Margaret Atwood: Feminist or Not?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

This has been puzzling to me. A woman who writes novels with a clear concern with feminist issues, but she refuses to call herself a feminist. Is it wrong for me to see her as a feminist when she herself would reject that label? Does anyone know about why she doesn't embrace the term?

― di, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Atwood has called hereself a humanist. She belives the liberation of woman is a step towards human liberation. She has problems with orthodoxy of any stripe and is an iconoclast.

― anthony, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You can't label her...shes too felty. Nothing sticks.

― Pennysong Hanle y, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

There is this hysterically funny NFD Doco. This filmmaker is invited to the Atwood compund in Muskoka. He is stuck in a tent , he like stalks her and asks really stupid questions. She just brushes him off liek a hair across the face. Atwood being interviewed is a treat. An hour of it is like watching a lion devour a wildebeast while hte wildebeast thinks he is engaging in scintallating dinner conversation.

― anthony, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

That is the problem with feminism - in its strictly defined term (ie with the Feminine bit of the word) it is pro-female over male. Which is a fine start on the way to equality, but what happens when you achieve it? Feminism should continue to make women dominant. Which is a problem that humanists like Atwood and myself have.

― Pete, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

She might not think so, but from what I've read Atwood struck me as a bit of an eco-feminist.

― Tim, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I think she's only an average to above average novelist, so if she doesn't want to call herself a feminist, I don't feel any sense of loss. Maybe the reasons she's too silly to call herself a feminist are linked to the overall boringness of her books.

― maryann, Tuesday, 18 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I hated Atwood's novels, her poetry on the otherhand is excellent. The poetry has more death than any feminism though.

― Mr Noodles, Wednesday, 19 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Didn't she read a poem near the end the famous anti-porn documentary 'Not a Love Story'?

― jason, Wednesday, 19 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

maryann, i am interested to know what you dislike about margaret atwood's novels. i think probably you and i have differing approaches to reading her novels, because you have a stronger background in literature than I do.

your posting has made me realise that it is not wrong for me to see margaret atwood as a feminist when she doesn't claim to be one, because her novels have a lot to offer me as a feminist woman. what i gain from her novels is a matter of personal politics, so it is understandable if you do not feel the same way about her writing, as everyones personal politics differ.

― di, Wednesday, 19 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

"humanists like Atwood and myself": yet again a Venn diagram is urgent and key. Let A = the set of Pete's characteristics. Let B = the set of MA's characteristics. Humanism = the intersection set.

― mark s, Wednesday, 19 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Mr Noodles
I am glad another one agrees with me about Maggie and her poetry

― anthony, Wednesday, 19 September 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

sixteen years pass...

Did we ever get this sorted tho

― rum dmc (darraghmac), Wednesday, 14 February 2018 23:59 (eight years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.