A review by charbck
The Iliac Crest by Cristina Rivera Garza

challenging mysterious reflective medium-paced

• Plot- or character-driven? Character
• Strong character development? Yes
• Loveable characters? No
• Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
• Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0

i went into this novel to continue my interrogation of the gender binary. did i get an interrogation of the gender binary…? not really. the david lynch comparison by publisher’s weekly is extremely fitting. like lynch’s films, i admire this novel for its craft, style, symbols, characters, and world, yet i have no idea what happened at all.

i’m confused about the interrogation of the narrator’s gender. the Amparos insistence that the doctor is secretly a woman reads transphobic. and this being published by the feminist press… it’s feeling terfy. our main character was not floating within the gender binary like i assumed he would be… he was a man. and reassured himself he was a man over and over. everyone in his life addresses him as a man except the Amparos. but the narrator’s insistence that he is a man refutes the transphobia. but maybe i am thinking too pessimistically and the Amparos insistence that he is a she is another instance of denying reality. there is a brief interrogation of gender in the middle of the book, where the narrator concludes men and women r the same in labor as in death, in a very women r as ruthless and cruel as men way. i saw some reviews calling this nonbinary realness and while i agree garza crossed many boundaries (state, time, language) the characters fit very neatly into their assigned gender, ESPECIALLY the main character. his description of women and his relationships with them was soooo heterosexual cis man. since he was written by a woman im sure this is commentary on misogyny, but he does not give transmasc theythem anything… at least not to the 2024 reader. garza in the author’s note says “gender—and what is done in the name of gender—can be lethal.” i dont understand how the book addresses that sentiment ??? unless the narrator disappeared themselves and chose to live as a man in the disappearance. or they r all dead. IDK!

this is just ONE motif i dont understand. that being said, i dont think this confusion makes the book bad, but i need to be in a socratic seminar with a professor to get my questions answered. 

this is a RICH text. there is an analysis essay to be written for every chapter. Maybe if i am still logged into JSTOR i will try to find a paper. there is important historical and literary context that i am DEFINITELY missing. glu glu.