The role that women play in Ghostwritten both struck and upset
me. While the opening chapter does not
discuss women at length, “Tokyo” reveals one of the most womanizing characters
I have come across in a novel in quite some time. Takeshi is absolutely unapologetic about his
treatment of women. In fact, he has even
developed his own revolting and chauvinistic motto when it comes to having sex
with women: “Only shag women who have more to lose than you do” (36). Throughout this chapter, Takeshi goes on to
brag about his multiple adulterous affairs with multiple women. He doesn’t care that most are engaged or
involved with other men. In fact, that
is exactly what makes these women most attractive to him. Don’t forget that Takeshi is also in the
middle of a bitter divorce with his estranged wife whom he is semi-desperately
attempting to win back from time to time.
Not only does he seek out emotionally vulnerable and perhaps often
unstable women, but the manner of which he speaks about each conquest is enough
to make any feminist dry-heave. Here
are a few of his best gems:
-“She came out of the shower, naked, brown, and dripping,
and damn if she wasn’t still gasping
for it!” (36).
-“Seriously, you should see her ass! Two overripe nectarines squeezed together in
a paper bag. One prod and they
explode! Juice everywhere!” (36).
-“What the eyes don’t see, eh? She’ll make a good little wifey, I’m
sure. She’s after a few nights of lust
and sin before she becomes a housewife forever” (36).
While Takeshi is well on his way to winning the “Man of the
Year” award, both Taro’s and Koji’s comments may rank them as candidates for Prince
Charmings as well:
-“Somewhere frequented by nubile girls on the prowl for
young male flesh” (48). -Koji
-“Brains aren’t everything in a women. Ayaka was saying this morning, a lad your age
should be stoking the poker more…” (51). -Taro
-“…so, have you, y’know, snipped her ribbons and unwrapped
her packaging yet?” (56). –Koji
Not to be outdone though, Neal Brose
is quite the Rico Suave as well. How
could anyone expect such a catch like Neal to be devoted to just one female? I mean, a man needs to spread his seed,
right? (I sincerely hope you are not
missing my sarcasm here!) It is clear
that Katy was not enough for Neal. He
needed to start shagging his maid as well.
His description of the cleaning lady made me feel as though I was
witnessing an old pervert describing an innocent school girl: “She was in a
black and white uniform with black tights.
The material must make her skin sweat…Her hair was luscious, her skin
dusky. After thirty seconds of being in
the same room, I knew that she and I would end up f***ing each other, and I
knew that she knew it too” (84). While
we discover that the maid is anything but
a poor and defenseless little doe, the way Neal accounts their sexual escapades
feels as though it is smeared with grime and disrespect: “I wanted her
again. This was costing me more than
money, so I may as well push for maximum value and damn myself properly. I got up and f***ed her from behind, on the
dressing table. We broke the mirror”
(88).
While Takeshi’s, Koji’s, and Neal’s
attitudes toward and about are less than desirable, they look like choir boys
in comparison to the Warloard’s Son and the father from “Holy Mountain.” Aside from slapping his young daughter for
merely asking a question, the father basically pimps her out for two lousy
bowls. To add insult to injury, the
father actually praises this dirty
bastard for allowing him to rape his daughter: “My Lord’s reputation for
generosity is just! No wonder all who
hear of My Lord’s grace weep with love at the very mention—” (112). My skin just crawls recollecting this scene
again.
After
the Warlord’s Son brutally rapes the young girl, stealing her virginity and any
promise of a future suitor (which is a whole
different problem with the role of women), he has the audacity to say to the
father, “You should be paying me. For
breaking in your foal” (113). To say
that a women is only “worth” anything if she is a virgin and that her virginity
can be used as some sort of currency is deplorable. This entire scenario is a testament to the
absolute dismal treatment of women.
Ultimately, however, despite the destitute future her shameful action of
“allowing” herself to be raped, the young girl overcomes countless obstacles
and lives a life worthy of the utmost respect and honor.
Mongolia’s chapter
introduces us to a husband—Buyant—who repeatedly disrespects and talks down to
his wife, Gunga. Petersburg showcases a little sexpot, Margarita, who intentionally whores
out her body as a way to gain access to priceless art. London
gives us Marco—a man who concocts various “angles” in order to get women into
bed. Clear
Island’s physicist, Mowleen Montervary is ultimately unable to out run the male-dominated
government agency. And “The Bat” from Night Train continually insults his
ex-wife with misogyny-laden comments on air.
Overwhelmingly, this novel often treats women as either a
mode of currency or simply the means to get a man’s “jollies” off. Whatever way you look at it though, Mitchell
gives us multiple female characters that are semi-disposable. Sure, some of them serve a purpose but
ultimately, the only ones who show perseverance and any redeemable qualities are
the woman from the Holy Mountain and Mo.
One dies and the other is captured, but they refuse to let their life
circumstances dictate their fate and instead, takes the metaphorical bull by
the horns.
So while, I agree with you're interpretation of how men treat women in Mitchell's novel I cannot help but pointing out that a few of the women use sex to gain power themselves. They take advantage of the men who are so easily subdued by the prospect of sex.
ReplyDeleteAs you say Margarita, "intentionally whores out her body" but you forget the fact that it is her choice. Throughout the section she constantly tells the reader about her past boyfriends and lovers, who she seduced away from their wives in order to get what she wants. Margarita is playing a game with the rules society has given her. We do not get her formative years so we do not know what caused her to be a "sexpot" as you call her, but from the hints of her delusions that Rudi loves her in spite of the fact that their relationship contains multiple signs of being an extremely unhealthy one, she stays with him and believes he loves. It is clear from this that her past experiences, not mentioned in the novel, may have influenced her choices to manipulate men the way she does. The fact is, is that it is her choice, as delusional as it may be, she has a sense of sexuality that the other women in the novel lack and she uses it to her benefit in the patriarchal world around her.
Another female character who has authority in this novel is arguably Katy Forbes. Katy is first introduced to us as the ex-(or soon to be ex-)wife of Neal Brose in the Hong Kong section. Katy leaves Neal. She makes the decision to leave him, even thought she still loves him, because he cannot provide her what she wants, namely a family. Katy also in the London section shows her authority with Marco. So yeah, Marco is a player. He's got a child and girlfriend (Poppy and India) and yet he still sleeps with other women, however Katy still holds the power between them. She is a consenting single woman, who wanted to have some fun and who has not problem kicking Marco out of her apartment when the Queen Anne chair arrives and she wants time to grieve over her ex-husband. In this situation Katy has the power over Marco.
Lastly, I would say Mo also has more authority than you give her credit for. She is an expert physicist in a man's world. She is more intelligent than most of the characters in the novel put together and ultimately, she is the creator of the Zookeeper in order to fight the power of the men (Mr. Texas guy and associates) who entrap her. She also gets them to allows her to bring her husband and son to the facility with her through "goat" related manipulations. She knows she is smarter than her captors, but she is also smart enough to know that one women cannot escape the power of the government, so she complies but on her own terms.
So while, I agree the that most of the men is the book are players and womanizers, I think you do not give Mitchell's female characters enough credit. Even minor characters like Sherry, traveling alone all the way from Australia, have power over their lives in ways that the male characters do not.
not to mention the fact that most of the womanizing men are punished before the book is over, i.e. Takeski is going to lose everything, Marco is living in poverty, and Rudi and Neal Brose die, while the female characters survive to seek new lives.
It's tough to argue that many of the male characters in the book treat women poorly (understatement), but for my part, there were really only two characters in the book that I found particularly compelling: The record store clerk and the woman from the holy mountain. I don't really think that the novel as a whole condones sexism. After all, the Zookeeper, savior of humanity, was created by a woman (quite a strong willed one at that). Actually, this theme of strong will shows up in the woman on the holy mountain as well. These two are actually probably the strongest characters in the book.
ReplyDeleteBoth of these women are proactive in the face of dangers represented by men. In one of the early scenes in which her tea shop is raided/vandalized by soldiers, she is ever vigilant, waiting for her opportunity and seizing it. As soon as the soldier clasping her "relaxed his grip" she "staved I his kneecap with a bottle of oil and sent the lamp in [her] face flying across the room" (117). She credits "Lord Buddha" with facilitating her escape, claiming tat he "slipped a brass chopstick into [her] hand" and that he "opened the door for [her] as [her] fingertips touched it" but she is the one who "stuck the brass chopstick through the side of [the soldier's] mouth" causing him to let go (117). She reports the action of the scene, taking credit herself for all of the real violence and only gives Buddha the credit for the passive actions that facilitate it. Not only does her point of view speak to her own agency but if we draw back and look at the scene more objectively it becomes apparent that she was (possibly) responsible for even those actions for which she credits the diety. In this scene the father gets beaten, loses his teeth on the barrel of "Medal Man's" gun and is "black with bruises" when she returns to the Tea Shack to find him "limping through the wreckage" of their home (117). He gets what he has coming to him in karmic retaliation for his treatment of his daughter who escapes essentially unharmed. Medal Man is also portrayed unfavorably in this scene. Instead of being credited with speech, the woman reports that he "shouted animal noises" and that he "barked at [her] father" (116). He is shown as a callous brute through this and his actions toward the father. Surely, none of the men in the scene are portrayed anywhere nearly as favorably as the woman is.
In a similarly condemning portrayal of (male) soldiers, the female scientist of the Clear Island section is the favorably portrayed hero. In the face of nameless adversaries who forcefully intrude upon the small island and hide behind such phrases as "Lady, you don't seem to realize. Your work is property of the American Department of Defense . . . and if you've hidden it, we'll find it" (370). Her adversaries regard her as less expendable than the soldiers regard the Holy Mountain Woman and she is therefore able to take control of the situation without resorting to violence. She is defiant even while admitting to being "too scared to bluff" (370). She calmly asserts her authority of the men, and by extension the American Government that they have invoked, explaining, "It's not my problem if you don't believe me. Feynman has the black book. . . Goats aren't fussy when they're hungry" (370). She, and the HMW both exhibit levels of bravery that are unequalled by any other characters in the book, male or female.
Therefore, I really do not think that the novel as a whole is sexist despite the presence of several sexist and misogynistic characters.