angst against the state of man. We castigate, on the one hand, our incomplete island-ness; and we regret, at times, on the other, the very nature of our being.

If men weren't really islands, no one would bother reiterating claims to the contrary four centuries later.

--
We are not the same. I'm an American, and you're a sick asshole.
[ Parent ]

I am an island (2.85 / 7) (#145)
by Lode Runner on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 06:58:40 PM EST

I have my books and my poetry to protect me. I am shielded in my armor, hiding in my room, safe within my womb. I touch no one and no one touches me.

[ Parent ]
not complete (2.80 / 5) (#135)
by circletimessquare on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 04:47:31 PM EST

to be utterly alone, and yet enjoy a good fuck now and then, somehow without getting entangled, that's what i seek


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
wow (2.80 / 5) (#167)
by SkullOne on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 08:46:49 AM EST

This is the first comment from you that I whole-heartedly agree with. Lets be friends.

[ Parent ]
true (2.66 / 3) (#172)
by Roman on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 10:48:52 AM EST

and that is what I have.

[ Parent ]
Idea (2.00 / 3) (#237)
by Therac-25 on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 04:24:42 PM EST

Someone somewhere on Usenet had a great idea for that.

The key to warding off female attachment -- a house with no indoor plumbing.

They might hang around your place for a few days, mabye a month.  But modern women can't live without a bathroom.
 
--
"If there's one thing you can say about mankind / There's nothing kind about man."
[ Parent ]

btw, this is just end result of human evolution (2.00 / 3) (#136)
by circletimessquare on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 05:05:11 PM EST

for millions of years, before the rise of agriculture, humans and prehumans, and their survival, depended upon a division of roles in tribal life: women stay in the nucleus, caring for the children and preparing food, while men are out on the peripherary, protecting the tribe from marauders (or marauding themselves) and acquiring food

in such an environment, a quiet, sulking, nonresponsive, noncooperative female is not only of no use to the other females, but a drain on vital resources... and a gabby bubbly male will just get the other males killed

not coincidentally, we see in this division what is understood to be the roles of man and woman in the traditional nuclear family


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

Sorta. (2.50 / 2) (#148)
by spooked on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 07:17:17 PM EST

That changed when we became agriculturalists and was totally destroyed by industralization. The roles are evolutionary throw-backs but that doesn't stop them from being persistant throw-backs.

Seriously.
[ Parent ]
exactly (2.00 / 3) (#153)
by circletimessquare on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 07:44:15 PM EST

agriculture and industry have completely discombobulated these arrangements

agriculture and animal husbandry made men's life on the periphery redundant, while industry released women from being bound to the nucleus of society

but these tribal arrangements have been with us for so long, since before we were human, that our behavior has become rooted in our genes

not that we are utterly bound to these roles, but it explains our comfort levels and our fantasies

nowadays, career women and mr. moms are perfectly acceptable and functional

it is now the mechanics of reproduction, and that alone, which binds women now

bu someday, we'll grow our kids externally in artificial wombs, and eventually the last genetic/ mechanical vestige of our divided sexual roles past will be broken

and then sex will be solely for what it was intended by god: recreation ;-P


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

It always amuses me how (1.50 / 2) (#271)
by Comrade Wonderful on Wed Jun 28, 2006 at 02:06:52 PM EST

people claim with certainty that we exhibit custom or quality X because of Y or Z evolutionary pressures.  There is absolutely no way to know this, so people should not talk about it as if it is stone truth.

[ Parent ]
omg so many letters (2.33 / 3) (#141)
by tkatchevzz on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 05:54:23 PM EST

not to mention whitespace and punctuation symbols, as well.

[ Parent ]
I read that one (none / 1) (#222)
by Gruntathon on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 11:41:55 PM EST

I personally felt a strong sympathy for the male aloneness experienced by the main character. But I felt Samuel used it more as an anti-hero characteristic of his/her personality.

Did you also choose to ignore the lack of respect shown towards this personality characteristic as did Bron in the novel?
__________
If they hadn't been such quality beasts (despite being so young) it would have been a nightmare - good self-starting, capable hands are your finest friend. -- Anonymous CEO
[ Parent ]
Fuck that (2.88 / 9) (#99)
by Spendocrat on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:35:57 AM EST

angst-ridden books showing intellectual struggle, violence, personal vulnerability, catastrophe and the struggle to rise above circumstance ...

If "The Handmaiden's Tale" isn't about intellectual struggle, personal vulnerability, catastrophe, and the struggle to rise above circumstance, I'll eat my hat. The only thing that's missing is *overt* violence.

violence (2.83 / 6) (#105)
by binford2k on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 07:17:45 AM EST

Didn't you read the scene where all the handmaids beat and scratched and kicked the "convicted rapist" to death?

[ Parent ]
Oh man (2.50 / 2) (#137)
by Spendocrat on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 05:20:58 PM EST

I must have read it, but I completely forgot about it.

[ Parent ]
Handmaid's Tale (2.50 / 2) (#185)
by rusty on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 09:06:48 PM EST

..is actually by one of the few women authors I read with enjoyment. Margaret Atwood, Connie Willis, Laurie King, and of course Agatha Christie. That's about it. Obviously lots of others with a book or two I liked, but for the most part, I do notice a clear difference between writing by women and writing by men, and not to the advantage of the former.

So this whole study doesn't surprise me at all. And it sort of sounds like she thinks there shouldn't be any difference in what men read, and why, than what and why women read. I find that idea very odd.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

What about Ursula K. LeGuin? (none / 1) (#203)
by ElMiguel on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 06:14:04 PM EST

To be honest, she's the only other female author I can think of just know whose works I've enjoyed.

[ Parent ]
Meh (none / 1) (#205)
by rusty on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:01:08 PM EST

We had to read A Wizard of Earthsea in middle school. I actually made a model of the boat for a project related to that. But it didn't do much for me. It's the kind of fantasy that Terry Pratchett has since parodied into oblivion, for the most part, although at least a fairly well-written example of the genre.

It was a pretty sweet little model boat though.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

reading list (none / 1) (#215)
by Sacrifice on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 09:08:10 PM EST

Earthsea - kids' books.

You should borrow Dispossessed, and Left Hand of Darkness instead.

[ Parent ]

you're missing out (none / 0) (#272)
by i liked the old tags page better on Mon Aug 14, 2006 at 03:59:00 PM EST

there is much more to her than just earthsea

[ Parent ]
Connie Willis (none / 1) (#225)
by Spendocrat on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 02:54:08 AM EST

Is doin' it right. I even read her [essentially] romance novels!

[ Parent ]
Frankly (2.84 / 13) (#100)
by coillte on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 04:11:56 AM EST

as a male, I have very little interface with the results of the above studies. Which is just dandy.

Criticism one.  A liberal arts background (in English LIt and cultural studies) does not equip the researcher with the methodology and skills to implement and analyse a statistical study. I'd question, at the very least, her selection techniques. Bare minimum.

Criticism two. The photo manual jibe. It seems an entirely arbitrary comparison. I'd hazard the majority of men have never read one. It would be equally bizarre, arbitrary and biased if she were to say, of women, that they read novels like they read curling tong manuals. As an off the cuff remark it is perhaps revealing. Its certainly not an example of academic rigour. Its distinctly misandrist.

Re Jardines take on supposed male taste? Its difficult to accept the idea that Albert Camus, or Marquez have little literary worth. They are certainly no less valid as literary luminaries than Margaret Atwood.

That said, the field of Cultural Studies/Cultural History is littered with cantankerous cranks, misandrists, and incompetent loons. Its where the conspiracy theorists of lberal arts eke out a living.

_________________
"XVI The Blasted Tower. Here is purification through fire,lightning, flames, war...the eye is the eye of Shiva... the serpent on the right is the symbol of the active will to live,the dove on the left is passive resignation to death"

Rorred at "As a male..." (1.75 / 4) (#111)
by ksandstr on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 11:03:17 AM EST

Even a non-native english speaker like me knows that there's special words for "males" and "females" of certain species. For example, a male duck is called a drake, a female dog is called a bitch, a male chicken is a cock and a female chicken is a hen.

Likewise for humans the correct words are "man" and "woman", except in the case of infants. Stick an "y" somewhere in the latter if you really think it's that important. Using the biological terms, male and female, makes you sound like you were talking about test subjects, blocks of wood or slabs of meat. PC as it may be.

Fin.
[ Parent ]

The usage (2.75 / 4) (#115)
by coillte on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 11:48:56 AM EST

is correct. I am male. The phrase "as a male" is technically and grammatically correct. It is also clear, and precise. "As a man" would be equally correct, and would mean precisely the same thing in the context. It would be no more or less pc. Or clinical. You bizarre freak.
_____________________
"XVI The Blasted Tower. Here is purification through fire,lightning, flames, war...the eye is the eye of Shiva... the serpent on the right is the symbol of the active will to live,the dove on the left is passive resignation to death"
[ Parent ]
It's not PC (none / 1) (#159)
by livus on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:34:11 PM EST

just try referring to a woman as "a female, which likes books" instead of "a chick, who likes books" and see where it gets you.

 

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

KEEP YOUR Y CHROMOSOME... (2.50 / 2) (#170)
by BJH on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 09:23:02 AM EST

...OUT OF INFANTS PLZKTHXBYE.
--
Roses are red, violets are blue.
I'm schizophrenic, and so am I.
-- Oscar Levant

[ Parent ]
huh. (2.80 / 5) (#178)
by SnowBlind on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 12:37:37 PM EST

I thought "Photography Manual" was a euphemism for "Playboy".


There is but One Kernel, and root is His Prophet.
[ Parent ]
Actually (1.50 / 2) (#197)
by NoBeardPete on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 02:44:23 PM EST

English Lit and Cultural studies do not constitute a liberal arts education. This is a peeve of mine. The original seven liberal arts are grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmatic, music, geometry, and astronomy. These were the skills considered appropriate for a free man (hence, "liberal", from "liberty"), as opposed to one who works for a living.

A liberal arts education was instil in a person a broad and capable mind. To try to tie mathematical and scientific illiteracy to liberal arts, as you do, is to misunderstand liberal arts.


Arrr, it be the infamous pirate, No Beard Pete!
[ Parent ]

I (2.50 / 2) (#199)
by coillte on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 04:31:55 PM EST

don't think it is. Not currently at least. The use of "liberal arts" in its current context does not mean that. Nor has it been for a hell of a long time. Since the middle ages. When they were referred to in Latin as the artes liberales, comprising the Trivium and Quadruvium(?).

But that hasn't really been the case since the Renaissance now, has it. The move from Scholasticism to Humanism (which is, after all, primarily in the broader cultural sense a radical change in curriculum taht we're talking about, in the 1400's), or from limited Aristotle to Plato (to grossly oversimplify) would roughly mark it.  Florence in the 1400's basically, particularly (though this is open to dispute)with the founding of Greek studies  by the Medici after the fall of Constantinople  would mark the move fairly definitively, although Petrarch began the move with his new curriculum earlier than this.

Anyway, by the 1600's, in all the major universities, the medieveal liberal arts have given way to the post Petrarchian humanist curriculum, the foreunner of the modern liberal arts.

If your pet peeves are things that have changed since the Renaissance, how do you find time to post?

_______________
"XVI The Blasted Tower. Here is purification through fire,lightning, flames, war...the eye is the eye of Shiva... the serpent on the right is the symbol of the active will to live,the dove on the left is passive resignation to death"
[ Parent ]

You're right, of course (2.50 / 2) (#202)
by NoBeardPete on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 05:56:46 PM EST

What people mean when they say "Liberal Arts" has changed. What they've retained is the sense that it doesn't train you to do useful work, that it isn't preparing you for a trade. What they've lost is the sense that it should result in a broad base of knowledge, an ability to discuss a multitude of topics intelligently, an ability to engage meaningfully in all parts of the political process. It's come to be a euphemism for "Mathematically and scientifically illiterate". Which is a shame, because that's exactly what we don't need out of an educational system now.

What we need are people who do have mathematical and scientific literacy. Not because these skills will help one get a job (although they probably will), but because for our society to make good decisions, it desperately needs a populace who can understand an increasingly complex world.

You're right. The meaning of the phrase has changed, as the meanings of many phrases do. It's the nature of language. I suppose this bothers me more than usual because I feel this change is being used as a coverup, to legitimize a shitty job job of teaching incurious people. If you want a broad education, study literature, history, linguistics, psychology, music, yes, but also learn how the scientific process works, learn some math, economics maybe, game theory. If you want a narrow education, fine, just don't try to pass itself off as something it's not.


Arrr, it be the infamous pirate, No Beard Pete!
[ Parent ]

Literature and its place (2.77 / 9) (#101)
by destroy all monsters on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 05:11:57 AM EST

What I find interesting is what ends up being defined as literature and what doesn't - and why. I'd consider the Hobbit genre fiction (fantasy). I'd consider almost everything on the "women's" list genre fiction (gothic romance for the most part).

Far more eloquent folks have already stated how rating one above the other is poppycock. Yet, the only things I find of interest in fiction would tend to be in the science fiction/fantasy/noir and/or horror realms. Who gets to decide what serious fiction is? I'd certainly prefer to re-read the Diamond Age than anything on either list.

It is my belief that good fiction (like good acting) teaches us about ourselves and the human condition - anything past that is of no importance whatsoever.

"My opinion: You're gay, a troll, a gay troll, or in serious need of antidepressants." - horny smurf to Lemon Juice

The Hobbit and the Fantasy Genre (2.50 / 2) (#198)
by NoBeardPete on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 03:06:01 PM EST

"The Hobbit" should be understood as not just a book that falls within the fantasy genre, but a book that did a great deal to create the fantasy genre. Tolkein basically invented the modern conception of fantasy, and "The Hobbit" is the start of that. Labelling "The Hobbit" as genre fiction, then, seems rather silly.


Arrr, it be the infamous pirate, No Beard Pete!
[ Parent ]

Agree and disagree (none / 1) (#226)
by destroy all monsters on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 03:25:56 AM EST

I agree with your first sentence but Tolkein no more created modern fantasy fiction any more than C.S. Lewis did with his Chronicles of Narnia. Even then, it is an evolution of past myths and legends.

See, you could claim the same about say, Black Sabbath but it would be far from inappropriate to label them as heavy metal.

Regardless, this is a minor point and one interesting only in historical terms rather than a definitive one. It *is* fantasy and fantasy *is* genre fiction.

If you'd like to write an article on genre fiction and how it came to be I support you in that endeavor - however your point takes away from the more significant (or at least larger canvas) points that I'm making.

"My opinion: You're gay, a troll, a gay troll, or in serious need of antidepressants." - horny smurf to Lemon Juice
[ Parent ]

-1. (1.06 / 16) (#109)
by J for Vendetta on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:42:24 AM EST

After carefully reading your article and considering its various pros and cons, I've decided it's not quite what I am looking for in a Kuro5hin article.

As such, I am forced to give this submission a -1. Better luck next time.


Natalie Portman: Are you going to vote -1 on more articles?
J: Yes.



PWNED NT (none / 0) (#132)
by spooked on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 04:19:51 PM EST



Seriously.
[ Parent ]
+1 FP, Excellent! (1.60 / 5) (#116)
by Psychology Sucks on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 12:01:16 PM EST

I usually F-1CTION, but this article is superb.  Bravo.

¡VIVA PLUS UNO! (none / 1) (#118)
by Mylakovich on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 12:57:14 PM EST

Now that Josh Farien is dead, I shall redirect the aims of the revolution to suit a more populist goal.

*sigh* there is a little Ferien in us all (none / 0) (#121)
by maynard on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 01:08:01 PM EST

let us pray, for our souls may be cast unto eternal hell

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
s/for/that/g (none / 1) (#140)
by tkatchevzz on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 05:52:20 PM EST

OMG SATON

[ Parent ]
congrats maynard! /nt (2.16 / 6) (#122)
by terryfunk on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 01:50:25 PM EST



I like you, I'll kill you last. - Killer Clown
The ScuttledMonkey: A Story Collection

reminds me of a classic (3.00 / 34) (#123)
by Lode Runner on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 02:15:46 PM EST

In-class assignment for Wednesday April 5, 2006: Tandem Story. Each person will pair off with the person sitting next to them. One of you will then write the first paragraph of a short story. The partner will read the first paragraph and then add another paragraph to the story. The first person will then add a third paragraph, and so on until both people agree a conclusion has been reached. The story must be coherent, and each paragraph relevant to the prior one.

. . . and here's what one pair turned in!

Rebecca <surname> and Gary <surname>
English 144A
Creative Writing
Prof. <name>

At first, Laurie couldn't decide which kind of tea she wanted. The camomile, which used to be her favorite for lazy evenings at home, now reminded her too much of Carl, who had once said in happier times, that he liked camomile. But she felt she must now, at all costs, keep her mind off Carl. His possessiveness was suffocating, and if she thought about him too much her asthma started acting up again. So camomile was out of the question.

Meanwhile, Advance Team Captain Carl Harris was leading his patrol squadron into orbit over Skylon 4. Carl had more important things to think about than the neuroses of that air-headed asthmatic woman named Laurie who, after one sweaty night over three months ago, was still desperately clinging to an illusion of a relationship she had fabricated in her unbalanced mind. "Alpha Tango One to Geostation One-Niner-Three", he said into his subspace communicator. "Polar orbit established. No sign of resistance..." But before he could sign off a bluish plasma beam flashed out of nowhere and blasted a hole through his ship's cargo bay. The jolt from the direct hit threw him out of his seat and into the cockpit control panel.

He hit his head and died almost immediately, but not before he felt one last pang of regret for psychically brutalizing the one woman who had ever had feelings for him. Soon afterwards, Earth stopped its pointless hostilities towards the peaceful farmers of Skylon 4. "Congress Passes Law Permanently Abolishing War and Space Travel", Laurie read in her newspaper one morning. The news simultaneously excited her and bored her. She stared out the window, dreaming of her youth -- when the days had passed unhurriedly and carefree, with no newspapers to read, no television to distract her from her sense of innocent wonder at all the beautiful things around her. "Why must one lose one's innocence to become a woman?" she pondered wistfully.

Little did she know, but she has less than 10 seconds to live. Thousands of miles above the city, the Anu'udrian battleship launched the first of its lithium fusion missiles. The dim-witted, bleeding-heart peaceniks who pushed the Unilateral Aerospace Disarmament Treaty through the U.N. had left Earth a defenseless target for the hostile alien empire who was determined to enslave the human race. Within two hours after the passage of the treaty the Anu'udrian ships were on course for Earth, carrying enough firepower to pulverize the entire planet and nothing to stop them. They swiftly initiated their diabolical plan. The lithium fusion missile entered the atmosphere unimpeded. The President, in a submarine off the coast of Guam, felt the inconceivably massive explosion which vaporized Laurie and 15 million other Americans. He slammed his fist on the conference table. "I KNEW this would happen! I am exercising my executive privledge to annul that treaty effective IMMEADIATELY! Ready the nukes, we're gonna blow those bastards out of the sky!"

This is absurd. I refuse to continue this mockery of literature. My writing partner is a violent, chauvinistic, semi-literate adolescent.

Yeah? Well, you're a self-centered tedious neurotic whose attempts at writing are the literary equivalent of Valium.

Asshole.

Bitch.

Perhaps... (2.80 / 5) (#124)
by A synx on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:06:27 PM EST

Perhaps I could care less about the article, save that my tax dollars are going to waste to fund such studies, but this story was damn good. XD

[ Parent ]
Great post! $ (1.66 / 3) (#127)
by akostic on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:53:22 PM EST


--
"After an indeterminate amount of time trading insane laughter with the retards, I grew curious and tapped on the window." - osm
[ Parent ]
MORE PLZ. THX. (2.85 / 7) (#130)
by spooked on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 04:13:17 PM EST



Seriously.
[ Parent ]
NO LESS (none / 1) (#138)
by tkatchevzz on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 05:51:26 PM EST

NO

[ Parent ]
oh man, sounds like k5 talking about iraq nt (1.33 / 3) (#134)
by circletimessquare on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 04:42:45 PM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
I'd 'a finished with Cunt (1.50 / 4) (#164)
by IceTitan on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 01:18:28 AM EST

But that's just how I roll.
Nuke 'em from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
[ Parent ]
dude! (2.66 / 3) (#165)
by bunk on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 05:20:18 AM EST

that's gotta be made up by someone to illustrate the point, it's too perfect to be a real example, bloody funny tho


hunger strike + bong hits = super munchies -- horny smurf
[ Parent ]
artists lie to reveal the truth, sometimes /nt (2.87 / 8) (#179)
by Lode Runner on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 02:28:18 PM EST



[ Parent ]
+1, Taxi Driver. § (none / 1) (#195)
by New Me on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 11:08:05 AM EST


--
"He hallucinated, freaked out, his aneurysm popped, and he died. Happened to me once." --Lode Runner
[ Parent ]

Other comments (2.75 / 4) (#125)
by The Diary Section on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:15:17 PM EST

pretty similar to our own thus far really, here.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
I always kind of thought women's literature (2.50 / 6) (#133)
by thankyougustad on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 04:21:22 PM EST

was a bit of an oxymoron. They really don't write about anything of any interest to anyone.

I consider this statement to carry as much weight as the statement's made by this professor, who probably has an MFA, which is like going to culinary school.

No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

click on the link (2.75 / 4) (#152)
by The Diary Section on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 07:28:41 PM EST

MA, PhD from Cambridge and is also a CBE (Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire).

Doesn't make her comments any more sensible though.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]

Yeah (2.50 / 2) (#154)
by thankyougustad on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 08:07:44 PM EST

The point is though, what place really does an academic have in talking about literature. The old adage about those who can doing and those who can't teach has a note of truth to it. Academia and literature may be in bed together, but real literature trancends anything academia can do to try and limit or class it.

No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

[ Parent ]
Could we please go back to calling it The Stranger (2.77 / 9) (#151)
by thankyougustad on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 07:27:44 PM EST

For a second I thought there was some Camus I'd never heard of.

No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

Are you talking about The Outsider? (none / 0) (#248)
by spasticfraggle on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:40:06 PM EST

It's been called that ever since I can remember. Is this just US English vs. English again? Yawn :-)

--
I'm the straw that broke the camel's back!
[ Parent ]
I guess so. funny difference (none / 0) (#250)
by thankyougustad on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 04:56:07 PM EST

and ultimately unimportant. though just thinking to myself I can't help but say : etymologically The Stranger is a better translation of L'etranger than the outsider.

No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

[ Parent ]
The Outsider is a better translation (none / 1) (#254)
by jupiter8 on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:22:52 AM EST

Think of the protagonist and then compare the definitions:

http://www.lexilogos.com/francais_langue_dictionnaires.htm

ÉTRANGER, ÈRE,

b) (Celui, celle) qui est sans lien, sans rapport avec quelque chose, qui ne se mêle pas de quelque chose, qui est indifférent(e) à quelque chose, qui n'a pas de notion de quelque chose.

(One with no bounds or relation to something, who isn't involved with something, who is indifferent of something, who has no concept of something)

http://www.dictionary.com

out·sid·er
n.
   1.
         1. One who is excluded from a party, association, or set.
         2. One who is isolated or detached from the activities or concerns of his or her own community.

strang·er
n.

   1. One who is neither a friend nor an acquaintance.
   2. A foreigner, newcomer, or outsider.
   3. One who is unaccustomed to or unacquainted with something specified; a novice: a stranger to our language; no stranger to hardship.
   4. A visitor or guest.
   5. Law. One that is neither privy nor party to a title, act, or contract.


[ Parent ]

so what's wrong with me? (2.33 / 3) (#156)
by wampswillion on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 08:33:41 PM EST

i pretty much love salinger, camus, and marquez.

Apparently you are (3.00 / 3) (#157)
by The Diary Section on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:12:41 PM EST

an adolescent boy.
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]
apparently. (none / 0) (#162)
by wampswillion on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:48:25 PM EST



[ Parent ]
when I was younger (2.75 / 4) (#158)
by minerboy on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:27:50 PM EST

I would occasionally meet women who liked those tpyes of books, films, etc. 9 times out of 10, to my disappointment, they'd turn out to be dykes.



[ Parent ]
well i have (3.00 / 10) (#161)
by wampswillion on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 09:47:48 PM EST

never turned out to be a dyke. but then i've never met you.  so maybe it's not the choice in literature that's done it, but the meeting you?  

[ Parent ]
I therefore award you the (3.00 / 2) (#230)
by bml on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 05:49:41 AM EST

prestigious Winston Churchill award in the category of "Best Reply To An Insidious Comment in K5" for April 2006.

The Internet is vast, and contains many people. This is the way of things. -- Russell Dovey
[ Parent ]
best churchill quote (1.50 / 2) (#232)
by wampswillion on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 09:06:46 AM EST

We are all worms. But I believe that I am a glow-worm.


[ Parent ]
churchill was gay (1.50 / 2) (#245)
by minerboy on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 06:39:40 AM EST

but was in the closet



[ Parent ]
What we knew all along: (none / 0) (#168)
by BJH on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 09:14:37 AM EST

You're a guy.
--
Roses are red, violets are blue.
I'm schizophrenic, and so am I.
-- Oscar Levant

[ Parent ]
gosh and i (none / 1) (#177)
by wampswillion on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 12:22:20 PM EST

am wearing such a clever disguise.  

[ Parent ]
You know (none / 0) (#270)
by Comrade Wonderful on Wed Jun 28, 2006 at 02:00:25 PM EST

the thing that totally ROCKS about you is that hanging out with you is JUST LIKE hanging out with one of the GUYS but you are LIKE a GIRL and that is SO cool.

[ Parent ]
Hell is Jane Austen (2.75 / 16) (#169)
by IHCOYC on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 09:21:29 AM EST

Really: I can't imagine a worse afterlife than to be compelled to hobnob with the women who populate Jane Austen's novels. A world of dramatic events involving scientific discovery and Napoleonic war surrounded them, and its influence never penetrates their social milieu. Instead, their sole concern is with marrying money, while remaining within the boundaries of an elaborate, frivolous, and treacherous etiquette.
--
"Complecti antecessores tuos in spelæis stygiis Tartari appara," eructavit miles primus.
"Vix dum basiavisti vicarium velocem Mortis," rediit G
Why aren't men (3.00 / 5) (#173)
by Grayworld on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 11:08:31 AM EST

reading contemporary literary fiction? I think they just find more satisfaction in actually doing and accomplishing things, whether they be trivial or great, than they are reading fiction.

I also think men, much more than women, prefer to read things that they believe can help them in achieving some professional or personal goal. They believe biographical, historical and technical stuff help guide them through the more difficult or significant crossroads in their lives much more than fiction. They prefer to draw lessons from reality rather than from what they consider essentially fantasy.

Finally, I think part of the answer lies in simple time management. Our lives are becoming ever more complicated. We need to know more about everything to stay even professionally and personally and culturally. We have more choices to explore more subjects all over the world now with the internet. There is simply less time to devote to fiction. There is too much reality to deal with.


Fair but a bit unbalanced to be sure!

contemporary lit is garbage (2.50 / 4) (#175)
by thankyougustad on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 11:30:42 AM EST

men can spend their entire lives reading nothing but the classics and still not finish them all.

No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

[ Parent ]
Not only time management (1.50 / 4) (#263)
by Prophet themusicgod1 on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 07:17:56 AM EST

Couldn't have said it better if I tried.

Not only time management, but reality management (mindshare management? memory management?). There's simply too much going on and while fiction can be enjoyable and illuminating, in, say, quantum physics alone there's enough information to keep a person digging through papers until they drown. And there's enough variety between different aspects of, say, computer science to keep a person from becoming stagnant for a long time.

I know I don't read nearly as much as I used to; I used to put away at least two 300 page books per week. Now the only way I can read a dozen 'stories' a *semester* is if they are small (cory doctorow's printcrime), or completely devoid of content, becuase anything else takes too much precious time.
"I suspect the best way to deal with procrastination is to put off the procrastination itself until later. I've been meaning to try this, but haven't gotten around to it yet."swr
[ Parent ]
What is good literature anyway? (2.83 / 6) (#174)
by Roman on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 11:20:25 AM EST

I read Jane Eyre when I was 12 and I didn't like it.  I read The Handmaid's Tale when I was 22 and I did like it.  I never read Hobbit, but I read LOTR in 3 different languages at different times.  I read Orwell when I was 15, and then later at 25, I liked it both times but for somewhat different reasons (at 15 I was still back in the USSR, or what was left of it in 91, at 25 I was in Canada.)

However I always preferred reading Sci Fi, Spy stuff, the Crime and Detective stuff, Adventure, and some fantasy to all other genres.  

Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra's Don Quixote de la Mancha

Stanislaw Lem's Solaris, The Invincible, Capitan Ijon Tichi (Star Diaries,) Eden, Moloch.  

Asimov's I Robot series, the Caves of Steel series and the Foundation series.  

Duma's The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years After, Ten Years Later, The Black Tulip, The Count of Monte Cristo, The Man in the Iron Mask, The Vicomte de Bragelonne.  

Robert Louis Stevenson the Treasure Island.

Jewel Vernes,

H. G. Wells,

Mark Twain,

Jack London,

Maine Reed's The Headless Rider,

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and his Sherlock Holmes series,

Agatha Christie with her Miss Marple, her Hercule,

Alexander Beliaev and his Professor Dowell's Head, Amphibian Man, Ariel, The Star Kets

Alexei Tolstoy and his Aelita

Tolkien and LOTR

and there are so many more...

If all of these writers are not good enough for Professor Lisa Jardine, that's fine, I'll take them and read them and reread them and then read them some more, and noone can ever convince me that they are not good literature.

What is wrong with photography manuals? (2.50 / 4) (#183)
by bacterio on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 06:31:34 PM EST

I was going through my Amazon wishlist and none of the books are fiction (except Clide Fans, but this is a comic). I do not see clearly why reading fiction is a good thing, as opposed to say, reading a manual on networks or a history book.

not everyone is boring n/t (1.00 / 3) (#184)
by thankyougustad on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 08:12:09 PM EST



No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

[ Parent ]
I disagree. (none / 0) (#276)
by grargrargrar on Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 06:32:56 PM EST

Strenuously.

[ Parent ]
Context (2.66 / 3) (#231)
by curien on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 06:54:27 AM EST

The study's author backs an award for fiction written by women. She decries men's dominance in recognizing good fiction by portraying them as uninterested in it.

--
We are not the same. I'm an American, and you're a sick asshole.
[ Parent ]
Her list of Top 5 Female Novels is B.S. (2.71 / 7) (#193)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:00:26 AM EST

Those are the top 5 female-read novels for a VERY select group of women. Ask any of the women on my little suburban street, chock-full of Liberal Arts University-educated Soccer-moms, and what will you find as the top 5: 4 novels in the Chick-lit genre and a book about weight loss/no-traditional spiritual enlightenment.

This article is good, but the article it references is total crap.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.

We can skip all the harsh noise (2.33 / 3) (#194)
by tert on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:23:06 AM EST

and go directly to the core of the matter. There are no women giving out awards for fiction because most women have abhorrent tastes in fiction. No need to dance around it, the genders are different.

Allow me to filter a bit of cruft out of your .. (none / 0) (#277)
by pierrebz on Wed Nov 14, 2007 at 06:06:12 PM EST

.. excellent point.

I suggest that the misappropriation of the word gender as a euphemism for the word sex dilutes your meaning.  

Gender is politically correct but anatomically incorrect sex. As such, it certainly does not belong at the core of this matter.

To elucidate at the risk of appearing pedantic:

Gender is the term for the sex of words as opposed to the sex of objects.  Something which occurs in some languages other than English.

e.g.

Spanish: el mar (m)  la lluvia (f)
French: la plume (f) l'oiseau (m)

It's not the sea, the rain, the feather or the  bird's sexes, it's the genders of those words.

[ Parent ]

On great literature... (1.75 / 4) (#196)
by Fon2d2 on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 12:47:18 PM EST

I would guess that most people don't read or read very little. This is a statement of the times more than it is a statement about people. More direct forms of entertainment, such as television and movies, are available now and are generally preferred. I, however, find that the written word is capable of a far greater dymanic range and subtlety of expression, and is therefore, ironically, a more direct form of self-expression. Literature, is therefore capable of many things that are either difficult or impossible in movies.

This distinction is mostly unappreciated however by our society. Consequently, there has been a noticeable decline in vocabulary and writing style since the Victorian era. To me, this is painfully obvious when placing classical literature such as Dickens or a well translated Cervantes side by side with 20th century authors such as Dan Brown or Kurt Vonnegut. Not that I would place either Brown or Vonnegut in the same distinction of literature as Dickens or Cervantes however, but they are the books of today. Brown and Vonnegut both seem to entertain for entertainment's sake. Vonnegut seems to have more depth but I find this depth to be somewhat illusory, something akin to a parlor trick.

Some people here have commented on the difference in eras preferred by men and women. I find this interesting as I would place mostly the older, classical works in the area of literature. The wider vocabulary and more erudite writing style gives these authors a higher command over language which results in a more expressive and more direct style. Mastery of the language is not enough however, to be a true work of art in my opinion. Poignant observations on life and the nature of humanity are also necessary. These are not told just in the way the characters interact and develop. It is in the subtext of the entire novel. It is an awareness of the characters' abilities, limitations, strengths, weaknesses, naivities, misconceptions and so forth on the part of the author that is slowly transmitted to the reader through the course of the novel. In this way, the reader gains real wisdom in addition to a compelling story.

Most books do not really manage to meet these criteria. The outstanding example from the list of books I have read is David Copperfield by Charles Dickens. I have noticed that many contemporary books have endorsements on their jackets implying that the author has in some manner matched or bested Dickens. These are categorically untrue. Do not believe them for an instant.

The most interesting modern author in my opinion is J.K. Rowling. I have noticed an awareness of her characters that speaks of a deeper understanding on her part. This is also blended with a fairly compelling story telling style to provide both entertainment and insight. This, in part, explains her massive popularity. But the Harry Potter series falls flat a lot more easily as well. This may be in part due to the plain language in which the novels are written. Such language may limit the subtlety and expressiveness that makes some novels truly delightful. The novels also show a lack of creativity in some other aspects that can make some aspects of the story something more akin to a prop. Where these aspects become weaved into the plot, the story as a whole necessarily loses. This seems not to be a minor problem for the Potter series.

Of the books on the list preferred by women, I have not read Pride and Prejudice, but I am currently reading Sense and Sensibility and I am expecting to gain something from it. I am only far enough in to establish the main characters and a couple of the romantic interests, so it will be interesting to see how Jane Austen develops them. The introduction, however, gave the impression that the book is a somewhat failed social statement. Not failed because it does not resonante with the outer world, but failed because Austen ultimately failed to get where she'd intended and ended up forcing some elements of the story in the end. It's a bit of a downer for an introduction, which begs the question why the publisher would include it. I suppose because the book is a classic and the introduction is included more for educational purposes than as a selling point, because at the point where you are reading the introduction, whatever it says is probably not a selling point for you anyway.

(Now to BS a point to my post...) In the end, I think it's funny to make a distinction the way Jardine does. Most people don't care about more expressive or subtle forms of art anyway. Books and television are the same in a lot of ways in that both provide basal entertainment; Books simply have more potential. Trying to influence the opinion of the public or draw inferences based on those opinions seems an exercise in pointlessness as applied to (what most would consider) such an esoteric aspect of life. Worse, she seems to be inexorably caught up in the results of her research, making value judgements based off it or using it to affirm value judgements she has already made. She is most likely tangled in a web of conceptions and subjectivity (necessary for such research) the extent of which even she is not aware. In short, though Jardine's conclusions may be interesting and provide points for further thought, they should not be taken to heart.

You obviously (none / 1) (#233)
by stuaart on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 10:39:30 AM EST

haven't read much modern fiction. Or at least the right modern fiction.

You are a traditionalist through and through.

Linkwhore: [Hidden stories.] Baldrtainment: Corporate concubines and Baldrson: An Introspective


[ Parent ]
Top 5 fiction books for real men (2.25 / 4) (#200)
by nlscb on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 05:09:32 PM EST

1) The Hunt for Red October

2) Jurassic Park

3) Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

4) Neuromancer

5) Return of the Dark Knight

Comment Search has returned - Like a beaten wife, I am pathetically grateful. - mr strange

If by "real men" you mean ... (2.71 / 7) (#214)
by Ignore Amos on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 08:38:14 PM EST

... "pathetic adolescent shut-ins", then I fully agree.

And that explains why airplanes carry cargo on small boats floating in their cargo aquarium. - jmzero
[ Parent ]

Wintermute ringing phones is teh gay (3.00 / 2) (#216)
by Lode Runner on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 09:18:30 PM EST

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, now there's a real man's science fiction novel featuring an AI.

Douglas Adams screams "pansy" too. That Larry Niven is missing from this list makes me think you're probably one of those effeminates you sometimes see at GenCon. You know, the ones who give each other reacharounds while on line at the Dragonriders of Pern booth.

Why isn't Storm of Steel--or at least Charles Ingrid's Sand Wars trilogy--on this list?!?!?

TANSTAAFL!

[ Parent ]

Can't believe I forgot about Mannie (none / 0) (#218)
by nlscb on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 09:37:18 PM EST

He would totally kick Case's ass, just like ninjas wouldn't stand a chance against some good ol' english pirates!

Comment Search has returned - Like a beaten wife, I am pathetically grateful. - mr strange
[ Parent ]

Chuck Palahniuk is missing too (none / 1) (#220)
by Lode Runner on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 10:29:52 PM EST

Anyway, that three-breasted midget whore in Total Recall could kick Case's ass too.

[ Parent ]
The Forever War. (none / 1) (#223)
by Russell Dovey on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 12:02:38 AM EST

Hard-core science fiction war story, among the best of all time.

"Blessed are the cracked, for they let in the light." - Spike Milligan
[ Parent ]

maybe for whiny girly-men... (none / 1) (#244)
by Lode Runner on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 05:11:07 AM EST

Dear Ms. Dovey,

Even the fucking Oberlin humanities professor in John Scalzi's Old Man's War had more balls than any of Joe Haldeman's supposedly battle-hardened characters:

    And so Maggie, whose SmartBlood was by now reaching its oxygen-carrying limit and whose body was undoubtedly beginning to scream for oxygen, took her Empee, aimed it at the nearest Ohu ship, computed a trajectory, and unloaded rocket after rocket. Each rocket burst provided an equal and opposite burst of thrust to Maggie, speeding her toward Temperance's darkened, night-time sky. Battle data would later show that her rockets, propellent long spent, did indeed impact against the Ohu ship, dealing some minor damage.

    Then Maggie turned, faced the planet that would kill her, and like a good professor of Eastern religions the she used to be, she composed jisei, the death poem in haiku form.

    Do not mourn me friends
    I fall as a shooting star
    Into the next life

    . . . and I bet she was a hell of a shooting star.

Manfully,
Lod E. Runner

[ Parent ]

Yeah, I just read that one too. (none / 0) (#265)
by Russell Dovey on Thu Apr 27, 2006 at 08:09:44 AM EST

Did you pick it up after the post on boingboing?

Anyway, sure Old Man's War was harder-corer than Forever War, but Haldeman is one of the giants that Scalzi had to stand on to reach those heights, my friend.

"Blessed are the cracked, for they let in the light." - Spike Milligan
[ Parent ]

Jurassic Park? (2.50 / 2) (#246)
by Pxtl on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 08:35:24 AM EST

Jurassic-freaking'-park?  I read that in middle school and even I could tell it sucked... and I was reading Piers Anthony at the time.

Oh, and "The Dark Knight Returns" is just more adolescent fantasy crap from Frank Miller.  Rugged monologueing hero has Whole World Against Him and Beats Up Villains.  The only thing it adds to traditional comics is (a) more brutal violence, and (b) repetative, melodramatic monologues.  You read it through, and then read Sin City, and realise how incredibly, painfully formulaic he is.  It's Jerry Pournelle's characters (which are all placeholders for people and groups he dislikes, except for The Rugged Hero and The Insane Villain) combined with Tarantino's violence, but without Pournelle's creativity or Tarantino's style.

Agreed on Neuromancer.  Read the rest of the series - Count Zero is, imho, even better than the first book.

[ Parent ]

There is nothing more manly (none / 0) (#269)
by Comrade Wonderful on Wed Jun 28, 2006 at 01:57:26 PM EST

than when doods walk around quoting HHG2TG.

[ Parent ]
Ursula K. Le Guin (2.75 / 4) (#201)
by circletimessquare on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 05:49:17 PM EST

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_K._Le_Guin

i always dug her

and not all that earthsea crap, i'm talking about stuff like her short stories

like that planet where all of the plants roots link together to form one giant brain, and drive the people who go there mad

or that perfect utopian society: no poverty no crime... except for that one teenager chained in his own filth that everyone is required to visit

i forget the names of these short stories, but they always left a deep impression on me, and her writing themes/ style always seemed distinctly feminine to me. in other words, the violence was always subvert, not overt

which is true about females in general: they are actually usually more violent than men, but in social ways, rather than physical ways

if you compare violence among grade school girls versus grade school boys, at first glance, boys seem much more violent: it's all fisticuffs. but if you include social violence: purposely damamging someone else's feelings with words to their face and rumors behind their backs, than the girls are off the charts compared to the boys

men will solve conflict by bashing each other in the face, which can of course be permanently disfiguring and threaten death. but mens' violence is shallow: the next day they are friends

women on the other hand will solve conflict by constructing lies about each other, and ruin the reputation and cast doubt on their integrity. therefore, women's violence is rich deep complex and very involved. it's all about long-term sabotage, and can be quite evil

men can kill each other, sure, and that's pretty evil in itself, but its shallow and quickly flares up and disappears. but women go about low grade social guerrilla warfare, destroying each other psychologically and socially


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

Ursula K. Le Guin (2.75 / 4) (#228)
by bml on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 05:25:13 AM EST

Good premises, poor execution.

The Internet is vast, and contains many people. This is the way of things. -- Russell Dovey
[ Parent ]
story of my life... that's why i like her? nt (1.00 / 2) (#229)
by circletimessquare on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 05:47:50 AM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
IDNAWTP. (2.50 / 2) (#234)
by tetsuwan on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 11:05:15 AM EST

The Dispossessed was great.

Njal's Saga: Just like Romeo & Juliet without the romance
[ Parent ]

are you nuts? (2.33 / 3) (#235)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 01:37:29 PM EST

examples or stfu.

left hand of darkness - great
disposessed - great

in fact, most of the Hain saga stuff is without peer.


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]

This article is obviously a joke! (1.75 / 4) (#224)
by petrochemical on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 02:31:09 AM EST

"The researchers also found that women preferred old, well-thumbed paperbacks, whereas men had a slight fixation with the stiff covers of hardback books."

The homo-erotic implications are mind-boggling ... This article has certainly succeeded in its purpose, which was to wind people up!



Do you have any qualifications? (1.42 / 7) (#239)
by sllort on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 07:25:49 PM EST

I noticed you didn't list any, but you're criticizing two University professors. It doesn't appear that you're qualified to make an argument.
--
Warning: On Lawn is a documented liar.
that's an ivory tower (2.50 / 2) (#247)
by thankyougustad on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 09:45:39 AM EST

the university professor, at the very least, doesn't seem to have any academic background in statistics.

No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

[ Parent ]
Just one University Professor (2.50 / 2) (#251)
by maynard on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 11:34:03 PM EST

The other, Ms. Watts, appears to have only a Masters:

Annie gained a BA in English at QM in 2002, before going on to do a core MA in eighteenth- century and early-nineteenth-century writing and society. Whilst at undergraduate level she developed an interest in psychoanalysis and its ability to bridge the gap between the eighteenth century and modern culture; choosing to incorporate this into her MA by taking a modernist module with Prof Jacqueline Rose. Her MA thesis, Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Individual in Eighteenth Century Utopian Society, enabled her to combine the works of Sigmund Freud with that of the lesser-known eighteenth century utopian novelist Sarah Scott. Annie is currently working on a doctoral thesis at CELL which addresses concepts of fame and celebrity in the eighteenth century. Her work centres on Samuel Richardson, his epistolary novel Clarissa and the 'fan mail' he accumulated during exchanges of letters with his varied and numerous correspondents.

You should read the links.

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]

I couldn't find the link about your qualifications (1.33 / 3) (#252)
by sllort on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:02:52 AM EST

Is there one?
--
Warning: On Lawn is a documented liar.
[ Parent ]
yeah - "writer on teh internets" (1.66 / 3) (#253)
by maynard on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:11:49 AM EST

with a Ph.Spew

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
What, no righteous indignation? (1.00 / 2) (#256)
by sllort on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 07:16:19 PM EST

It's a pity. You used to be the king of the ad hominem argument, I was hoping I might get a little bit of crybabying out of you. Not that I was subtle about turning the tables, but still.
--
Warning: On Lawn is a documented liar.
[ Parent ]
bow before me sllort (1.00 / 2) (#262)
by maynard on Tue Apr 18, 2006 at 02:37:11 PM EST

for I am your king

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
It's ok (none / 1) (#266)
by sllort on Thu Apr 27, 2006 at 08:20:34 PM EST

Kings still crybaby now and then. Pleaaaase? For old time's sake?
--
Warning: On Lawn is a documented liar.
[ Parent ]
Wah! Wah! WAAAAAH!!! $ (1.50 / 2) (#267)
by maynard on Thu Apr 27, 2006 at 09:20:52 PM EST

Oh oh. I think I just shit my pants

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
stereotype-conform self-descriptions (2.00 / 3) (#240)
by mhermans on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 09:31:12 PM EST

Forgoing the literary discussion, and offering a quick note from the (undergraduate) perspective of social psychology: one should keep in mind that (verbal) descriptions of behaviour -- including our own behaviour -- are deeply (and unconciously) influenced by pervailing stereotypes if we lack clear information/comparison points.

An example is the self-description of experienced emotions [Robinson et. al., 1998 (linky)], and I wouldn't be suprised if there is an equal significant impact when nominating your "milestone book". Can't really imagine David Cameron picking some 'chick-lit' as "as his watershed book"...



Watershed fiction (2.50 / 2) (#243)
by livus on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 04:32:09 AM EST

"Help us find the top 10 novels that have changed the way we see women by nminating your choice."

BBC Radio talks to Lisa Jardine.

Now I understand. It's a comparison between apples and oranges.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

So, basically, her point is... (2.40 / 5) (#249)
by illissius on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 04:33:06 PM EST

Men and women have different taste, therefore, men are inferior.

More like... (none / 0) (#273)
by Wen Jian on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 04:33:29 PM EST

" Men like X, Women I know and value like Y, men are wrong and bad."

I love it. This is the sort of irrational shit that liberal arts women (and to be fair, main men studying socialogy and crap like that, too) love to spout constantly. Not only does it infer that no matter how well educated a women is, the pinnacle of her achievement will be telling men they're wrong on spurious grounds, but she is committing an act of class oppression against her sister women by excluding women from less salubrious backgrounds in order to raise the chances that she'll get a set of books that the supposedly male-dominated intellectual world will consider 'not shite'.
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
[ Parent ]

And furthermore... (none / 0) (#274)
by Wen Jian on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 04:35:42 PM EST

Men Like books about exclusion etc because SOCIETY HATES US.

Article to follow as soon as I've got my head around it.
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
[ Parent ]

"changed their lives" is the key word (none / 1) (#261)
by ethereal on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 03:59:09 PM EST

I don't understand why a literary male could not also say that those books changed their lives.  Perhaps they read the book, and then decided it was terrible and they wanted to get into real literature instead?  This seems to just be bad survey design.

Me, I dislike Bronte or Salinger both equally, although for different reasons.  Discussions of what literature is more acceptable are just argumentation fodder for academics, similar to "what's your father do?" in kindergarten.

--

Stand up for your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and State

So... (none / 0) (#264)
by Niha on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 07:39:07 PM EST

 They asked 500 or 400 men about their tastes in reading. What does it have to do with what men and women like to read?

Prof. Lisa Jardine: 'Men Prefer Fiction About Alienation And Violence.' So What? | 277 comments (243 topical, 34 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!