Quartet: A film starring Tom Courtenay, Billy Connolly, Pauline Collins and Maggie Smith. Directed by Dustin Hoffman. Script by Ronald Harwood.
Jean is an arrogant, ageing operatic star. She's coming to live at Beecham House, a place for retired musicians that sits in the English countryside. "Be careful with that one," an irritable Jean {Magge Smith},
says to her driver as he removes boxes from her now nearly empty apartment.
Meanwhile over at Beecham House, Reginald Paget {Tom Courtenay}, Wilfred {Billy Connolly}, Cecily Robbins {Pauline Collins} and other retirees play the usual games. They sing, play music, flirt, gossip, quarrel, grow old and relive past glories.
Jean, a once famous diva, sets 'Quartet' in motion. "Jean has arrived and shattered everything," Reginald says. True, but she also forces the other main characters to confront the truth of their lives. 'Quartet' is ably directed by Dustin Hoffman and the witty script is by Ronald Harwood who wrote the play on which this movie is based. It's a comedy and the elephant in the room for all of us ageing people, namely death, never intrudes.
The beautiful countryside sits as a lovely backdrop to this enjoyable but light movie. Then there's the mostly classical music that gives the film some lovely lyrical moments.
Wednesday, 27 February 2013
Monday, 25 February 2013
Book review of 'Temptations of the West'
'Temptations of the West. How To Be Modern In India, Pakistan and Beyond' by Pankaj Mishra {Picador}.
Peshawar is a mess," writes Indian author Pankaj Mishra. But so it seems is most of India, Pakistan and Nepal,or at least as they appear in his book 'Temptations of the West'. An Indian middle class of 200 million people or more and hundreds of millionaires prosper in a country where another 800 million struggle to survive a grinding poverty. In Pakistan, the military and the mullahs still rule the roost. Meanwhile the tiny kingdom of Nepal is split between Maoist guerillas and an absolute monarchy. Then there's Tibet which squirms under the iron heel of the Communist rulers of China.
Mishra takes us on a tour of the conflict-ridden areas of South Asia. But he also touches down in Bollywood to meet Indian celebrities and movie stars.
One point he leaves out is the massive increase in the area's population. India's population of roughly 500 million in the 1950's has now doubled to a billion people or more. Nepal's skyrocketting population is mentioned but no other country's birth rate gets a mention. This is strange since massive increases in population in poor countries also means more social problems.
"A new elite of politicians and bureaucrats," writes Mishra about Kashmir, "emerged from the culture of corruption that grew around the administration." The same can be said about most of South Asia and Mishra does say this. More could have been written about the high tech world that's booming in India. And not too many women pop up in sthe book to give their views on what's happening in their countries.
But Pankaj Mishra has written a fascinationg and probing book about the problems of many of the countries of South Asia.
Peshawar is a mess," writes Indian author Pankaj Mishra. But so it seems is most of India, Pakistan and Nepal,or at least as they appear in his book 'Temptations of the West'. An Indian middle class of 200 million people or more and hundreds of millionaires prosper in a country where another 800 million struggle to survive a grinding poverty. In Pakistan, the military and the mullahs still rule the roost. Meanwhile the tiny kingdom of Nepal is split between Maoist guerillas and an absolute monarchy. Then there's Tibet which squirms under the iron heel of the Communist rulers of China.
Mishra takes us on a tour of the conflict-ridden areas of South Asia. But he also touches down in Bollywood to meet Indian celebrities and movie stars.
One point he leaves out is the massive increase in the area's population. India's population of roughly 500 million in the 1950's has now doubled to a billion people or more. Nepal's skyrocketting population is mentioned but no other country's birth rate gets a mention. This is strange since massive increases in population in poor countries also means more social problems.
"A new elite of politicians and bureaucrats," writes Mishra about Kashmir, "emerged from the culture of corruption that grew around the administration." The same can be said about most of South Asia and Mishra does say this. More could have been written about the high tech world that's booming in India. And not too many women pop up in sthe book to give their views on what's happening in their countries.
But Pankaj Mishra has written a fascinationg and probing book about the problems of many of the countries of South Asia.
Monday, 18 February 2013
Review of 'When the Gods Changed' by Peter c. Newman
.When The Gods Changed: The Death of Liberal Canada by Peter C. Newman. A book published by Randdom House Canada. 291pp.
Once upon a time, which wasn't too long ago, the federal Liberal party won one election after another and therefore was the the government of Canada. Their main rival, the Progressive Conservative party could only look on in envy. "Conservatives are like measles," one Liberal said. "You get them once in a lifetime and then they're gone forever."
But then all of that changed. A reformed and very right wing Conservative party started to win one election after another and the Liberals ended up in second place. In the 2011 federal election, the Liberals fell to third place behind the New Democratic party and the governing Conservatives, led by the very right wing Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Why did all this happen? Peter C. Newman thinks he has the answer. "A groupie of the power elite," I once said about Newman. But while this may be true, Newman is also a fine writer who has written many interesting books about Canadian politics and business. In this book called 'When The Gods Changed' Newman zeroes in on Michael Ignatieff the Canadian-born writer, traveller, professor, human rights activist and then leader of the federal Liberal party. Ignatieff was supposed to lead the Liberals back to power. Instead he led the party to a disastrous third place finish and then resigned as leader.
Newman singles out many reasons for the Liberals's collapse. They include the now ancient sponsorship scandal, the ferocious rivalry between Prime Minister Jean Chretien and his Finance minister Paul Martin, Martin's weak role as Prime Minister and so on.But the main reason is simple; the Liberals got old.
"Of the many Canadian politicians who flashed like meteors across the northern sky," writes Newman, "Ignatieff was the most complex, the most puzzling and the least transparent." Newman is well positioned to say this, since he's known and hung out with many politicians and leaders of the last 50 years. But Newman's focus on the leaders, ignores the upheaval among the vast majority of non-leaders. For the past 30 years, Canadian governments of all stripes and labels have slashed social programs, shovelled out big tax breaks to the rich and hammered private and public sector unions.
The Liberals party could and did promise all Canadians a better and more prosperous life. But that promise has now vanished as the welfare state disappears. As Canada becomes a very unequal society, the middle ground that the Liberals stood on started to shrink. And so did their supporters too.
In the end, Newman blames the Liberal party for Ignatieff's crushing defeat. He also realizes that an academic like Ignatieff took too long to learn political skills.
The best parts of 'When the Gods Changed' are Newman's interviews with Ignatieff and Ignatieff's reflections on his life. The book takes us on an interesting ride through the collapse of the Liberal party. But the Liberals"s eclipse may only be temporary. After all there is the figure of Justin Trudeau looming on the political horizon. Maybe the ageing Peter C. Newman will give us another book about the Liberal party's revival. After all he did the same about Justin Trudeau's father more than forty years ago.
Once upon a time, which wasn't too long ago, the federal Liberal party won one election after another and therefore was the the government of Canada. Their main rival, the Progressive Conservative party could only look on in envy. "Conservatives are like measles," one Liberal said. "You get them once in a lifetime and then they're gone forever."
But then all of that changed. A reformed and very right wing Conservative party started to win one election after another and the Liberals ended up in second place. In the 2011 federal election, the Liberals fell to third place behind the New Democratic party and the governing Conservatives, led by the very right wing Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Why did all this happen? Peter C. Newman thinks he has the answer. "A groupie of the power elite," I once said about Newman. But while this may be true, Newman is also a fine writer who has written many interesting books about Canadian politics and business. In this book called 'When The Gods Changed' Newman zeroes in on Michael Ignatieff the Canadian-born writer, traveller, professor, human rights activist and then leader of the federal Liberal party. Ignatieff was supposed to lead the Liberals back to power. Instead he led the party to a disastrous third place finish and then resigned as leader.
Newman singles out many reasons for the Liberals's collapse. They include the now ancient sponsorship scandal, the ferocious rivalry between Prime Minister Jean Chretien and his Finance minister Paul Martin, Martin's weak role as Prime Minister and so on.But the main reason is simple; the Liberals got old.
"Of the many Canadian politicians who flashed like meteors across the northern sky," writes Newman, "Ignatieff was the most complex, the most puzzling and the least transparent." Newman is well positioned to say this, since he's known and hung out with many politicians and leaders of the last 50 years. But Newman's focus on the leaders, ignores the upheaval among the vast majority of non-leaders. For the past 30 years, Canadian governments of all stripes and labels have slashed social programs, shovelled out big tax breaks to the rich and hammered private and public sector unions.
The Liberals party could and did promise all Canadians a better and more prosperous life. But that promise has now vanished as the welfare state disappears. As Canada becomes a very unequal society, the middle ground that the Liberals stood on started to shrink. And so did their supporters too.
In the end, Newman blames the Liberal party for Ignatieff's crushing defeat. He also realizes that an academic like Ignatieff took too long to learn political skills.
The best parts of 'When the Gods Changed' are Newman's interviews with Ignatieff and Ignatieff's reflections on his life. The book takes us on an interesting ride through the collapse of the Liberal party. But the Liberals"s eclipse may only be temporary. After all there is the figure of Justin Trudeau looming on the political horizon. Maybe the ageing Peter C. Newman will give us another book about the Liberal party's revival. After all he did the same about Justin Trudeau's father more than forty years ago.
Tuesday, 12 February 2013
Review of movie 'Side Effects'
'Side Effects' a movie starring Jude Law, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Rooney Mara. Directed by Steven Soderbergh and written by Scott Z.Burns.
Stay way from shrinks or if you go to one, don't swallow everything they prescribe.
That's the message beamed out by the movie 'Side Effects' directed by Steven Soderbergh. Emily Taylor, played by Rooney Mara is a twenty something, very depressed wife of Martin Taylor, played by Channing Tatum. Martin's just done five years in prison for insider trading. Emily has lost a child in a miscarriage and then this childless woman, drives her car into a brick wall. To be cured of her depression, that may have caused her accident, Emily ends up in the care of psychiatrist Jonathan Banks, played by Jude Law.
"Did you try to hurt yourself this morning," asks Banks when he first sees her in hospital. Soon he's prescribing Ablixa for her to take. This supposed anti-depressant may have side effects.
To find out Emily's past, Jonathan heads off to see Emily's first psychiatrist, Victoria Siebert, played by Catherine Zeta-Jones. Soon all hell breaks loose and there's a murder, a trial and lots of other stuff. The movie turns into a 'who done it' mystery thriller.
Cleverly scripted by Scott Z. Barnes, 'Side Effects' has twists and turns that'll keeped you glued to your seat. Still, as one formerly unbalanced friend of mine once said, "Some shrinks are crazy." I'd believe that especially after watching "Side Effects'. But also remember that some pills can endanger your life.
The one message that I didn't like that came out of this film is that lesbians may be evil. But then again, no movie can give you everything you want.
Stay way from shrinks or if you go to one, don't swallow everything they prescribe.
That's the message beamed out by the movie 'Side Effects' directed by Steven Soderbergh. Emily Taylor, played by Rooney Mara is a twenty something, very depressed wife of Martin Taylor, played by Channing Tatum. Martin's just done five years in prison for insider trading. Emily has lost a child in a miscarriage and then this childless woman, drives her car into a brick wall. To be cured of her depression, that may have caused her accident, Emily ends up in the care of psychiatrist Jonathan Banks, played by Jude Law.
"Did you try to hurt yourself this morning," asks Banks when he first sees her in hospital. Soon he's prescribing Ablixa for her to take. This supposed anti-depressant may have side effects.
To find out Emily's past, Jonathan heads off to see Emily's first psychiatrist, Victoria Siebert, played by Catherine Zeta-Jones. Soon all hell breaks loose and there's a murder, a trial and lots of other stuff. The movie turns into a 'who done it' mystery thriller.
Cleverly scripted by Scott Z. Barnes, 'Side Effects' has twists and turns that'll keeped you glued to your seat. Still, as one formerly unbalanced friend of mine once said, "Some shrinks are crazy." I'd believe that especially after watching "Side Effects'. But also remember that some pills can endanger your life.
The one message that I didn't like that came out of this film is that lesbians may be evil. But then again, no movie can give you everything you want.
Sunday, 3 February 2013
review of book on Louis Riel and Gabriel Dumont
'Louis Riel and Gabriel Dumont' by Joseph Boyden, with an introduction by John Ralston Saul. Part of the series titled 'Extraordinary Canadians'. Penguin. 240pp.
In Canada it seems some things never change. What turns on Quebec turns off the rest of Canada. And vice versa. Also First Nations people often squat at the bottom the Canadian mosaic. Take the story of Louis Riel, the sometimes visionary leader of the Metis and his military assistant, Gabriel Dumont. The Metis are a part First Nations, part European people.
In this book ably told by novelist Joseph Boyden, Riel takes on the Canadian government, first in Manitoba in 1870, and then in alliance with Dumont, in Saskatchewan in 1885.
Both face offs end in Metis defeats. "To the men in Ottawa," writes Boyden, "the mixed bloods are insolent and stubborn. The Metis represent two painful thorns in Canadian Prime Minister John. A. MacDonald's feet as he attempts his Anglo-Saxon stride to the Pacific."
So MacDonald and the Canadian army sweep the Metis out of the way. Riel orders Thomas Scott, a fanatical anti-Cayholic, anti-Metis Protestant to be shot dead in the Metis revolt of 1870. Orangemen Protestants in Ontario freak out. Then in 1885, the Canadian army defeat Riel and Dumont's Metis soldiers at the Battle of Batoche. After a short, totally unfair trial, Riel is condemned to death. French-Canadians in Quebec and elsewhere, and many others around the world, plead for the Canadian government to scrap the death sentence.
But Prime Minister MacDonald won't listen. "He shall hang," says MacDonald of Riel, "though every dog in Quebec bark in his favour." Once Riel hangs, the French Canadians go ballistic and rarely vote for MacDonald's party, the Conservatives ever again.
Author Joseph Boyden wisely spends most of the book on the Battle of Batoche and the trial of Riel. As he points out, compared to the massive trench battles of the First World War, Batoche was a mere skirmish. At the battles of Vimy Ridge and Ypres during World War One, thousands of Canadians were killed, sometimes in a single day. And at Batoche? Maybe five or six soldiers died. This was sad but not tragic.
Dumont by the way survived and lived away from Canada for quite some time.
Since this book came out, the Idle No More movement has surfaced . Also a recent court decision has ruled that the Meis and non-status Indians are Indians under the Constitution Act and so may be entitled to benefits paid to status Indians.
Yet despite all of tthese hopeful signs, the French-English divide still slices through Canadian politics. In the last Quebec provincial election, the sovereigntist Parti Quebecois ended up as the government, and is still committed to taking Quebec out of Canada.And the majority of Canadians don't like the Idle No More movement or Chief Theresa Spence who fasted to force the Canadian government to listen to First Nations demands.
As the motto of the London-based 'Times' newspaper used to say, "Times change, values don't."Boyden's book fills us in on a turning point in Canadian history that explains much of the politics of to-day.
In Canada it seems some things never change. What turns on Quebec turns off the rest of Canada. And vice versa. Also First Nations people often squat at the bottom the Canadian mosaic. Take the story of Louis Riel, the sometimes visionary leader of the Metis and his military assistant, Gabriel Dumont. The Metis are a part First Nations, part European people.
In this book ably told by novelist Joseph Boyden, Riel takes on the Canadian government, first in Manitoba in 1870, and then in alliance with Dumont, in Saskatchewan in 1885.
Both face offs end in Metis defeats. "To the men in Ottawa," writes Boyden, "the mixed bloods are insolent and stubborn. The Metis represent two painful thorns in Canadian Prime Minister John. A. MacDonald's feet as he attempts his Anglo-Saxon stride to the Pacific."
So MacDonald and the Canadian army sweep the Metis out of the way. Riel orders Thomas Scott, a fanatical anti-Cayholic, anti-Metis Protestant to be shot dead in the Metis revolt of 1870. Orangemen Protestants in Ontario freak out. Then in 1885, the Canadian army defeat Riel and Dumont's Metis soldiers at the Battle of Batoche. After a short, totally unfair trial, Riel is condemned to death. French-Canadians in Quebec and elsewhere, and many others around the world, plead for the Canadian government to scrap the death sentence.
But Prime Minister MacDonald won't listen. "He shall hang," says MacDonald of Riel, "though every dog in Quebec bark in his favour." Once Riel hangs, the French Canadians go ballistic and rarely vote for MacDonald's party, the Conservatives ever again.
Author Joseph Boyden wisely spends most of the book on the Battle of Batoche and the trial of Riel. As he points out, compared to the massive trench battles of the First World War, Batoche was a mere skirmish. At the battles of Vimy Ridge and Ypres during World War One, thousands of Canadians were killed, sometimes in a single day. And at Batoche? Maybe five or six soldiers died. This was sad but not tragic.
Dumont by the way survived and lived away from Canada for quite some time.
Since this book came out, the Idle No More movement has surfaced . Also a recent court decision has ruled that the Meis and non-status Indians are Indians under the Constitution Act and so may be entitled to benefits paid to status Indians.
Yet despite all of tthese hopeful signs, the French-English divide still slices through Canadian politics. In the last Quebec provincial election, the sovereigntist Parti Quebecois ended up as the government, and is still committed to taking Quebec out of Canada.And the majority of Canadians don't like the Idle No More movement or Chief Theresa Spence who fasted to force the Canadian government to listen to First Nations demands.
As the motto of the London-based 'Times' newspaper used to say, "Times change, values don't."Boyden's book fills us in on a turning point in Canadian history that explains much of the politics of to-day.
Thursday, 31 January 2013
Review of movie 'Amour'
'Amour'. Starring Jean Louis Trintignant, Emanuelle Roy and Isabelle Huppert. Directed by Michael Hanneke.
There's definitely two distinct ways of looking at old age. One is Jane Fonda's way or the North American way. "Old age is wonderful," goes this message. "It's just another stage of growth. Sure, it ends in death but don't think about that part." Then there's the European take on ageing which says it can be hell on wheels.
The French film 'Amour' hews to the second view. Georges and Anne Laurent are an upscale French couple who've made it into their eighties. They're living in a big apartment somewhere above the ground floor in a building that maybe in Paris.
Anne, played by Emanuelle Riva is a former classical music pianist who gets hit by a stroke. Then a second stroke hits her. Georges, played by another veteran actor, Jean-Louis Trintingnant has to take care of his now invalid wife. Director Michael Hanneke spares us nothing. We see how hard it is for Georges to lift his wife from the wheelchair she's in, to the bed and back from the bed to the wheelchair. In long stable camera shots, Hanneke gives us closeups of the couple's struggles just to do what used to be normal everyday tasks.
And sometimes Georges has to change the bedsheets, as Anne now urinates in bed. I've never seen that in a film before.
Isabelle Huppert plays a small role as the daughter Eva. Like many middle-aged children she has trouble facing her parents' physical decay and their oncoming death. Near the film's end, Georges has to feed his near paralyzed wife. "Come on sweet," he says. "You only ate three mouthfuls."
The ending hurts. But you can't condemn anybody. Ageing , disability and death stalk us all. 'Amour' means love of course. In the end Georges shows his love for Anne. 'Amour' is one tough film, worlds away from the upbeat mood of most North Americans. For that alone it's well worth watching.
There's definitely two distinct ways of looking at old age. One is Jane Fonda's way or the North American way. "Old age is wonderful," goes this message. "It's just another stage of growth. Sure, it ends in death but don't think about that part." Then there's the European take on ageing which says it can be hell on wheels.
The French film 'Amour' hews to the second view. Georges and Anne Laurent are an upscale French couple who've made it into their eighties. They're living in a big apartment somewhere above the ground floor in a building that maybe in Paris.
Anne, played by Emanuelle Riva is a former classical music pianist who gets hit by a stroke. Then a second stroke hits her. Georges, played by another veteran actor, Jean-Louis Trintingnant has to take care of his now invalid wife. Director Michael Hanneke spares us nothing. We see how hard it is for Georges to lift his wife from the wheelchair she's in, to the bed and back from the bed to the wheelchair. In long stable camera shots, Hanneke gives us closeups of the couple's struggles just to do what used to be normal everyday tasks.
And sometimes Georges has to change the bedsheets, as Anne now urinates in bed. I've never seen that in a film before.
Isabelle Huppert plays a small role as the daughter Eva. Like many middle-aged children she has trouble facing her parents' physical decay and their oncoming death. Near the film's end, Georges has to feed his near paralyzed wife. "Come on sweet," he says. "You only ate three mouthfuls."
The ending hurts. But you can't condemn anybody. Ageing , disability and death stalk us all. 'Amour' means love of course. In the end Georges shows his love for Anne. 'Amour' is one tough film, worlds away from the upbeat mood of most North Americans. For that alone it's well worth watching.
Thursday, 24 January 2013
Review of 'Against Our Will'
Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape, a book written by Susan Brownmiller. Published in October 1975. 541pp.
In 1975 my life was a mess. Rage, sadness and paranoia buffeted my mind. Patella femoral syndrome, a degenerative disease ate away at my knees making me unable to walk more than six or seven blocks a day. And some young feminists I met abused me whenever I saw them. In fact, as I now realize, they were just giving me back what I'd dealt out to other people.
So when some young woman told me about 'Against Our Will' a book by Susan Brownmiller, I said something like, "I won't read that. I'm tired of feminism and feminists."
But a week or so ago, I came across 'Against Our Will' in a tiny thrift store in Vancouver's West End. I bought it and read it. And to-day, I think it's one great book.For Brownmiller, rape of women by men, is the very essence of men-women relations. Rape, she says, "is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation, by which all men keep all women in a state of fear."
To prove this controversial point, Brownmiller ranges across history, religion, culture, psychology and above all criminal law. Along the way she denounces so-called famous rapists and killers like the 19th century murderer 'Jack the Ripper'. She also disputes the teachings of famous religious figures like the theologian St. Thomas Aquinas.
There are long chapters in the book in which she shows how wars give men the chance to rape and kill. There's a small section on child molestation that's become a huge issue in recent years. She also examines the delicate area of white-black relations in the United States and concludes that black men as well as white ones have raped many women. Liberals and some progressives may have not liked this part of the book, since white racists in the U.S. and elsewhere have always denounced black men for raping and hungering after white women.And Brownmiller concludes that black men have raped white women many times.
Then in one of the most moving parts of 'Against Our Will', she quotes long testimonies of rape victims and the terrible impact that rape had on their lives. Here, Brownmiller hammers criminologists and others who blame women for being raped.
"Because men control the definition of sex," writes Brownmiller, "women are allotted a poor assortment of options." This is true and no one can read 'Against Our Will' and call rape as one person I knew did, "No big deal."
Since this book came out, much has changed for the better. Many police are now women and will listen to and act on the complaints of rape victims as many male police never did. Women have led marches across Canada and the U.S , demanding that laws against rape be enacted. Due to their efforts and books like 'Against Our Will', rape is now seen as a serious crime.
Still, much remains to be done. In India, for example, a recent news story revealed many rapes of Indian women by men. And the case of serial killer Robert Pickton shows that many policemen still will not act to protect women from rape and murder by men.
, Now that my mental state has improved as has my opinion of feminism, I can only agree with the words of Carol Rinzer, a journalist at the New York City-based 'Village Voice' newspaper.'Against Our Will' she wrote way back in 1975, "is a major work of history. It's a classic." 38 years later it still is.
In 1975 my life was a mess. Rage, sadness and paranoia buffeted my mind. Patella femoral syndrome, a degenerative disease ate away at my knees making me unable to walk more than six or seven blocks a day. And some young feminists I met abused me whenever I saw them. In fact, as I now realize, they were just giving me back what I'd dealt out to other people.
So when some young woman told me about 'Against Our Will' a book by Susan Brownmiller, I said something like, "I won't read that. I'm tired of feminism and feminists."
But a week or so ago, I came across 'Against Our Will' in a tiny thrift store in Vancouver's West End. I bought it and read it. And to-day, I think it's one great book.For Brownmiller, rape of women by men, is the very essence of men-women relations. Rape, she says, "is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation, by which all men keep all women in a state of fear."
To prove this controversial point, Brownmiller ranges across history, religion, culture, psychology and above all criminal law. Along the way she denounces so-called famous rapists and killers like the 19th century murderer 'Jack the Ripper'. She also disputes the teachings of famous religious figures like the theologian St. Thomas Aquinas.
There are long chapters in the book in which she shows how wars give men the chance to rape and kill. There's a small section on child molestation that's become a huge issue in recent years. She also examines the delicate area of white-black relations in the United States and concludes that black men as well as white ones have raped many women. Liberals and some progressives may have not liked this part of the book, since white racists in the U.S. and elsewhere have always denounced black men for raping and hungering after white women.And Brownmiller concludes that black men have raped white women many times.
Then in one of the most moving parts of 'Against Our Will', she quotes long testimonies of rape victims and the terrible impact that rape had on their lives. Here, Brownmiller hammers criminologists and others who blame women for being raped.
"Because men control the definition of sex," writes Brownmiller, "women are allotted a poor assortment of options." This is true and no one can read 'Against Our Will' and call rape as one person I knew did, "No big deal."
Since this book came out, much has changed for the better. Many police are now women and will listen to and act on the complaints of rape victims as many male police never did. Women have led marches across Canada and the U.S , demanding that laws against rape be enacted. Due to their efforts and books like 'Against Our Will', rape is now seen as a serious crime.
Still, much remains to be done. In India, for example, a recent news story revealed many rapes of Indian women by men. And the case of serial killer Robert Pickton shows that many policemen still will not act to protect women from rape and murder by men.
, Now that my mental state has improved as has my opinion of feminism, I can only agree with the words of Carol Rinzer, a journalist at the New York City-based 'Village Voice' newspaper.'Against Our Will' she wrote way back in 1975, "is a major work of history. It's a classic." 38 years later it still is.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)