Kristen J. Sollee's 2017 book, "Witches, Sluts and Feminists", is a culmination of of feminist-focused topics with a common thread: the historic demonization of sexually positive women- archaically as "witches", and currently as "sluts". Sollee argues, generally, that these "feminists" were, and continue to be, a postive source in society, and that their persecution is unjustified.
If that sounds rather vague and general, that's because the book as a whole is rather vague and general, covering a variety of topics ranging from the historical to the modern; from the Salem witch trials to online activism; always touching on relavent topics, but never actually diving in to the specifics. If you are looking for a book that delivers on deep, critical analysis of feminism in a historical context, this is not it.
Just like the the books namesake, many of the chapters seem to be titled to evoke a specific reaction from the more prude among us- a filter, not too unsimilar to Snapchats functionally unnecessary user interface rearrangement, designed to put off anybody who doesn't already have at least a cursory interest in the feminist movement.
Hyperbole even manages to extend to the back, where a quote from Huffington Post producer and host Alex Berg is prominently featured: "Ages before the most qualified presidential candidate in history was called a 'nasty woman'..." - don't get me wrong, I proudly voted for this "nasty woman", but calling Hillary Clinton "the most qualified presidential candidate in history" is a bit of a stretch, in my opinion.
What isn't hyperbole are the content of the chapters themselves, three of which I will be going over here. While progress for women has greatly accelerated over the past century, there are still some areas that need some serious work- and this is made readily apparent during the course of this reading. Unfortunately, Sollees focus is lacking in these relatively short chapters, and she often jumps from topic to topic, from person to person, from quote to quote.
Case-in-point: the chapter titled "Music Witch- Sound as Sorcery".
This chapter starts off strong, as many of Sollees chapters do. The following quote on page 125 jumped out at me:
"When male musicians create work about the witch, she often serves to elicit fear or arousal. She is a foil for their desires, for their fantasies. She is the mysterious Other".
Couldn't have said it better myself. I personally am not aware of any songs written by a male artist that uses the term "witch" (or "slut", for that matter) with any kind of positive connotation.
Unfortunately, the chapter quickly devolves from here- immediately afterwards, she begins talking about a rather obscure 1960s band named "Coven" that embraced the witchcraft and occult aesthetic- a rather interesting topic on its own right, but in the context of the previous content, does not feel substantial- it's more of a transitional piece to Yoko Ono, the third topic in just a little over one page.
Say what you want about Yoko Onos contribution to feminism, to womens rights, to the sexuality movements- she is an objectively bad musical artist, and in my opinion, was a terrible example to use. In fact, Yoko Ono is only the topic for one paragraph until Sollee moves on to Stevie Nicks (a much, much better example in my opinion).
While we're here, does anybody else think that a self-proclaimed "millennial" referring to bands that most "millennial" would be unfamiliar with is odd? As a "millennial" myself, I do. That being said, if you don't know who Stevie Nicks or Fleetwood Mac is, do yourself a favor and consider purchasing their "Rumors" album. There's a reason why Barnes and Noble still carries it on Vinyl and CD forty years later.
Thankfully, during the second half of the chapter, she chooses to juxtapose these older musicians with more modern counterparts- none of which identify as witches. I'm not going to go too much in to this, other than to say that the examples she uses- Beyonce and Iggy Azalea- are also not very good examples. Overall, I'm of the opinion that a juxtaposition of Stevie Nicks and Lady Gaga would have been significantly better.
The next chapter that I will review is titled "Hex Sells: Feminism, Capitalism and The Witch".
This chapter, again, starts off strong with the following quote right at the top of the page:
"Thanks to the burgeoning popularity of witches, you, too, can adorn yourself in the dark, seductive trappings of sorcery. Like punk, many once marginalized movements are now fodder for the marketplace"
I typed this quote verbatim, and you may have noticed a typo- unfortunately, these kinds of small typos and spelling errors are relatively common in this book. Sollee really should have considered hiring an editor.
Anyways, I find this statement... odd. First of all, she says "burgeoning"- but the popularity of witches has been a fad since Harry Potter became insanely popular. In fact, the magical witch/wizard/occult fad really ran its course throughout the millennial prime, from about 1998 to 2010, with books such as Twilight and the Lord of the Rings movies supplementing Harry Potter and other works. As this book was published in 2017, there was definitely nothing new about this "burgeoning" fad- and in fact, I would argue that it's actually (finally) in decline. It's just an incredibly odd statement to hear from someone in the same generation as yourself- it's as if her core audience isn't people her age, but people who are older.
Sollee takes great pains to avoid using pop culture icons such as Harry Potter or Twilight in this chapter as references of the occults popularity in mainstream society, and instead effectively uses the remainder of the chapter to pretend that that the magical witch/wizard/occult fad is some new-fangled thing that kids these days are doing- and is totally not something that likely affected her personally during her high school or college years. Nope, there's no way that this fad may have influenced her decision to become a feminist. There's no way that this fad may have influenced the title or topic of her book. No sir-ee.
While she dodges pop culture icons like she's Neo in the Matrix, she makes one grammatical decision that I find interesting. Consider the following quote, from page 133:
"What's been co-opted is the politics of identity," s/he said.
At the end of that quote, Sollee refers to Genesis Breyer P-Orridge as s/he. At first, I thought this was a typo- but it is in fact intentional, because P-Orridge considers themselves to be pandrogynous. While it is refreshing to see someone being referred to in the way that they should be referred to, I personally would have chosen "xi", a relatively recent gender-neutral term that is borrowed from Esperanto. I do not expect Sollee, or really anybody else, to be proficient or even aware of pronouns in an obscure, artificial language, but I will say that I have seen that pronoun used from time to time on a variety of alternative websites and publications.
The final chapter that I will be reviewing is "Tech Witch: Online activism and the Digital Mystic".
Unlike the previous two chapters, this one does not start off strongly. Consider the opening paragraph, on page 137:
"Drawn together by the labyrinthine networks that link the like-minded, 'generation witch' is a product of contemporary technology. Creating community has become ritualized in new ways: the selfie, the hashtag, the snap, the swipe. As the wireless world blurs IRL and URL, and with it our so-called 'real-selves' and online personas, we have the opportunity to connect with more people than ever before."
Again, I find this paragraph to be odd. This "generation witch" that she is referring to is, in fact, her very own generation- the millennial. The selfie has been around for nearly twenty years, the hashtag for 13, the swipe for 11 and the snap for 7. These are no longer "new" ideas, but rather they are well established and accepted parts of modern society. Has she been living underneath a rock? Again, it's as if her core audience is not people who are her age, but those who are older and are completely unfamiliar with the technological landscape that has existed for nearly two decades in one form or another. Her ignorance almost seems willful at this point.
On the next page, 138, there is another paragraph that stood out to me- but for a very different reason. See if you can spot it:
"These hashtags were coined, championed, and transformed in to real world action because of Black Twitter. When it comes to gender-driven politics online, the 'feminist internet' takes charge- although Black Twitter overlaps with this arm of internet activism and often leads the way there as well."
First off, I just want to say- I am not arguing racist or ignorant intent here. I do not think Sollee meant any harm in this paragraph.
That being said, the format of this paragraph feels incredibly tone-deaf to me. First of all, she is conflating two different social media campaigns: Black Lives Matter and fourth wave feminism. While there is certainly overlap between the two campaigns, the way she describes this is... weird. Replace the term 'black twitter' with 'the blacks' and you'll see what I mean.
Again, I want to emphasize that I do not think there was any kind of bad intent here- I blame sloppy editing.
Speaking of sloppy editing, consider the following oxymoron from page 139:
"Millennial are the first native digital generation to have grown up online" - The green tea was the color green. Enough said.
I came in to this book with very high expectations, and I finished this book disappointed. To summarize- if you are looking for any kind of analysis of feminism in a historical context, this book is not for you. If you are looking for insight in to the mind of the Millennial generation, this book is not for you. If you are not a fourth wave feminist already, this book will not convince you to become one.
So then, who is this book for? If you already subscribe to the ideals of fourth wave feminism, and you're looking for a feel-good narrative that confirms your own personal thoughts and opinions, then this book is for you. If you want a book that is strictly opinion ("Witches, Sluts and Feminists is not a formal work of academic scholarship...", pg.10) from someone who claims to be a "millennial" but clearly did not grow up in that culture, economy- or potentially- even that time period- and you do not want to be challenged on your own personal beliefs, then this book is for you.
I give this book three stars. It's an interesting concept, but ultimately I found it vapid, opinionated, and error-prone.
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle Cloud Reader.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Flip to back Flip to front
Follow the Author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| Free with your Audible trial | |
Frequently bought together
- +
- +
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Choose items to buy together.
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Virtual lessons at low prices
Amazon Explore Browse now
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Customer reviews
Would recommend to everyone, women especially.
Images in this review
Top reviews from other countries
Rebelle Jay
Incredible book. Everyone should read it.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on December 8, 2021Amy-Jane Lewis
Good book but perhaps a bit expensive when bought
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on February 4, 2021
Amy
I found this book eye-opening, informative and inspiring. ...
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on March 6, 2018
