Scan barcode
A review by alexscholls
The Mirror Empire by Kameron Hurley
2.0
All right. I've been thinking about this book for a few weeks now that I've finished it.
I'll start with some good things about it:
The world was unique. It was truly like nothing I've seen before: the culture, the setting, the people. I can appreciate that.
The writing was good. Not terrific, because it had the attitude that because it was an "adult" novel, it could throw information at the reader and the reader would absorb it as fast and even faster than it was being thrown because the reader is an ADULT. Sorry, that's not the way this works. An author still has to introduce information gradually and clearly for the reader to understand and absorb it.
It "kept me reading." I put that in quotes because this might have been the absolute weirdest fantasy I have ever read. I wanted to keep reading just to find out how much weirder it could get (if that was possible).
Now, the bad things.
Purportedly, one of the things that makes this book famous is that it "redefines gender roles." Mainly for women. But it does not. It just makes women into men.
One of the cultures the book focuses on is one where women are the warriors, the landowners, the slave-holders. One character, a renown warrior, keeps a "husband," who is considered her property and is basically her sex slave. She treats him as an animal, because he is physically inferior to her (slight, and male), and because she owns him an can control him. I don't see how this is redefining gender roles. This is just switching the "roles": now women are doing the abusing and men are taking it.
This, of course, does not put anybody in a good light, male or female. And, granted, this is one character. But when an entire culture is based off of the concept that women have all the power and this is what they do with it, what is the author trying to say? That women have to be barbaric men in order to be interesting as characters? In order to break out of traditional "gender roles?" What does this say about women in general? Do women have to become "men" in the traditional sense (possess martial ability, strength, dominance, and aggressiveness) in order to have value? Why are "traditional" attitudes for women (empathy, self-sacrifice, humility) not valued as strong qualities? I think that's the question we should be asking our society and our literature, and the aspect we need to change.
A real redefinition of gender roles would be to assert that many human qualities (both male and female in the traditional sense) are valued as strong, regardless of what gender is displaying them. Redefining gender roles would be to assert that there are none. A man can be strong by yielding, as can a man. A woman can be strong by empathizing, as can a man. We are all human, and so can display all these human qualities and be strong. But this book simply maintains our society's pre-determined, rigid "roles" and substitutes men for women. Disappointing. And mildly infuriating.
I actually really thank this book, because it helped me to truly define my frustration concerning the portrayal of women (and men!) in fantasy literature. I'd add that to the "good things about this book" list.
On the whole, I was unimpressed with this work. Its scope was daring, its cultures rich, but it did not live up to purported expectations.
I'll start with some good things about it:
The world was unique. It was truly like nothing I've seen before: the culture, the setting, the people. I can appreciate that.
The writing was good. Not terrific, because it had the attitude that because it was an "adult" novel, it could throw information at the reader and the reader would absorb it as fast and even faster than it was being thrown because the reader is an ADULT. Sorry, that's not the way this works. An author still has to introduce information gradually and clearly for the reader to understand and absorb it.
It "kept me reading." I put that in quotes because this might have been the absolute weirdest fantasy I have ever read. I wanted to keep reading just to find out how much weirder it could get (if that was possible).
Now, the bad things.
Purportedly, one of the things that makes this book famous is that it "redefines gender roles." Mainly for women. But it does not. It just makes women into men.
One of the cultures the book focuses on is one where women are the warriors, the landowners, the slave-holders. One character, a renown warrior, keeps a "husband," who is considered her property and is basically her sex slave. She treats him as an animal, because he is physically inferior to her (slight, and male), and because she owns him an can control him. I don't see how this is redefining gender roles. This is just switching the "roles": now women are doing the abusing and men are taking it.
This, of course, does not put anybody in a good light, male or female. And, granted, this is one character. But when an entire culture is based off of the concept that women have all the power and this is what they do with it, what is the author trying to say? That women have to be barbaric men in order to be interesting as characters? In order to break out of traditional "gender roles?" What does this say about women in general? Do women have to become "men" in the traditional sense (possess martial ability, strength, dominance, and aggressiveness) in order to have value? Why are "traditional" attitudes for women (empathy, self-sacrifice, humility) not valued as strong qualities? I think that's the question we should be asking our society and our literature, and the aspect we need to change.
A real redefinition of gender roles would be to assert that many human qualities (both male and female in the traditional sense) are valued as strong, regardless of what gender is displaying them. Redefining gender roles would be to assert that there are none. A man can be strong by yielding, as can a man. A woman can be strong by empathizing, as can a man. We are all human, and so can display all these human qualities and be strong. But this book simply maintains our society's pre-determined, rigid "roles" and substitutes men for women. Disappointing. And mildly infuriating.
I actually really thank this book, because it helped me to truly define my frustration concerning the portrayal of women (and men!) in fantasy literature. I'd add that to the "good things about this book" list.
On the whole, I was unimpressed with this work. Its scope was daring, its cultures rich, but it did not live up to purported expectations.