(Untitled)

[taelle]

Never read this myself, but found it quoted and loved the list. From Salman Rushdie's "The Enchantress of Florence," a 16th century Indian emperor gives a list of what a woman of breeding must possess in the way of accomplishments

Comments

[calanthe_b]

...doesn't expect much, does he? ~wry look~

[taelle]

Oh yes (loved the last point). But the direction in which this woman's talents should go is interesting too.

[alice_montrose]

Interesting. He doesn't even expect much, does he? And I notice he does not mention that a woman should be able to read, either.

Theoretically, I know things were much worse than this. Still, at times it's hard to grasp. *deep sigh*

[taelle]

No, no reading. He expects a woman to be qualified in several actual professions, though... but most of them have to do with decoration and entertainment.

[alice_montrose]

And let us not forget magic! Though how she should study said magic without knowing how to read and write is beyond me...

[taelle]

Well, first, folk magic was supposed to be taught from mother to daughter, wasn't it? I doubt reading is necessary for that. And second, he might not have mentioned reading because he does not care whether she can read, seeing it as an instrument, not a goal.

[angharadd]

I liked "The Enchantress of Florence" - it sort of goes along the same lines all Rushdie novels do, but I love the theme of interplay between reality & imagination, so my cup of tea exactly. Re:women in the novel: there is some interesting stuff, but I'm not sure whether it was a conscious choice on Rushdie's part. It plays with the idea of women as imaginary creatures, created by men for men (men's gaze and all that), but in Rushdie's novels imagination does take over reality, always.

[taelle]

Imaginariness (is this a word?) is kind of noticeable here, in a way, though I've never read any Rushdie, I must admit.

[angharadd]

I like Rushdie despite his repetitiveness & конъюнктурность (don't know the proper English word :) ).