A completely unscientific survey
I’m reading The Winter King and hating every page. I’ve always wanted to read it out of curiosity and a copy fell into my hands the other day, so here I am. From the reviews, I’d expected it to be a sort of grimly realistic re-imagining of the Arthurian legend. Actually it’s just a grimly misogynistic re-imagining of the Arthurian legend, with women getting brutally raped on almost every other page. Realistic? Well, authors choose how they want to tell a story and which details they’re going to highlight. I’m sure rapes happened in the 5th century, but I’m also sure that pooping happened in the 5th century and yet Cornwell doesn’t feel compelled to dwell on the details of every shit. And the pagan Britons were known for having strong women leaders, which doesn’t much show up here. Basically it’s just the same old Noble Arthur he-man crap, this time with more emphasis on sword technique, bloodletting, and, of course, those endless rapes.
But back to my unscientific survey: after reading half of this godawful book, I went to Amazon to see if any other readers had commented on how difficult it is to stomach. Nope! Page after page of glowing reviews from mostly men — the predominance of male names among the reviewers is striking — describing just how thrilling and wonderful and inspiring this sludge is. I mean, women are getting raped all the goddamn time in this book, horrible mutilations and screaming and blood caked on their legs, you know what I’m saying? It’s so upsetting to me I’m having real trouble forcing myself to finish the thing. And men read this crap and it doesn’t bother them a bit, it’s just all so entertaining…
It’s things like that, little completely non-scientific personal observations, that freak a girl right out.
35 Responses to “A completely unscientific survey”
-
Mandos says:
I’ve never heard of Cornwell, but I’m not surprised I’ve never heard of him because he appears to fit in the “historical” genre rather than fantasy or SF. Thank you for informing me not to try his books. I was probably unlikely to encounter them anyway.
However, I suspect that the male reviewers classify brutal rape in their minds when reading the book as “nasty violence—cool!” rather than a special category of violence. If the book is already violent, they’re unlikely to object. Women are probably likely to see an emphasis on rape as specially worse violence.
I suspect you shouldn’t read George R.R. Martin then, though. Althought Martin does, in fact, accord roughly equal time to pooping and rape, so he’s more consistent. Also Stephen R. Donaldson’s Gap series of SF novels—avoid.
June 1st, 2006 at 12:03 pm EST -
Violet says:
Women are probably likely to see an emphasis on rape as specially worse violence.
Someone on a feminist blog a while back mentioned that for women, when we hear of a rape in the news our stomachs automatically clench up and we get that sick feeling, that cold-sweat-oh-god feeling. I certainly do. Don’t think men do.
By the way, Cornwell is also the author of the Sharpe’s Rifles series. Maybe there’s less raping in them.
-
Mandos says:
Perhaps. I think that Arthurian stories are very tempting to sexualize that way. I mean, even the feminist Mists of Avalon sexualizes the story.
-
Violet says:
You know, I’ve never read the Mists of Avalon — it’s been on my list for years and years but haven’t gotten to it. However, I’m thinking of getting a copy to start immediately after The Winter King to clear the mess out of my head.
Or is there raping in the Mists of Avalon as well?
-
Mandos says:
Aaaactually, to be perfectly honest, I never read the Mists of Avalon from cover to cover. I do know that there is some Sex To Invoke The Goddess’s Power and tricking men out of their precious bodily fluids.
I did see the made-for-TV movie with the ER lady. Being on TV, there’s very little rape. There’s definitely unwitting incest. I suspect there is rape in the book, but probably treated with some sensitivity. I have read the late MZ Bradley’s Darkover novels, most of them, and she does occasionally deal with rape, but from her peculiar Christian-feminist-occasionally-tending-towards-lesbian-separatist perspective.
-
Mandos says:
I think that men would get that sick feeling re rape if they thought that they were at risk of going to prison and thought that they might be at risk of rape there. Otherwise, except for this small subset of men, there’s not much reason to view it as a personal risk, and hence less ability to feel sick over it or distinguish it from other types of violence.
-
Violet says:
Ripper: Nineteen hundred and forty six. Nineteen fortysix, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your postwar commie conspiracy, huh? It’s incredibly obvious, isn’t it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual, and certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard core commie works.
Mandrake: Jack… Jack, listen, tell me, ah… when did you first become, well, develop this theory.
Ripper: Well, I ah, I I first became aware of it, Mandrake, during the physical act of love.
Mandrake: (sighs fearfully)
Ripper: Yes a profound sense of fatigue, a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I was able to interpret these feelings correctly: loss of essence.
Mandrake: Yes…
Ripper: I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women… women sense my power, and they seek the life essence. I do not avoid women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence.
Mandrake: Heh heh… yes.
-
Mandos says:
This could equally apply to the Rabbi Isaac thread…
-
Violet says:
That must mean that thinking about men’s precious bodily fluids and such is what cheers me up.
Dr. Strangelove is still the single funniest movie I’ve ever seen. I first saw it as a child and we all (my mother and brother and I) would just die.
-
Violet says:
But hey, you’re the one who mentioned precious bodily fluids! Can’t have precious bodily fluids without the full Dr. Strangelove context.
-
Mandos says:
If you read (or watch) the Mists of Avalon you’ll know what I mean, though.
-
belledame222 says:
I always liked the Once and Future King; true, it’s got its own weird misogyny (of a sort, more based on the author’s evil mom, I think, and a fairly conscious one), but it’s…interesting.
this one sounds like it’d be right up Mel Gibson’s aisle.
“It is as it was.”
whatever you say, hoss; just, wipe off that drool, mkay?
-
Michael says:
The Mists of Avalon is awesome. One of my favorite books, although I haven’t read it for years. Very, very good.
I have to ask a question though: you may or may not enjoy a book like The Winter King, which I have personally not heard of, but I don’t see how the prevalence of rape in the book would make it a good book or a bad book or the fact that men like the book make any statement whatsoever about rape. This is my same bitch with the critics of The DiVinci Code. It’s fiction. It’s art. It is not a reflection of any reality — it’s fantasy. The author may well have wanted you to feel uncomfortable about some of this stuff. He (or she) may have wanted to portray a shockingly misogynistic society. You seem to be implying it would be a better book without all the rape, and maybe you are right, but this book and this author have no responsibility whatsoever to write a book that avoids your personal discomfort. Nor should men feel bad if they like this book. It’s fiction and the parts that you don’t like may be carefully constructed so as to make you uncomfortable. That’s called art.
-
Violet says:
It’s fiction and the parts that you don’t like may be carefully constructed so as to make you uncomfortable. That’s called art.
Oh my god. This changes everything! I had no idea that’s how it worked! I’m going to have to bone up on this “fiction” and “art” and stuff.
-
Michael says:
Oh my god. This changes everything! I had no idea that’s how it worked! I’m going to have to bone up on this “fiction” and “art” and stuff.
Yeah, I really recommend that you do. Might cut down on the number of idiotic blog posts bemoaning the fact that everything on earth doesn’t fit neatly into your perfect little world-view.
Seriously, what exactly was your point? The book is bad because it contains rape? Men are bad ’cause they like this book? That is asinine.
-
Violet says:
Michael, that’s just it — you completely missed the point of my post. And then proceeded to lecture me in a condescending tone on the nature of fiction and art! Considering that a) I’m an arthur myself, and b) my post wasn’t about the nature of fiction and/or art, your little comment was hilariously inappropriate.
-
Michael says:
your little comment was hilariously inappropriate.
Unless you are a complete idiot, I suspect you agree with my hilariously inappropriate comment. Yet you condemn this book because it includes more fictional rape than you are comfortable with. And then you condemn us stupid men for not being bothered by it. And then you condemn me for pointing out that your post uses the same flawed logic that religious freaks are using against the DaVinci Code! I think I got your point, dear.
-
Violet says:
Dude, what is your deal? I don’t know what to do for you. You didn’t understand my post, you’re compounding your confusion with every comment, and when I tell you point blank that you’re off-base, you get even angrier. I guess when you find yourself in bar fight with a guy who’s twice your size you just keep swinging, thinking you’ve got the advantage even as your face is being turned to pulp. Jesus, buddy.
-
Infidel says:
Like significant numbers of men are reading “The Winter King” and having an opinion on it. How representative is that? SlimPick’ns rid’n that H-Bomb yee hawww- now there’s a phalic symbol.
-
Michael says:
Sorry, Violet, I guess I’m too dumb to understand your obviously deeply profound post. Thanks for doing nothing to clarify it.
The condescension is in your mind, baby, and I have been more than patient trying to actually engage in a discussion. Scroll back. The only things you have said to me have been inane. Not one shred of discussion or debate. Just sarcasm, personal attacks and “poor dumb Michael” bullshit. WTF.
I apologize for trying to engage in a discussion. How irrational of me.
-
Paul Tergeist says:
I suspect, as I have said before, that there is a certain obsessive paranoia evident in the subject matter of this blog. Some people are afraid of snakes. Some are afraid of rape. I dunno….if you don’t like the book, don’t read it. Maybe you are bit oversensitive, kid. This is earth. People are mammals. Mammals are animals. Expecting anything different is just fantasy. Deal with the reality we have, not the reality you wish we had. If you can’t, maybe you need to find God. With God, everything happens for a reason and everyone goes to heaven. Ain’t it a great fantasy?
*****************************************
Here is the first review on Amazon….by a female.My Second Favorite Arthurian Series Of All!, May 9, 2006
Reviewer: Stephanie Handley (Annapolis, MD) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
I stopped counting the number of Arthurian series I’ve read when I reached the number sixteen and I have to say that next to Dame Mary Stewart’s masterful series, this is my favorite. The story of Arthur is told from the viewpoint of a new character, Derfel Cardarn, who is an inspired spearman that fights with Arthur through all his battles and becomes a close friend. But don’t worry, all the usual faces are in this story, as well. Cornwall develops his characters so well that you find yourself caring deeply for most and passionately hating others.As other reviewers have said, his battle scenes are vivid, energetic and exciting. Interestingly, he draws not only on Celtic myth, but also on Egyptian, yet still manages to stay true to the legend and keep all the main scenes you’d expect to find.
This is definately a refreshing retelling, yet a very faithful rendition. Exactly what I love!
-
gordo says:
Paul–
I don’t think that I’d equate fear of rape with a phobia. I’d say it’s more like my fear of eating raw pork and chicken. It’s a perfectly rational fear.
And to get to the review you cite, you had to skip over a spotlighted review, also by a woman, that discusses the violence in the book more directly:
“His books pull no punches describing battles and acts of violence (how Nimue gets her wisdom is a graphic scene, for example.)”
Hmmm … the protagonist’s love interest “gets her wisdom” in a graphic, violent scene. Sounds like Dr. Socks is giving us an accurate account of the book.
I guess I’m just not seeing why Violent’s point is so hard for some of the commenters here to grasp. She’s not saying that she hates the book because there’s rape in it, but because of the misogynistic way in which it’s handled.
There’s rape in “A Handmaid’s Tale,” and Atwood made the rape uncomfortable for the reader. I haven’t seen Violent complain about the way the subject was handled in that book.
So I figure the problem she’s having with all the rape in “The Winter King” isn’t due to a rape phobia, or because the author has cleverly depicted the rape in such a way as to make the act seem revolting.
-
Michael says:
She’s not saying that she hates the book because there’s rape in it, but because of the misogynistic way in which it’s handled.
Right, okay, so if I address this we can skip the Michael-as-stupid-punching-bag stuff?
First of all, you are implying that rape can be handled non-misogynisticly. That’s like saying, yeah, he was murdered but at least it wasn’t a violent murder. Murder=violence. Rape=misogyny.
The undercurrent of Violet’s post which made me bristle was, in fact, the issue referenced in the subject line — she was dismayed that men didn’t find the book disturbingly misogynistic as well. She subtlety condemns the book and the men who don’t condemn the book because they are apparently fine with the “misogynistic way in which it’s handled.”
That is the point that, to me, is unfounded, lame and rich in personal bias. It sounds like I would like this book. I do not like rape. I am not a misogynist. Yet I have no problem with either in fiction, especially fiction set in more brutal settings and any implication that this is somehow revealing my deep misogynist heart is completely wrong.
-
Violet says:
I need smarter commenters.
Folks, I’ve read thousands of books. I’m a writer myself. Fully grasp the concepts of fiction, narrative, and authorial intent.
I’m not liking this book, that’s all. (Actually the second half is more tolerable; less violence.) I never enjoy books with a lot of sexual violence, which is why I don’t read Patricia Cornwell (odd coincidence on the last names.) The misogynist context in the Winter King is making it even harder to take. I’m forcing myself to finish it because it’s a classic. If I were preparing a serious review of the book I’d find much positive to say, but this blog post wasn’t a serious review, just an off-the-cuff complaint.
The only point of my post, which Mandos grasped perfectly, was that it weirded me out to rediscover from the Amazon reviews that the sexual violence against women that I find so hard to stomach (because it’s personal to me) doesn’t seem to faze most guys. It’s not personal to them. No big discovery there; I’m not announcing the Unified Field Theory. It’s not even puzzling. Just an observation.
Here’s a thought experiment for you boys: imagine you were reading a book, the first half of which featured men being castrated and anally raped with hot pokers on every other page, so that after reading for a few hours your stomach was cramped from tension. Imagine that you went to Amazon and found dozens and dozens of glowing reviews from female readers, all of them talking about how thrilling the book was and none of them remarking on the sexual violence. If you were smart, of course, you wouldn’t conclude from this that women are evil or even uncaring about real sexual violence as opposed to the fictional kind. But it would probably weird you out to realize that what you find so horrific you can hardly bear to read it is just “thrilling” and clearly not personal at all for female readers. And if you had a blog, you might even be motivated to dash off a quick post on your observation.
The only point to be derived from all this is simple: if you’re dumber than Mandos, you probably don’t belong here. I shall create a Mandos-shaped measuring device for all who enter.
-
Michael says:
I need smarter commenters.
Unbelievable. Yes, fuck you, too, Dr. Socks, I shan’t trouble you again with my pesky attention to your blog. I didn’t realize you were so thin-skinned. But, boy, you’ve really hurt me by repeatedly calling me dumb. Ow.
I’ve wasted enough cycles on your psychosis. Good luck with that.
-
Infidel says:
“I need smarter commenters.”
That’s what I’m all about, baby, that’s why I’m here.
-
will says:
Fine. I will stay away from your blog then!!! Geeez. You could have just emailed me.
-
Violet says:
Goof! Get back in the rabbi thread and answer me about your hoo-hah.
-
CR says:
There are 247 carefully and thoughtfully chosen Classic books left that I would like to read before I die. The Winter King didn’t make my revered classics list. If you read fast- well, you didn’t waste too much time. If you read slow. Even four days is too long.
-
Mandos says:
I dunno how I should take this. If I am to be the baseline, does that mean that I barely qualify?
-
gordo says:
Mandos–
Don’t feel bad. From what Violent says, I don’t qualify at all. But I’m defying her and commenting anyway. HA!
Violent–
I get your point, but I offer this quibble with your analogy:
Most men wouldn’t be as affected by the hot poker scenes, because most of us don’t think about such things. It’s so unlikely to happen to us that descriptions of that kind of torture aren’t very real or personal to us.
But I understand what you’re saying. I think.
-
blondie says:
Oh great. The comments policy didn’t say anything about having to be smart. I don’t have any idea if I’m dumber than Mandos. Which just goes to show I probly am. Rats!
-
Alon Levy says:
Well, Blondie, can you come up with a line like “The most annoying thing for a kid is when his parents take credit for his own achievements” (rough paraphrase, sorry)?
-
Violet says:
The comments policy didn’t say anything about having to be smart.
That’s because I just pulled that requirement right out of my ass as I typed. No time yet to update the Comments policy.
I dunno how I should take this. If I am to be the baseline, does that mean that I barely qualify?
Don’t worry about that and just get busy with a plaster cast of your cognitive functions.
-
madaha says:
this post is old, so you’ve probably read the Mists of Avalon by now, but yes, it is fabulous, but yes, there is one rape in there. (spoiler) Guenivere gets raped and held captive at one point. It’s interesting, it’s clear that the set up is the dichotomy between the oppressed Xian woman, a party to the patriarchy (it’s even suggested that maybe her desire to let the men have all the initiative is due to some psychological stuff, for instance, she’s agoraphobic) and the independent pagan woman Morgaine.
Perhaps one might read her abduction and rape as a consequence of giving up too much power, and having to trust in untrustworthy men as a consequence of her reduced autonomy (she is betrayed by those she trusted). I’m not sure.
Anyway, although the movie has Hans Matheson in it, I don’t really recommend it. The book is by FAAAAR better.
