Scan barcode
A review by jona
This Is Pleasure by Mary Gaitskill
challenging
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
I really liked the book, if you see it as critique of the people portrayed in this book and their excusing behavior. But then I read this interview with the author and now I'm not so sure about my feelings for this novella.
In the interview Mary Gaitskill says:
"Actually, it is a defense of the male character, to some extent. He’s someone who, for all his life, has acted in a way that’s now called “harassment,” and not only was it tolerated but he did very well, is a great success, socially and professionally. So why would he realize how offensive his behavior now seems to many people? I don’t intend the story as an exoneration; I don’t see this character as innocent or completely harmless. But, really, who is? Quin is flawed, but he’s essentially a good man who is being punished beyond the scope of his “sins.”"
I feel very conflicted with this statement, because of course I believe that everyone has flaws and stuff like that and you shouldn't be cancelled forever, just because you didn't understand a situation. But I feel like statements like this are exactly what is damaging to the movement against sexual harassment. Of course Quin didn't rape anybody, but that's not the point right? He doesn't understand that his actions, even though there is no bad intent there, make other women feel bad and small and other things and that this debate is not about what he feels.
In the end I think I don't understand why this novella was published. If it's not to be shown the ridiculous behavior of people defending or not taking sexual harassment seriously, brushing it off as only a bad joke, then what does Gaitskill want to say with this? Because if there's one thing we don't need right now, it's showing "the other side" of the MeToo-Movement.
In the interview Mary Gaitskill says:
"Actually, it is a defense of the male character, to some extent. He’s someone who, for all his life, has acted in a way that’s now called “harassment,” and not only was it tolerated but he did very well, is a great success, socially and professionally. So why would he realize how offensive his behavior now seems to many people? I don’t intend the story as an exoneration; I don’t see this character as innocent or completely harmless. But, really, who is? Quin is flawed, but he’s essentially a good man who is being punished beyond the scope of his “sins.”"
I feel very conflicted with this statement, because of course I believe that everyone has flaws and stuff like that and you shouldn't be cancelled forever, just because you didn't understand a situation. But I feel like statements like this are exactly what is damaging to the movement against sexual harassment. Of course Quin didn't rape anybody, but that's not the point right? He doesn't understand that his actions, even though there is no bad intent there, make other women feel bad and small and other things and that this debate is not about what he feels.
In the end I think I don't understand why this novella was published. If it's not to be shown the ridiculous behavior of people defending or not taking sexual harassment seriously, brushing it off as only a bad joke, then what does Gaitskill want to say with this? Because if there's one thing we don't need right now, it's showing "the other side" of the MeToo-Movement.
Content Warnings
Minor: Pedophilia, Rape, and Sexual assault