Jessica
So here is what I knew about this book before I went in – it's confronting, it's a major work of Black feminist (or womanist) literature, it's been banned in a lot of times and places, and Alice Walker refused to allow it to be published in Israel out of support for the BDS movement.
So there's our starting point. It's also probably useful to know that it's set in rural Georgia over the first half of the twentieth century, spanning a period of 30 years, because I didn't know this when I started out I was guessing a much earlier setting. It is a confronting book, especially the beginning, which is a seriously brutal way to start a book. It actually squicked me quite a lot so it took a long time for the book to grow on me, but by the end, I really liked it. Probably what turned things around for me was Celie's pursuit of happiness – with the help (and love!) of her friend Shug, she's able to stop being someone who horrible things happen to all the time and start to be her own person, which I appreciated.
There's a lot in here, and a large cast of characters; I hadn't actually expected that the narrative would make it to Africa and comment on female genital mutilation practices (as well as the relationship between Africans and African-Americans). But it did. I hadn't really expected it to be so spiritual either, but it was that too (and that's where the title comes from, too – reflecting on the wonder of the colour purple). Indeed I would say spirituality is the thing this novel seeks to impart most of all; the need to accept God is no white man, but inside and a part of everything. I'm not really sure about that, honestly, but taking wonder in the natural world is something I can understand. I was less keen on Celie forgiving her long-time abusive husband. Sure, I guess it shows there are reasons why lower-class or marginalised men abuse – alienation, feelings of powerlessness – but just on an emotional level, I did not like it.
The novel also attracts some comment for its “subversion of gender roles”, but honestly it just depicts people as they are (or were), which often is not totally in line with gender roles, even when that pressure is there. For instance, Harpo tries to be a violent, domineering husband because that's what he's been taught, but every time he tries to beat his wife Sofia, she bashes him nastily and he can't manage it. He clearly feels insecure about this failing, which just makes him even more anxious to be violent, and so it goes. But I think Walker is good about not just vilifying men on an individual level, but showing what pressure these alienated, downtrodden men are under to conform to this model. Even so, I don't think forgiving them is necessary! And while some women “subvert gender roles” by being confident and assertive, it's not like they're living without the context of an extremely patriarchal society, and they're often punished for it. So I would describe the characterisation as realistic, rather than “subversive”. Although I guess those are the same thing sometimes.
Overall, I'd highly recommend this. It was political but never forced, dealing with racism, women's oppression, abuse, lesbianism, and ended on a positive note in spite of the horrifying beginning. Well worth persevering.
So here is what I knew about this book before I went in – it's confronting, it's a major work of Black feminist (or womanist) literature, it's been banned in a lot of times and places, and Alice Walker refused to allow it to be published in Israel out of support for the BDS movement.
So there's our starting point. It's also probably useful to know that it's set in rural Georgia over the first half of the twentieth century, spanning a period of 30 years, because I didn't know this when I started out I was guessing a much earlier setting. It is a confronting book, especially the beginning, which is a seriously brutal way to start a book. It actually squicked me quite a lot so it took a long time for the book to grow on me, but by the end, I really liked it. Probably what turned things around for me was Celie's pursuit of happiness – with the help (and love!) of her friend Shug, she's able to stop being someone who horrible things happen to all the time and start to be her own person, which I appreciated.
There's a lot in here, and a large cast of characters; I hadn't actually expected that the narrative would make it to Africa and comment on female genital mutilation practices (as well as the relationship between Africans and African-Americans). But it did. I hadn't really expected it to be so spiritual either, but it was that too (and that's where the title comes from, too – reflecting on the wonder of the colour purple). Indeed I would say spirituality is the thing this novel seeks to impart most of all; the need to accept God is no white man, but inside and a part of everything. I'm not really sure about that, honestly, but taking wonder in the natural world is something I can understand. I was less keen on Celie forgiving her long-time abusive husband. Sure, I guess it shows there are reasons why lower-class or marginalised men abuse – alienation, feelings of powerlessness – but just on an emotional level, I did not like it.
The novel also attracts some comment for its “subversion of gender roles”, but honestly it just depicts people as they are (or were), which often is not totally in line with gender roles, even when that pressure is there. For instance, Harpo tries to be a violent, domineering husband because that's what he's been taught, but every time he tries to beat his wife Sofia, she bashes him nastily and he can't manage it. He clearly feels insecure about this failing, which just makes him even more anxious to be violent, and so it goes. But I think Walker is good about not just vilifying men on an individual level, but showing what pressure these alienated, downtrodden men are under to conform to this model. Even so, I don't think forgiving them is necessary! And while some women “subvert gender roles” by being confident and assertive, it's not like they're living without the context of an extremely patriarchal society, and they're often punished for it. So I would describe the characterisation as realistic, rather than “subversive”. Although I guess those are the same thing sometimes.
Overall, I'd highly recommend this. It was political but never forced, dealing with racism, women's oppression, abuse, lesbianism, and ended on a positive note in spite of the horrifying beginning. Well worth persevering.