"...many scholars consider Frankenstein to be the first true work of science fiction"
(I feel like I mentally start out half my posts with "I should be asleep, but I HAD TO SHARE THIS THOUGHT WITH YOU." If only you knew how true that was this time around.)
Part 1.
This is the list of science fiction books that Flavorwire suggests for girls. Note the lack of of modern female writers, the dearth of female protagonists, and the way their absence suggests that no one is currently writing (quality?) science fiction with girls in mind.
Behold my counter-list:
The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, The Shadow Children series by Margeret Peterson Haddix, The Missing series by Margeret Peterson Haddix, Uglies series by Scott Westerfeld, Midnighters series by Scott Westerfeld, Leviathan series by Scott Westerfeld, Peeps Scott Westerfeld, Runaways by Brian K Vaughn,The Giver by Lois Lowry, Across the Universe by Beth Reevis, A Million Suns by Beth Reevis, The Forest of Hands and Teeth by Carrie Ryan, The Dark and Hollow Places by Carrie Ryan, Mrs. Frisby and the Rats if NIMH by Patrick O'Brien, Liar by Justine Larbalestier, Darkness Rising series by Kelley Armstrong, Tomorrow, When the War Began by John Marsden, Tankborn by Karen Sandler, The City of Ember by Jeanne DuPrau, Things Not Seen by Andrew Clements, Life as We Knew it by Susan Beth Pfeffer, First Light by Rebecca Stead, Matched by Allie Condie, Cold Awakening series by Robin Wasserman, Numbers by Rachel Ward, Enclave by Ann Aguirre, Heir Apparent by Vivian Vande Velde, Double Helix by Nancy Werlin, Enchantress from the Stars by Sylvia Engdahl, The Adoration of Jenna Fox by Mary Pearson, Article 5 by Kristen Simmons, Alien Secrets by Annette Curtis Klause, Dragonriders series by Anne McCaffery, Love Will Tear us Apart by Alaya Dawn Johnson, The Children of the Revolution by Maureen Johnson, The Extraordinary Secrets of April, May, and June by Robin Benway, 11 Birthdays by Wendy Mass, Freak the Geek by John Green, Frannie K Stein series by Jim Benton, Babymouse: Mad Scientist by Jennifer and Matt Holm
And honestly, i know there are dozens and dozens and dozens more that I have missed. (feel free to let me know which ones in the comments!) And every single one of them a better choice than Stranger in a Strange Land.
Part 2.
It is perhaps inevitable that my progression through Russ' How to Suppress Women's Writing has helped put me in a contrary and argumentative mood whenever the topic of women's writing comes up. That is, after all, the purpose of reading it.
Before I began, I expected to be able to learn to use her insights to classify and document the various types of asinine comments about women's writing that are depressingly easy to run across. What I did not expect was how fundamentally she would shift my view of women's writing in almost no time at all.
When hawkwing_lb pointed out this ridiculous reading list to me just a few days ago (or was it a week already?) I immediately recognized it as an insult and set aside the deconstruction for later. Something kept bugging me though, as if there was more than just the ridiculousness of the choices that were insulting. At some point between compiling a lengthy list of alternate titles, finishing the first chapter of How to Suppress Women's Writing, and composing in my head an explanation for the lack of middle school science fiction novels in general, I realized that the problem went deeper than just the list.
Part 3.
The Flavorwire article begins with:
"Madeleine L’Engle’s beloved and much-lauded A Wrinkle in Time turns 50 this year. As The New York Times points out, it’s one of the few science fiction books to have drawn a large female fan base. At the time of its publication, science fiction was not often market to girls, and the genre is still often considered to be mostly the purview of men."
This is a spectacularly audacious set of lies hiding in behind half-truths. "At the time of it's publication" science fiction wasn't just "considered to be mostly the preview of men" it was also considered inappropriate for elementary school children of both genders. Children of the time still read science fiction, I am sure, but it was not sold as children's literature. Even Heinlein's juveniles, classics of the genre, were intended for teens, not nine year olds. (And why does Heinlein get such love and Norton so little, btw?) To this day, fantasy novels greatly outnumber science fiction in children's sections of bookstores and libraries. The fact that we have any significant number of kids skiffy at all can be traced directly back L'Engle's work.
A Wrinkle in Time didn't just feature a female protagonist when such things were a rarity in science fiction, it was the also first science fiction novel to win the Newbery. Girls have been present in children's science fiction from the very instant that it was publicly recognized as a legitimate genre for middle grade readers.
The list, the article, the piece in New York Times - all of it pretends to pay homage to the L'Engle's groundbreaking work. It does not. Instead of discussing A Wrinkle in Time's influence, originality, or artistry - the very reasons why it is "much-lauded" - they use the anniversary of it's publication to reassure genre readers that science fiction is still for boys - mostly, anyway. Completely ignoring not just nuance but the facts that prove them wrong.
Part 4.
"We expect women who come here to be competent, good students; but we don't expect them to be brilliant or original" As Russ points out: "Discouragement usually takes less obvious forms [than this.]" and yet retains the same underlying argument. For example: when celebrations of women's work spend more time talking about how they have failed than they do exploring the lasting impact of the work in question.
Yes you can play, if you insist, but don't forget who these toys really belong to.
Part 1.
This is the list of science fiction books that Flavorwire suggests for girls. Note the lack of of modern female writers, the dearth of female protagonists, and the way their absence suggests that no one is currently writing (quality?) science fiction with girls in mind.
Behold my counter-list:
The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, The Shadow Children series by Margeret Peterson Haddix, The Missing series by Margeret Peterson Haddix, Uglies series by Scott Westerfeld, Midnighters series by Scott Westerfeld, Leviathan series by Scott Westerfeld, Peeps Scott Westerfeld, Runaways by Brian K Vaughn,The Giver by Lois Lowry, Across the Universe by Beth Reevis, A Million Suns by Beth Reevis, The Forest of Hands and Teeth by Carrie Ryan, The Dark and Hollow Places by Carrie Ryan, Mrs. Frisby and the Rats if NIMH by Patrick O'Brien, Liar by Justine Larbalestier, Darkness Rising series by Kelley Armstrong, Tomorrow, When the War Began by John Marsden, Tankborn by Karen Sandler, The City of Ember by Jeanne DuPrau, Things Not Seen by Andrew Clements, Life as We Knew it by Susan Beth Pfeffer, First Light by Rebecca Stead, Matched by Allie Condie, Cold Awakening series by Robin Wasserman, Numbers by Rachel Ward, Enclave by Ann Aguirre, Heir Apparent by Vivian Vande Velde, Double Helix by Nancy Werlin, Enchantress from the Stars by Sylvia Engdahl, The Adoration of Jenna Fox by Mary Pearson, Article 5 by Kristen Simmons, Alien Secrets by Annette Curtis Klause, Dragonriders series by Anne McCaffery, Love Will Tear us Apart by Alaya Dawn Johnson, The Children of the Revolution by Maureen Johnson, The Extraordinary Secrets of April, May, and June by Robin Benway, 11 Birthdays by Wendy Mass, Freak the Geek by John Green, Frannie K Stein series by Jim Benton, Babymouse: Mad Scientist by Jennifer and Matt Holm
And honestly, i know there are dozens and dozens and dozens more that I have missed. (feel free to let me know which ones in the comments!) And every single one of them a better choice than Stranger in a Strange Land.
Part 2.
It is perhaps inevitable that my progression through Russ' How to Suppress Women's Writing has helped put me in a contrary and argumentative mood whenever the topic of women's writing comes up. That is, after all, the purpose of reading it.
Before I began, I expected to be able to learn to use her insights to classify and document the various types of asinine comments about women's writing that are depressingly easy to run across. What I did not expect was how fundamentally she would shift my view of women's writing in almost no time at all.
When hawkwing_lb pointed out this ridiculous reading list to me just a few days ago (or was it a week already?) I immediately recognized it as an insult and set aside the deconstruction for later. Something kept bugging me though, as if there was more than just the ridiculousness of the choices that were insulting. At some point between compiling a lengthy list of alternate titles, finishing the first chapter of How to Suppress Women's Writing, and composing in my head an explanation for the lack of middle school science fiction novels in general, I realized that the problem went deeper than just the list.
Part 3.
The Flavorwire article begins with:
"Madeleine L’Engle’s beloved and much-lauded A Wrinkle in Time turns 50 this year. As The New York Times points out, it’s one of the few science fiction books to have drawn a large female fan base. At the time of its publication, science fiction was not often market to girls, and the genre is still often considered to be mostly the purview of men."
This is a spectacularly audacious set of lies hiding in behind half-truths. "At the time of it's publication" science fiction wasn't just "considered to be mostly the preview of men" it was also considered inappropriate for elementary school children of both genders. Children of the time still read science fiction, I am sure, but it was not sold as children's literature. Even Heinlein's juveniles, classics of the genre, were intended for teens, not nine year olds. (And why does Heinlein get such love and Norton so little, btw?) To this day, fantasy novels greatly outnumber science fiction in children's sections of bookstores and libraries. The fact that we have any significant number of kids skiffy at all can be traced directly back L'Engle's work.
A Wrinkle in Time didn't just feature a female protagonist when such things were a rarity in science fiction, it was the also first science fiction novel to win the Newbery. Girls have been present in children's science fiction from the very instant that it was publicly recognized as a legitimate genre for middle grade readers.
The list, the article, the piece in New York Times - all of it pretends to pay homage to the L'Engle's groundbreaking work. It does not. Instead of discussing A Wrinkle in Time's influence, originality, or artistry - the very reasons why it is "much-lauded" - they use the anniversary of it's publication to reassure genre readers that science fiction is still for boys - mostly, anyway. Completely ignoring not just nuance but the facts that prove them wrong.
Part 4.
"We expect women who come here to be competent, good students; but we don't expect them to be brilliant or original" As Russ points out: "Discouragement usually takes less obvious forms [than this.]" and yet retains the same underlying argument. For example: when celebrations of women's work spend more time talking about how they have failed than they do exploring the lasting impact of the work in question.
Yes you can play, if you insist, but don't forget who these toys really belong to.