Troy AndersonApril 17, 2008 17:33 EST

I enjoyed reading this article but I would have liked to see some feminist analysis. Surely the author, and the writers being discussed, had something, anything, to say which would show an awareness that their success is perfectly normative within a patriarchy which places supreme value upon the sexualized woman. Sure, these writers may have garnered some supposedly new and improved power and status from their works, but it's not lost on me that they're still caged birds.

larry gassanApril 23, 2008 19:03 EST

This review illuminates the elliptical algebra of situational power and inequality of sex, which varies continually. "The Story of O" reveals slowly that sex is Theatre of Mind, and by the end the reader begins to wonder who is the neediest: O, or Sir Stephen.

But to the review: the sentence "Her diagnosis is essentially material: there are far more beautiful young women on the Plateau Mont-Royal than there are fuckable men—hence the brutality of the game." is blunt and unsparing in any analysis.

I'm grateful this review was not filtered through any dogmatic prism: feminism, Marxism, idiot man-child laddy-mag[ism], or stuffy Masterpiece Theatre bloviation.

Finally, the writers are not caged birds, although their subjects might be.

Francesco SinibaldiMay 03, 2008 15:48 EST

Notion of love.

In the sky
the sunny cloud
appears like a
delicate candle in
the song of your
heart, and sometimes,
when you pray
with clasped hands
recalling the past,
a young bird
arrives near the
sound of a footprint,
and ever delights,
in a notion of love.....

Francesco Sinibaldi

AnonymousOctober 27, 2009 20:13 EST

I'm grateful this review was not filtered through any dogmatic prism: feminism, Marxism, idiot man-child laddy-mag[ism], or stuffy Masterpiece Theatre bloviation.