Saturday, January 28, 2012

thoughts on the necessity of "sexiness" for women writers


Marie Calloway posted this on her tumblr recently:
I asked someone if a woman could be successful in the alt lit world if she weren’t attractive:
“Yes but she would have to write like the boys. She would have to write in a style that men find “worthy,” e.g. high level of abstract thought, aggressive or nihilistic view of society/life, “hard” exterior image, masculine.
She couldn’t write feminine or sexy material.”

And I’ve been thinking about feminine image in relation to authorship and ~feminist things and my own self image.  If I consider the women alt lit writers I’m aware of (I’m kind of new at this, my apologies,) generally speaking they are all conventionally attractive by which I mean thin and feminine looking.  And I think about Sylvia Plath, because every conversation I’ve had about Sylvia Plath (I was an English major, ok?) at some point involves a comment about how pretty she was.  And I think about young Didion.  And how Emily Dickinson only had one picture taken of herself ever and she hated that picture because she thought she looked ugly.  And as much as all of this is kind of “well, duh” I think it’s still worth pointing out.

Because even though I identify as feminist, there are certain knee-jerk reactions that I don’t know if I will ever not have.  Recently I went to an open mic and a conventionally unattractive woman (overweight, not particularly feminine) read a poem about a sexual experience and my immediate reaction was aversion (closely followed by shame for having felt that way and I AM A BAD FEMINIST.)  In fact, I was so distracted by my mixture of aversion and shame that I honestly couldn’t tell you whether or not the poem was “good.”   I am so not proud of this.  But these things happen, and if they’re not discussed, they’ll just keep happening.  So.

Last year I participated in a poetry marathon in Milwaukee with three other women I went to school with (all conventionally attractive, btw) and I found the looks of the other participants I didn’t know kind of surprising.  Generally speaking, they all looked like regular Wisconsin people.  Some were downright rural, others suburban casual, a few academic looking ones.  I guess for some reason I thought that Poet-Wisconsinites would look vastly different from the townies surrounding my college campus.  They didn’t.  These poets were real people.  One older woman (mid-sixties, maybe) read a kind of lengthy pastoral-ish poem, about a young snake charmer.  As the poem progressed, some subtle word choices and imagery made me think “tee hee, unintentional sexuality”  By the end of the poem however, I realized (along with everyone else in the room I think) that all of the sexual imagery was, in fact, intentional and I looked at this older woman with some kind of awe because she was old and wearing a cardigan.  And I had specifically not chosen to read anything sexual at this poetry marathon because there were going to be old ladies in cardigans there.

Getting back to the quotation at the top of this post, there’s this feeling or belief that only sexy people can write sexy poetry.  Or rather, readers only want to read sexy poetry by sexy poets.  And I think I want to specify that further to sexy female poets, because Bukowski.  I would love for unattractive women to be able to write sexy things and “make it” in alt lit like it’s nbd.  But I’m skeptical.  Personally I’m not sure I’d be able to “put myself out there” if I didn’t fit certain qualifications for being conventionally attractive.  (Look, I know it’s not cool to think you’re attractive sometimes and now you’re probably all like ~lol w/e you’re conceited and hideous~)  At least, I don’t think I would be able to put any kind of sexy writing “out there.”  So in addition to “unattractive” women having difficulty being accepted into the community, there is probably also a fairly huge intimidation factor.

0 comments:

Post a Comment