soph (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sophia_sol) wrote2022-12-21 07:06 pm
sophia_sol) wrote2022-12-21 07:06 pm
Piranesi, by Susanna Clarke
I just reread Piranesi, and you know how when a book is so close to perfect and yet falls short in a few specific ways, it can feel more disappointing than a book that didn't get so close? Yeah, that.
There's so much about this book that's truly glorious, that I absolutely adore. Things that it's doing that are really special and unusual and incredible. But. For a book published in 2020 to unquestioningly reproduce a) the evil gay trope and b) the heroic police officer trope, with no indication there was ANY thought put into complicating either those ideas.....it's disappointing. Look, I'd absolutely be okay keeping Arne-Sayles gay; it's relevant to him as a representative of outsider thinking, especially during the era he was academically active. But there needs to be other non-evil, non-predatory queer characters as well to balance him out! In fact, let's just make 16 a non-cop lesbian, and maybe make Matthew Rose Sorensen gay as well, and the book would be fixed.
It's especially disappointing from an author like Clarke, who in Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell created a book where the persistent theme throughout is that people with social and political power abuse it, and that the outsiders and people from oppressed people groups are worth listening to. But of course, as was pointed out to me, just because people are interested in those themes doesn't mean they're capable of recognizing all of who has power and who's oppressed.
On my first read of Piranesi I was so transported by the good things the book is doing that I didn't think much about these issues except to note that they were present. But now on reread, they sting a little more. SIGH. I want this book to be perfect, dangit!!!!
EDIT: can't believe I forgot to mention: Piranesi must have had a background as a birder! he confidently identifies herring gulls instead of being like "um, they're seagulls of some kind"
There's so much about this book that's truly glorious, that I absolutely adore. Things that it's doing that are really special and unusual and incredible. But. For a book published in 2020 to unquestioningly reproduce a) the evil gay trope and b) the heroic police officer trope, with no indication there was ANY thought put into complicating either those ideas.....it's disappointing. Look, I'd absolutely be okay keeping Arne-Sayles gay; it's relevant to him as a representative of outsider thinking, especially during the era he was academically active. But there needs to be other non-evil, non-predatory queer characters as well to balance him out! In fact, let's just make 16 a non-cop lesbian, and maybe make Matthew Rose Sorensen gay as well, and the book would be fixed.
It's especially disappointing from an author like Clarke, who in Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell created a book where the persistent theme throughout is that people with social and political power abuse it, and that the outsiders and people from oppressed people groups are worth listening to. But of course, as was pointed out to me, just because people are interested in those themes doesn't mean they're capable of recognizing all of who has power and who's oppressed.
On my first read of Piranesi I was so transported by the good things the book is doing that I didn't think much about these issues except to note that they were present. But now on reread, they sting a little more. SIGH. I want this book to be perfect, dangit!!!!
EDIT: can't believe I forgot to mention: Piranesi must have had a background as a birder! he confidently identifies herring gulls instead of being like "um, they're seagulls of some kind"