Die hilfreichsten Kundenrezensionen
|
|
3 von 3 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich:
4.0 von 5 Sternen
Too original and thought provoking to be "feminist", 15. Juni 2000
Reading Rene Denfeld's critique of modern feminism made me think of this book which directly attacked and challenged everything that was feminism in its time (and was roundly condemned by both women who still called themselves feminists) from "Matriarchy is peace" to "women are naturally more loving, compassionate, etc., etc."Its more than that. It is an examination, a critique, a tour through Western culture from the perspective of a unique and startling confrontational woman. Her Appolonian=male, Dionysian=female argument might be just as a whacked as the Gloria Steinem inner child but it is still largely believed that structure=male, nature=female (just that nature is good and wholesome while structure is "patriarchal") and her love of everything patriarchal is knid of scary if patriarchal had actual meaning than what feminists call things that they don't like. In this book you will see Emily Dickinson described as the female Sade, read Paglia's burning hatred for Mark Twain (she admits to hating Huckleberry Finn so much that one of the things to do when she went to grad school was to write a paper tearing that book apart), watch Paglia tear the matriarchy apart (look at the pregnant statue - no face, no legs, just pregnant - does that look like a life affirming goddess figure to you or a woman with one function only?), and get disturbed by her theories of culture (all cultures at their height of power and art are primarily pedophiliac) It's a dense book and one that cannot be read in one sitting. YOu might even have to put it on the shelf and come back to it later, but like the teacher who loves her subject, Paglia will keep you interested. You will never look at Western art the same way again. Oh one last thing on the feminist issue. Most feminists are Jungian in their outlook. They talk about feminine aspects and masculine aspects in the terms that Jung proposes. Paglia is a Freudian. MOst people consider Freud was a sexist even though he never said anything about anything being naturally feminine or masculine (penis envy being a type of hysteria like the Oedipal complex - possible and not altogether improbable but not normal everyday behavior) but that's because most people don't read Freud because he scares them before they can open up a Freudian text. So if you are feminist who thinks that your cherished ideas will not be confirmed by this book, run away. Let it rest on the shelf. Unless you have the courage to be challenged. Then read some Freud too and see what you've been missing.
Helfen Sie anderen Kunden bei der Suche nach den hilfreichsten Rezensionen
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 von 2 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich:
4.0 von 5 Sternen
A truly powerful work, 10. April 2000
It isn't very often that a book can create such seizmic shiftsin a person's consciousness and perspective on, oh, just abouteverything. I sense what it must have been like at the turn of the century when the works of Nietszche and Freud- her intellectual precursors and patron saints- had their works argued and denounced and quickly lauded simultaneously. The beauty of this book, beyond her shining, acrobatic, intellect, is that it leaves you changed. This is not a dime-store novel- type intellectual polemic, that leaves you as if you just read the Harvard English professor's version of the National Enquirer. This is the kind of work that, when you put down, you become a renter in the apartment building of the author's mind- regardless of how much of your own furniture of opinions you choose to bring with you. To say I agree with her findings is almost irrelevant- in fact, that may be the central beauty of the whole thing. It is impossible to agree or diagree without seeing the world through her frame of reference while trying to prove your point- just as Freud and Nietzsche amde you do- and still do- before her. If there are any faults that would render it unworthy of a perfect five star rating, I wouldn't go with the feeling of being exhausted by her erudition or polemic style. Even the cultural narcissism- obviously coming out of her Rolling Stones/Woodstock days of youth, which bleeds through her education- is forgiveable. Her only major fault I would say is what could best be called "Afro-phobia", and her avoidance of the African influence on Western culture, and its many sophisticated artistic and sexual/religious mores made manifest through the ages in not just 20th Century America. Nonetheless, if you are even remotely fascinated by the subject matter- or any one of the God knows how many subjects, from sex to politics, it touches on while she proves her central thesis, you will immensely enjoy this book. If your interest goes beyond that, you may find yourself as I have, ready to change the shape and the direction of your career. Either way, you cannot look at the soul of art, artists and writers the same afterwards.
Helfen Sie anderen Kunden bei der Suche nach den hilfreichsten Rezensionen
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 von 1 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich:
4.0 von 5 Sternen
does she really refer to herself as a feminist?, 16. Mai 2000
I always wondered what an intelligent woman who buys so much Freud would look like. Her literary gifts amaze, I enjoy her writing immensely, and I value her emphasis on the shadow side of romance ...but one could wish for a less reductive and, ultimately, less patriarchal view of relationships. Reading her reminds me a bit of reading psychoanalysis and its eerie preoccupation with breasts, penises, and feces. Perhaps she can work some of that stuff out--whatever it is--before she writes her next book.
Helfen Sie anderen Kunden bei der Suche nach den hilfreichsten Rezensionen
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Die neuesten Kundenrezensionen
|
