I love this book group. I love the people, I love the books, I love the discussion. But tonight my feathers got a little ruffled...a lot ruffled.
The book we had read was Delicious Foods, by James Hannaham, a book about addiction and poverty and racism. It's a story about a boy named Eddie who's mother turns to drugs after her husband is brutally murdered. She then gets spirited away to a farm called Delicious Foods where she is forced to work to pay for room and board and drugs. The story is told from the point of view of the mother, the son, and the drug.
We were discussing the character of Darlene, the mother. In the story Darlene was in college when she had met Nat, who was dating her sorority sister. They fell in love, Nat seeing Darlene behind her sorority sisters back. Darlene tells someone about her being in love, and once the word gets out the public hazing begins. Her sorority sisters begin ostracizing and playing harmful, destructive pranks on Darlene. As they escalate, becoming more and more violent, Darlene and Nat draw into each other until they decide to leave the college and move. They start a new life, open a grocery that becomes a community hub, they have a son and live a happy life together. Then, when Eddie is six, Nat is brutally murdered for trying to instigate social change.
The beginning of the segue began when Amelia (names have been changed) told us that she didn't think Darlene was a strong character. When we inquired as to why she said that it was because she went behind her friends back and stole her boyfriend, she relied on him and he protected her when the threats and violence from her peers became too much, she didn't finish college, she relied on Nat and fell apart after he died, and because she turned to drugs as a coping mechanism. Amelia said that she was a feminist and she thought that women who couldn't be independent were weak.
Several things about this bothered me. And bothered me a lot. I could sympathize with Darlene. She hadn't cheated, her boyfriend had, and yet she was the one being slut shamed for it (which, for those who don't know, is not OK). When she was being ostracized, Nat supported her and protected her, which makes him sound like a pretty good friend and boyfriend. When it got bad they left and went and made a life together, which sounds like the normal and reasonable thing to do. They started a business, had a child, and, from what the story told us, made a happy life together. Then when the love of her life was brutally murdered, Darlene had a hard time coping and turned to drugs to try to make it day to day.
All of Darlene's reactions seem reasonable to me. She lived her life the best she was able, she made a good relationship out of a bad start, made a place for herself in the community with her husband and son, and was traumatized when violence touched her life. I don't feel like these make a woman weak.
I began to think about it more. It wasn't just the differences of opinion on this character that bothered me. It was the underlying assumption of what it meant to be a strong independent woman.
I consider myself a strong independent woman, I work hard, I have friends. I have also been shamed by others based on my sex life, and, whether or not it was any of their business (it wasn't), it sucks. I have relationships that I feel enrich my life, and I would be devastated if the people I love died. Does this make me weak?
This discussion led to the existence of strong women in literature. Amelia expressed how she didn't like how the Harry Potter books were so popular, and how Hermione should be the main character because she had her act together. She used the analogy that if she had a coworker who she did all the work for, it would be wrong if the coworker got promoted and got all of the reward for her hard work. This analogy bothered me. It made me angry. It was so unsympathetic to the actual story, to how relationships with people actually work.
I may be biased. I love Harry Potter. It taught me so many lessons about right and wrong, about perseverance, courage, friendship, racism, classism. I gained from it strong male and female role models. Dumbledore's and Lupines leadership, Harry's perseverance and sacrifice, McGonigal's compassion, Snape's bravery. Even though Harry was the main character, I think I learned the most from Hermione.
Hermione the only character who constantly had her shit together for all seven books. In the first book she is called bossy when she is just trying to help people, called a show off when she works hard and succeeds ("its Levi-oo-sa."). She makes friends with Ron and Harry, who value her for her smarts and her caring. She solves almost every problem in every book. She stands her ground, and is not afraid to be assertive for the causes she cares about (S.P.E.W.). She has meaningful, lasting, relationships, where both parties bring something to the table and enrich each others lives. I think that she makes a wonderful role model for both boys and girls.
The conversation shocked me. While I agree that I would like to see more female role models for both boys and girls, I think that its important to have balance with it. I think its important to have books where both sexes work together, and have meaningful relationships. I think that we need to learn from both men and women in literature, because I don't think that values are gendered. I don't think that the places we can learn from are gendered.This conversation was so strange because while Amelia was unhappy that women in literature were weak (at least in her mind) or not getting the recognition that she would like, she was not granting the characters any credit for what they had achieved (in Hermione's case), or any sympathy for what they were experiencing (in Darlene's). This struck me as ironic, as women in real life are experiencing these same struggles: equal work for equal pay, or empathy after a rape ( victims blaming is still far too common).
Thinking about this discussion made me realize how important empathy really is. Reading fiction is a lesson in empathy, as you are actively trying to understand how a character, sometimes multiple characters at the same time feel. This can be hard, especially if you don't do it enough. People are complex, they don't "have the emotional range of a teaspoon (Hermione)." Reading fiction is important because we need to practice empathy so that we can use it in our every day lives, on non-fictional people. We need to realize that not everyone is in the same place, feeling the same things. They are all going through life the best they know how, with the tools they have at the time.
I have been privileged in my life with reading. My parents read to me often as a child, and encouraged my love of books. I had a wonderful local library that stocked everything from Star Wars to The Song of the Lioness Quartet, Hatchet to Redwall. I had teachers that encouraged me to read diversely, to see and attempt to understand things that I could never experience because I was born the "right" color in a powerful country. I've had many opportunities to practice being empathetic. Others may not have had these same opportunities. Their experiences may be slightly different, and so will their perception. This is a good thing. This is what leads us to such interesting discussions.
There is, however, always room for improvement. These discussions, while sometimes infuriating, are an opportunity, to teach and learn and grow, to practice what you've learned. People are have had different experiences, they see the world through different lenses. I need to try to be just as empathetic to her point of view as I want her to be with the characters I read about. I need to try to see things from her point of view, and perhaps, through discussion, she will come to understand mine. If everyone could be a little more empathetic, I think the world a better place. I need to practice a little more, and hopefully, next time, the conversation will push my buttons a bit less, and I will try to be more empathetic.
No comments:
Post a Comment