Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 10:28:23 +0200 From: Crystal Warren Subject: [*FSFFU*] BDG Herland To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Many apologies for the late start to this discussion. In South Africa we are heading into winter and I am afraid that I succumbed to the very first flu bug that arrived. Thinking with some longing of Herland where they have all but eradicated illness. Some general questions to kick off discussion: 1) Did you enjoy Herland? If so, what did you particularly like? 2) If you didn't like the book, can you say why, what bothered you etc. 3) How realistic / feasible did you find the portrayal of the women's country (just struck me now that it is always referred to as Herland, the name the men give it. If I recall correctly we never learn what the women call it. Any comments on that) 4) Bearing in mind the period when the book was written (it was published in installments in Gilman's own magazine in 1915) how do think it compares to other writing of the time? 5) Any comments on how it stands up today? Does it work? Is it dated? Comparisons with other feminist utopias 6) What do you think about Herland's emphasis on motherhood? Also comments on the views of mothering and education. Hopefully some of these questions will start the discussion, and I am sure there are many other aspects of the book to talk about. Looking forward to an interesting exchange of views. Crystal Ms Crystal Warren Researcher National English Literary Museum Private Bag 1019 Tel: (+27 46) 6227042 6140 Grahamstown Fax: (+27 46) 6222582 South Africa e-mail: C.Warren@ru.ac.za Website: www.rhodes.ac.za/nelm/ NELM: 1980-2005 Telling our Stories for 25 Years ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 10:06:31 -0400 From: "Intihar, Phebe L USAEC/LogSec Team" Subject: [*FSFFU*] Herland To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Hi, all. I did like Herland. I particularly was struck by the parthenogenesis, which was vague, but which is a common solution in feminist utopias to the absolutely crucial problem they face: Men have to be gotten rid of, fictionally, or the story cannot proceed. Because men are aggressive and dominant and will certainly always take over agaIn if they aren't disappeared or walled off or their proportion in the society artificially kept very low, whatever the fictional device is. Glory Season forced them to be sailors involved in goods transportation, kept their numbers low, and allowed them to come on shore for brief impregnation episodes to provide genetic variation in their predominantly cloned society. Glory Season was most similar to Herland re the basic method of reproduction. Woman's Country walled men off. >>>>>>(just struck me now that it is always referred to as Herland, the name the men give it. If I recall correctly we never learn what the women call it. Any comments on that) [:-) Well, perhaps you may be recalling that our frame of reference is usually male; what men like is pronounced good or operational. In this case, it's really the author's name for the country, and the males are the protagonists, so it's fair......still, you make a good point! The men were explorers and colonizers and such men always give a name to the area and forget about the name the indigenes have for it. >>>>Any comments on how it stands up today? Does it work? Is it dated? Comparisons with other feminist utopias. I do think it works. Sure, it's dated, but everything must be located in its time. Its basic point is hardly dated! Suppose there were a land where there were only women....... THEN we'd fix things up right! This is the "land beyond the Northern Sea" that Ruben would consign Rachel to, in the old children' song. All feminist utopias have to answer two questions: first, how to get rid of the men so they can't reconquer; and second, how would society be different, namely better? 6) What do you think about Herland's emphasis on motherhood? The emphasis on motherhood shows that this feminist utopia was written by a woman. As opposed to the similar Glory Season by David Brin. That novel IS a feminist utopia (I actually searched till I found a picture of him, I was so sure when I read it that he must be a woman), but in the fine grain of the text, there are very male differences. In Glory Season there is an emphasis on sex -- the "Glory Season" itself when a rapture comes over the women, a sort of heat; a regular adolescent phase of homosexuality. In my experience feminist utopias written by women simply elide over all that, they don't focus on it. Also, Brin's novel takes a great interest in the technical aspects of women supplying goods to the society, and also he has a soldier class. So does Herland, to manage the men, but you get the feeling the large women guards are more ad hoc than a regular standing force. In Glory Season the women war, and I just don't believe that. At the end of Herland you suspect the men will come back with teams, and reconquer. Same with Femina, Brin's planet of women isolates: humanity hunts out these isolated planets (for fear of genetic drift, they say) and they do intend to reconquer and regularize it. A tragic ending, in both cases, as the female societies of both Herland and Femina were both superior and peaceful. Phebe ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 17:31:34 +0200 From: Henrick Pålsson Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Herland To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Hi! First I will say a few words about myself. My name is Henrick lives in Sweden. Am 29 years old. I havent read much feminist sf but a few books have I read and one of them is "Herland" > 1) Did you enjoy Herland? If so, what did you > particularly like? I ejoined Herland much. It was a few weeks ago I read that. I like the characters, they was very realistical. > 3) How realistic / feasible did you find the > portrayal of the women's country (just struck me now > that it is always referred to as Herland, the name > the men give it. If I recall correctly we never > learn what the women call it. Any comments on that) Very for me! A lovely country which I could live in, indeed. Ecologist and democratic (socalism) with for was a great idea!! I liked the book more beacuse Herland write in years 1915 (in hers magazine) long before women own the right to vote (n Sweden 1921). > 4) Bearing in mind the period when the book was > written (it was published in installments in > Gilman's own magazine in 1915) how do think it > compares to other writing of the time? I dont know how many similar books have been written in same time. Even is Herland book was written in 1915, that can teach us something now in our modern world. One year ago I read "The female man" by Joanna Russ also one of mine favorite books. The female man was written in 1969? of course female man is more radcial than Herland (I think) but both books is great so I have both in my bookshelf. > 5) Any comments on how it stands up today? Does > it work? Is it dated? Comparisons with other > feminist utopias I think Herland is a great book to read for us who living to day. As I said in Qs 4 I think those feminist utopias that wrotes now are more radical like Russ, Monique Wittig and Charnas than Gilman was just beacuse the time. Best Henrick ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 21:34:30 -0400 From: Gaile Pohlhaus Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Herland spoilers To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU I thought the book ended quite abruptly with the preparations for leaving. I enjoyed the book and the relational development. It read very much like a Jules Verne story so I presume that was the style in the early 20th century. I think the emphasis on motherhood was because Gilman did not want to tackle an emotional relationship between two adult women. Gaile ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 10:01:07 -0700 From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Herland To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU At 10:28 AM 5/10/2005 +0200, Crystal Warren wrote: > Many apologies for the late start to this discussion. In South Africa we are > heading into winter and I am afraid that I succumbed to the very first flu > bug that arrived. Thinking with some longing of Herland where they have all > but eradicated illness. > > Some general questions to kick off discussion: > > 1) Did you enjoy Herland? If so, what did you particularly like? I did, with a few reservations. Partly, the quaint attitudes, but also the progressive social arrangements, not to mention the gender arrangements. > 2) If you didn't like the book, can you say why, what bothered you etc. A few things: 1. After many years of independence of and total unfamiliarity with men, a number of women are "attracted" to the sturdy male explorers. This seems unlikely, even given the delicacy with which the subject of sex is studiously avoided. In fact, it's exactly the same reaction shown by countless male-deprived "spacewomen" in a raft of B movies from the '50's and 60's. Not one Herlander, that we know of, is tempted to a lesbian relationship with their pure and unsullied-by-physical-desires sisters. This is astonishing, to say the least. 2. The "outrage" committed by one of the men is predictable and cliched, but interesting none-the-less. Although these women are moderately bloodthirsty, possessing lethal (but humane) means of dealing with criminals, the Herlanders don't feel compelled to inflict this punishment on the perpetrator, but merely insist on returning them to the outside world, an action tinged with folly, if nothing else. Forrest (in Daughters of a Coral Dawn and Daughters of an Amber Noon) is similarly bloodthirsty, in a passive-aggressive sort of way, but at least sees the necessity of continued secrecy. Did none of the Herlanders possess the tiniest bit of brain in their benevolent head? 3. The book is, of course, racist. Magically, white women are able to create a civilization which their benighted neighbors are unable to conceive of. They feel no particular obligation to extend the blessings of their progress and insights into the human condition to anyone outside their insular society. After all, it's obvious (by reason of the color of their skin) that these efforts would be wasted. This is a common feature of utopias, which quite often feature white men (optionally accompanied by white women) in the midst of "savages" who are incapable of anything but the most childish reasoning and cultural artifacts. 4. Gilman seems to think that, while "New Women" are easily fashioned, "New Men" are rare birds indeed. So her Utopia foists all the changes onto women, who become "scientific," independent, and the like, while retaining their traditional cultural feminist advantages of moral and ethical superiority. Whilst this is, perhaps, "realistic," it's also tedious after so much repetition over the years since. It seems more related to other "Isles of Women" like Avalon, where women are a stand-in for ministering angels and "Women's Country" for Death. > 3) How realistic / feasible did you find the portrayal of the women's > country (just struck me now that it is always referred to as Herland, the > name the men give it. If I recall correctly we never learn what the women > call it. Any comments on that) Well, since there was no "outside world" in Herland, the Herlanders wouldn't really need a name for themselves or for their country. Like every insular society, they would be simply "The People" and their place "The Center of the World." > 4) Bearing in mind the period when the book was written (it was published in > installments in Gilman's own magazine in 1915) how do think it compares to > other writing of the time? Favorably. > 5) Any comments on how it stands up today? Does it work? Is it dated? > Comparisons with other feminist utopias > > 6) What do you think about Herland's emphasis on motherhood? Also comments > on the views of mothering and education. Well, that was her purpose, wasn't it? She saw, correctly, that the appalling lack of educational opportunities for women and their deliberate shunting off into "vocational" classes "suitable" for their "predestined" roles as wives, housewives, and mothers stunted their intellectual growth and encouraged dependence on men, which we must presume was the point, after all. She would have surely been discouraged by the fact that, after a hundred years of "progress," we have a leadership dedicated to "going back to basics," reinstituting the primacy of marriage and motherhood in women's lives, and retreating to the comfort of a Nineteenth Century moral certitude in "G-d's Plan" for the world and the "natural" place of White Men in charge of it. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose... - Alphonse Karr Lee Anne ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 13:06:21 -0400 From: "Intihar, Phebe L USAEC/LogSec Team" Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] BDG Herland To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > Although these women are > moderately bloodthirsty, possessing lethal > (but humane) means of dealing with criminals, > the Herlanders don't feel compelled to inflict > this punishment on the perpetrator, but merely > insist on returning them to the outside world, > an action tinged with folly, if nothing else. Good point. I suppose it might not have occurred to them that returning to conquer and enjoy a kingdom of women would surely be the first aim of those men who heard the story. They only had one exemplar of sexual violence, after all. Still, you make a good point, I think. Phebe