<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A worthy follow-up to Idols of Perversity
Review: Because of his previous study/essays in Idols of Perversity, I grabbed this book almost immediately after it was published. Just like the other book, this one was very insightful about the sort of deep-seated cliches applied to women in the arts - the virgin/whore/child-bride/vamp, etc. After reading it, I sat down and had another look at my own writings and tried to eradicate all those crippling, limiting roles from my female characters. One only wishes that this sort of thoughtful re-examination of female archetypes would be applied to more novels and films especially.
Rating:
Summary: A worthy follow-up to Idols of Perversity
Review: Because of his previous study/essays in Idols of Perversity, I grabbed this book almost immediately after it was published. Just like the other book, this one was very insightful about the sort of deep-seated cliches applied to women in the arts - the virgin/whore/child-bride/vamp, etc. After reading it, I sat down and had another look at my own writings and tried to eradicate all those crippling, limiting roles from my female characters. One only wishes that this sort of thoughtful re-examination of female archetypes would be applied to more novels and films especially.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't waste your money.
Review: I don't like writing bad reviews but I bought this book and wasted my money. Almost everything Dijkstra talks about is already available in one form or another through critical articles, reviews, and even (sad to say) popular prejudice. Actually, Dr. Dijstra turns political correctness into a nightmare. Idols of Perversity was ideological to the core, but this book is like a Politically Correct Mrs. Grundy primer for Americans. This book was useless, just more finger shaking puritanism of the PC kind...Dijkstra a male missionary to males. His biology is off too. An example of the attempt to do interdisciplinary work without updating your biology library from the 1950's (or earlier?) Dijkstra still has yet to explain why the writers he criticizes are valuable and read by many. Maybe I am just too old fashioned or too modern to see that the enduring quality of a work of art lies in the very claims it makes to be good art. Examining the condition of a writer's bed sheets does not constitute good criticism but it makes a best friend for Mrs. Grundy.
Rating: 
Summary: Not nearly as good as -Idols of Perversity_
Review: I was mightily entertained by his previous book, -Idols of Perversity-, and had high hopes for this one, which seems much less interesting.-Idols- introduces us to the images of a number of fascinating academic and Symbolist artists of the 19th century, and makes them interesting by roundly condemning them for various sins against political correctness. This book tries to do the same; unfortunately, he covers more familiar territory, and deals with works that are far more familiar. Dijkstra's judgmentalism adds spice to the obscure, but to familiar masterpieces it seems like vandalism. It is not new or insightful to point out, say, that Hemingway was mighty interested in Real Manliness; or that Faulkner had peculiar notions about hereditary degeneration. Mr. Dijkstra does a good job at connecting these features of these works to half-forgotten ideas like Lombroso's physiognomy; but the overall effect is far less striking. Those who want to read Hemingway or Faulkner will not find their interest whetted by the diatribe against their sins against political correctness. Unlike nineteenth century paintings, these familiar books stand on their own.
Rating:
Summary: Not nearly as good as -Idols of Perversity_
Review: I was mightily entertained by his previous book, -Idols of Perversity-, and had high hopes for this one, which seems much less interesting. -Idols- introduces us to the images of a number of fascinating academic and Symbolist artists of the 19th century, and makes them interesting by roundly condemning them for various sins against political correctness. This book tries to do the same; unfortunately, he covers more familiar territory, and deals with works that are far more familiar. Dijkstra's judgmentalism adds spice to the obscure, but to familiar masterpieces it seems like vandalism. It is not new or insightful to point out, say, that Hemingway was mighty interested in Real Manliness; or that Faulkner had peculiar notions about hereditary degeneration. Mr. Dijkstra does a good job at connecting these features of these works to half-forgotten ideas like Lombroso's physiognomy; but the overall effect is far less striking. Those who want to read Hemingway or Faulkner will not find their interest whetted by the diatribe against their sins against political correctness. Unlike nineteenth century paintings, these familiar books stand on their own.
Rating: 
Summary: deliberate digression
Review: Throughout this book the author attempts to prove that all popular forms of entertainment have roots in misogyny. His reliance on examples nobody remembers is interesting, given his insistence on their powerful cultural influence to this day. Though it is useful in tracing the roots of misogynistic icons, the book strains at the bit to find a conspiracy of male poets, writers, artists, and scientists who were all out for one thing: to put women in their "proper" inferior place in the game of natural selection and pave the way for Nazism. He puts words in his sources' mouths repeatedly and engages in sometimes ludicrous speculation, making one wonder where the good professors own deepest beliefs lie. Very "politically- correct," but still a useful analysis, like his previous(better) work, IDOLS OF PERVERSITY.
<< 1 >>
| 
