September 23, 2008

I always thought, whenever people talked about Middlesex, that they actually meant Middlemarch. This led me to believe that a lot of people had some very, very strange interpretations of great literature.

It wasn’t until a few months ago that I realized I just hadn’t been listening carefully.

Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to I always thought, whenever people talked about Middlesex

  1. TED says:

    Oh please, you think you’re confused? For years, I thought the same thing whenever I heard people mention Middle Earth.

  2. TED: Perhaps you don’t have the new edition of Middlemarch with all the elvish lyrics restored?

  3. Jeff says:

    Middlesex is a terrific book, by the way.

  4. campbell says:

    Imagine my own confusion. I couldn’t comprehend how you could mistake one of the Home Counties for a book. Only Jeff’s response lifted the fog.

  5. initials says:

    Wow. Realize, please, that you can only apply the various gender theories in very warped ways to depict those poor, orphaned sisters as transsexuals… Their author, on the other hand? Bring in Marxism (well, Stalinism, really), and you have a nasty picture of a decadent, ivory-tower libertine false marketing herself to make a killing selling books. Eugenides, on the other hand? Male writing F2M in, of all places, the GM-exec. suburbs of Detroit. And yet, many feminists find his portrayal blameless… Hmm…

  6. Aidan says:

    O. My. Dog. You are SO cute, I just want to squeeze you and pinch your cheeks.

  7. Jeff: I don’t know, I don’t love the part where she burns the will.

    campbell: I’m still trying to figure out how soup can be commenting on my blog.

    initials: What do you make of Silas Marner?

    Aidan: I am here waiting to be squeezed and my cheeks to be pinched.

  8. initals says:

    Read from a feminist/marxist perspective, and you will see… The capitalist miser’s heart is transform-ed by the proverbial child of the people. Silas is made to begin thinking about the care of one human being, and it teaches him to care for the world… Unfortunately, Sophie simply inherits all his wealth and so just ends up as one freakishly rich little nice girl. That’s not exactly a Marxist redistribution of excess value, as she’s totally the Church/Temperance type. Really, this is the kind of moralist pap that Henry Fielding, Esq. was railing against a hundred-odd years before, only less Puritan and far better written… Also, I’d love to see the BBC movie. It’s like the plot for one multi-season story arc in a soap opera (before the twist)!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *