You know, Roshie was *my* favorite character here too! There's a reading of this book where she's unambiguously heroic (the melanated TRUE progressive taking on white Silicon Valley faux-progressives) and there's a reading of this book where she's an anti-woke caricature (the loudmouth SJW), and I guess they're both true? But neither of those summaries really captures the character. I think a lot of writers wouldn't bother fleshing her out beyond the race/class angle, and there are a lot of writers who would just not have the race/class angle be relevant a la Shondaland, but what makes this book so good is that Roshie can be a product of her background and also a genuine person.
I am sort of curious whether the hesitance trans writers have to discuss the transgendered body in fiction dovetails with a broader trend of... disembodiment, let's call it, in literary fiction? Naomi has a really great piece in Lit Hub (maybe?) about how characters in modern fiction never worry about money, which seems like a similar issue. (Another critique of modern litfic that you can't make about "The Default World" - it's a really great novel!)
Great interview and food for thought. “Most Substackers are happy when I make fun of the woke left, but they really don't want to hear that for me personally wokeness was very good.” More or less sums up what I continue to strongly dislike about Substack; the political reactionaries dominate even on aesthetic matters and think they are both novel and interesting rather than tedious and self-regarding. People who are slightly uncomfortable with what a racist authoritarian Elon Musk is, but are thinking “well, but he’s not wrong about…”
He’s always wrong! So is the notion that merely saying anything you want anytime you want is the only meaningful consideration of the First Amendment and “how dare you say out loud that I’m a jerk for saying x” I can’t decide if it’s naivety or more cynical but it pisses me off. So it’s nice to see something more nuanced than the usual right-wing adjacent self-congratulating substack theory of literature here.
Just finished the book. Loved the interview. Nothing was anti or pro-woke about any of it. I liked and hated everyone in it hahaha. It was filthy and funny and sometimes sad. Such a talent!
Very interesting interview. I’m a Kanakia fan and was interested in what the situation around her trans identity was and this was illuminating in certain ways.
What I’d really be interested in understanding is her view on trans ideology - the set of factual claims that trans ideologies make (and in many cases seem to want to legally enforce on the rest of us) about what it is to be a woman and the lack of relevance of one’s physical body to the question. She strikes me as having too much intellectual integrity to unquestioningly accept that ideology, which I see as full of contradictions and in some cases blatantly false assertions.
You know, Roshie was *my* favorite character here too! There's a reading of this book where she's unambiguously heroic (the melanated TRUE progressive taking on white Silicon Valley faux-progressives) and there's a reading of this book where she's an anti-woke caricature (the loudmouth SJW), and I guess they're both true? But neither of those summaries really captures the character. I think a lot of writers wouldn't bother fleshing her out beyond the race/class angle, and there are a lot of writers who would just not have the race/class angle be relevant a la Shondaland, but what makes this book so good is that Roshie can be a product of her background and also a genuine person.
I am sort of curious whether the hesitance trans writers have to discuss the transgendered body in fiction dovetails with a broader trend of... disembodiment, let's call it, in literary fiction? Naomi has a really great piece in Lit Hub (maybe?) about how characters in modern fiction never worry about money, which seems like a similar issue. (Another critique of modern litfic that you can't make about "The Default World" - it's a really great novel!)
Great interview and food for thought. “Most Substackers are happy when I make fun of the woke left, but they really don't want to hear that for me personally wokeness was very good.” More or less sums up what I continue to strongly dislike about Substack; the political reactionaries dominate even on aesthetic matters and think they are both novel and interesting rather than tedious and self-regarding. People who are slightly uncomfortable with what a racist authoritarian Elon Musk is, but are thinking “well, but he’s not wrong about…”
He’s always wrong! So is the notion that merely saying anything you want anytime you want is the only meaningful consideration of the First Amendment and “how dare you say out loud that I’m a jerk for saying x” I can’t decide if it’s naivety or more cynical but it pisses me off. So it’s nice to see something more nuanced than the usual right-wing adjacent self-congratulating substack theory of literature here.
And just over an hour after my comment, the second commenter proved my point for me.
You got it, man. I've gotten tired of it too.
Just finished the book. Loved the interview. Nothing was anti or pro-woke about any of it. I liked and hated everyone in it hahaha. It was filthy and funny and sometimes sad. Such a talent!
Roshie's email was the funniest moment for me.
Very interesting interview. I’m a Kanakia fan and was interested in what the situation around her trans identity was and this was illuminating in certain ways.
What I’d really be interested in understanding is her view on trans ideology - the set of factual claims that trans ideologies make (and in many cases seem to want to legally enforce on the rest of us) about what it is to be a woman and the lack of relevance of one’s physical body to the question. She strikes me as having too much intellectual integrity to unquestioningly accept that ideology, which I see as full of contradictions and in some cases blatantly false assertions.