Incidentally, I just read "Opening Theory." I guess one positive take on it is that even imperfect stories are being published in elite venues. It is pretty painfully long and episodic in a way that reminds me of Trollope. There are some power dynamics at play, I guess, with the age difference, but I didn't find Margaret's revelation at the end terribly revelatory?
It's really interesting to imagine what the male equivalents of Rooney, Moshfegh, and Cline would look like. You mention Greenwell and Lerner. But they're both in their 40s. And Greenwell is also gay (and, I presume, writes mainly about gay relationships), whereas Rooney, Moshfegh, and Cline are straight women who write mostly about heterosexual women. What would straight male literature by straight male writers in their 20s and 30s look like?
I was having this discussion with some friends I've met off of Substack and I noted how few 20-something male Substack writers we know of, whereas there's a ton of 20-something female ones. It seems that us 30-something male writers, even beyond Substack, may be the youngest male age cohort that's still dedicated to writing (especially straight men).
How many of the male authors in the 40-yr-old cohort are urbanites or New Yorkers? There's still room for more diversity in that range (says the nearly 50-yr-old).
i like the idea that literature asks us to shape the next sociopolitical chapter of society, but i dont specifically agree that moving literature in our culture ONLY concerns females understanding and normalising their non-normative sexual desires. in my opinion, sally rooney etc. are mainstream, they are the most talked abt. and that talking has become even louder within tiktok/instagram/youtube, any reader who takes to social media to bring attention to their reading and their interests.
one must consider that the majority of readers talking about rooney etc. are women. many young women finding their sexuality. but i want to highlight they are WOMEN.
as a queer person, who knows other queer people (afabs/amaps what-have-you) i want to suggest that sally rooney, cis, mostly het women conceptualising their sexuality is definitely not taking up a lot of our culture, our headspace, our literature etc.
not to say our reading habits arent similar, that this isnt a topic, but i do not believe it the be the ONLY one, the MAIN one. i have found that my friends who read like me, not specifically around female sexuality but around identity, memory, community, comfort, race, relationships, class, money, culture and society, are quiet about their reading. they dont advertise it on social media as much as i see books about female sexuality.
of course, im not trying to say the books i read arent abt sexuality and finding oneself, coming of age, identity, but there are many, many more topics out there, that my community of queer critical/cultural studies majors are reading, which are very far away from female sexuality, and are loudly talked abt in other avenues. (through friends, on essays, perhaps recreated in their creative writing).
given, my bubble is small, but i hope you consider WHY u believe female sexuality to be the biggest thing, the next thing of our poltical world. where do u see all those books? what community are you in? where is ur lense from?
Submission in the bedroom: yep. How far that could go? nope. But then what about commitment to a loved one? How does that fit into this "theory" of sorts?
As to the publishing "industry", isn't this a discouraging message in many ways? And perhaps why you would love to read about something else ...
Interesting read Sam. I don’t know how connected I am to the girl boss narrative, although I did enjoy listening to Sally Rooney read “Opening Theory” for the New Yorker’s The writer’s voice (while taking a hike in nature). But I didn’t read something quite so deep into the story. And I am still trying to figure out why I am not connecting at all (and bored by!) Miranda July’s “All Fours” which everybody I know and respect is raving about… so if you ever end up reading it, I’d love to hear your take on it.
I’m visiting my hometown in Montana and this is a fresh reminder of how little traditional publishing cares about what life in a place like this is really like. So those literary snapshots are of certain vibes in NYC or LA. They are not reliable measures of life or historical moments anywhere else. I suppose some very simplistic slices of rural life get captured in country music, but the ways that men and women interact in these communities is more nuanced than that. Something like the girl boss narrative just seems silly in comparison to the women who shape these communities.
I just read (over the past 36 hours) the short brilliant terrifying "The Fifth Child" by Doris Lessing. Recommended by Eleanor Anstruther at The Books That Made Us. A dystopian fertility novel(la).
Incidentally, I just read "Opening Theory." I guess one positive take on it is that even imperfect stories are being published in elite venues. It is pretty painfully long and episodic in a way that reminds me of Trollope. There are some power dynamics at play, I guess, with the age difference, but I didn't find Margaret's revelation at the end terribly revelatory?
It's really interesting to imagine what the male equivalents of Rooney, Moshfegh, and Cline would look like. You mention Greenwell and Lerner. But they're both in their 40s. And Greenwell is also gay (and, I presume, writes mainly about gay relationships), whereas Rooney, Moshfegh, and Cline are straight women who write mostly about heterosexual women. What would straight male literature by straight male writers in their 20s and 30s look like?
I was having this discussion with some friends I've met off of Substack and I noted how few 20-something male Substack writers we know of, whereas there's a ton of 20-something female ones. It seems that us 30-something male writers, even beyond Substack, may be the youngest male age cohort that's still dedicated to writing (especially straight men).
How many of the male authors in the 40-yr-old cohort are urbanites or New Yorkers? There's still room for more diversity in that range (says the nearly 50-yr-old).
i like the idea that literature asks us to shape the next sociopolitical chapter of society, but i dont specifically agree that moving literature in our culture ONLY concerns females understanding and normalising their non-normative sexual desires. in my opinion, sally rooney etc. are mainstream, they are the most talked abt. and that talking has become even louder within tiktok/instagram/youtube, any reader who takes to social media to bring attention to their reading and their interests.
one must consider that the majority of readers talking about rooney etc. are women. many young women finding their sexuality. but i want to highlight they are WOMEN.
as a queer person, who knows other queer people (afabs/amaps what-have-you) i want to suggest that sally rooney, cis, mostly het women conceptualising their sexuality is definitely not taking up a lot of our culture, our headspace, our literature etc.
not to say our reading habits arent similar, that this isnt a topic, but i do not believe it the be the ONLY one, the MAIN one. i have found that my friends who read like me, not specifically around female sexuality but around identity, memory, community, comfort, race, relationships, class, money, culture and society, are quiet about their reading. they dont advertise it on social media as much as i see books about female sexuality.
of course, im not trying to say the books i read arent abt sexuality and finding oneself, coming of age, identity, but there are many, many more topics out there, that my community of queer critical/cultural studies majors are reading, which are very far away from female sexuality, and are loudly talked abt in other avenues. (through friends, on essays, perhaps recreated in their creative writing).
given, my bubble is small, but i hope you consider WHY u believe female sexuality to be the biggest thing, the next thing of our poltical world. where do u see all those books? what community are you in? where is ur lense from?
Submission in the bedroom: yep. How far that could go? nope. But then what about commitment to a loved one? How does that fit into this "theory" of sorts?
As to the publishing "industry", isn't this a discouraging message in many ways? And perhaps why you would love to read about something else ...
"commitment to a loved one? How does that fit into this "theory" of sorts?"
An essential question, Mary.
Interesting read Sam. I don’t know how connected I am to the girl boss narrative, although I did enjoy listening to Sally Rooney read “Opening Theory” for the New Yorker’s The writer’s voice (while taking a hike in nature). But I didn’t read something quite so deep into the story. And I am still trying to figure out why I am not connecting at all (and bored by!) Miranda July’s “All Fours” which everybody I know and respect is raving about… so if you ever end up reading it, I’d love to hear your take on it.
I’m visiting my hometown in Montana and this is a fresh reminder of how little traditional publishing cares about what life in a place like this is really like. So those literary snapshots are of certain vibes in NYC or LA. They are not reliable measures of life or historical moments anywhere else. I suppose some very simplistic slices of rural life get captured in country music, but the ways that men and women interact in these communities is more nuanced than that. Something like the girl boss narrative just seems silly in comparison to the women who shape these communities.
Good analysis, but I have absolutely zero interest in reading any of that.
Sam,
I just read (over the past 36 hours) the short brilliant terrifying "The Fifth Child" by Doris Lessing. Recommended by Eleanor Anstruther at The Books That Made Us. A dystopian fertility novel(la).
A different take on female sexuality.
Nicely said.