|
I tend to agree largely with Hamlet 53's assessment.
This was clearly a book with a split personality. One can applaud the amazing vividness of some of the carefully researched areas--particularly those remarkable descriptions of the seamy underside of Victorian society.
But then one might immediately encounter fictionalised, speculative areas which attempt to enter the minds of Fanny and Stella. It is clear that the Author does this to make these two quite unlikeable characters seem victims and sympathetic. He is correct, of course in that they were indeed meant to be put on display in a "show trial" which didn't have much to do with justice. But still to conclude Stella's death with that silly Eulogy was only irritating.
Stella, especially, seemed to have very serious gender problems. And this brings up the implication by McKenna that s/he was mixed gender. He has no real evidence for this except the unreliable testimony from Jack Saul's pornographic memoirs. Still, Stella's mother actually seemed to expect her child to marry a man. Stella evidently retained a soprano singing voice, which could indicate that a male larynx was never formed. In the case of Stella, it could be that there were internal female sexual organs which wouldn't be observable. So I feel that some sort of trans-gender quality may actually have been part of Stella's physical make-up. But it remains a moot point and clearly unprovable.
I found that the book really lacked an acute, objective, analytic perspective and tended more to tabloid sensationalism.
I would give it a 5 out of 10. On a 5 point scale I would give it 3 in recognition of the vividness of some of the passages. At least McKenna never bores the reader.
|