Word: pearlman
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...Pearlman and Henderson constantly underrate our imaginations in this way--they seem to think that if we are not privy to the minutest detail of the mechanics of each interview, our dull-witted curiosity will be such that we cannot concentrate on the interviews themselves...
...order and beauty in the places where they write, but they have done this with time and thought and taste rather than with money." What should be a series of thoughtful interviews exploring the intellectual aims and achievements of women writers degenerates into a series of gross personality caricatures. Pearlman and Henderson fall prey to the very trap of identity politics they themselves denounce in critical treatment of women writers' works. It is all very nice and good that Tan Bakes cookies for Henderson, but is it particularly germane...
...writers themselves are intelligent, articulate women, but the interviewers' blatant fawning frequently makes the interviews seem trivial and stilly. Many of the women are interviewed in their homes or in cozy little cafes near their homes and Pearlman and Henderson spare no words communicating the picayune domestic details of their surroundings. Their voyeuristic glee at seeing Godwin's indoor pool or overhearing one of Fischer's personal telephone conversations is embarrassing. Italics and exclamation points abound. The opening paragraph of Pearlman's interview with Erdrich is only one salient sample...
...format for a genre they call the "mini-essay." The organization is unfortunate-after authors finally set the scene, there is precious little space for the women writers to speak meaningfully of their work. The brief interviews are never long enough to answer the questions they raise. In addition, Pearlman and Henderson spend unnecessary time summarizing the writers' works, sometimes with lengthy quotes from the writer themselves...
...interviewers, Pearlman and Henderson are far too obtrusive in pursuing their own academic agenda. They rather presumptuously ask the writers to concur with their theories, theories often extraneous to the writers' works. Pearlman and Henderson also obscure the writers' views by floating quotes into the text and tagging them with "we agreed," never revealing who originally set the statement forth. Their Gilliganesque emphasis on connectedness is at best distracting, and at worst, dishonest. Pearlman dedicates sections of her mini-essays to explicating her own theories on space in women's literature. Interviewing Erdrich on her rich fictions of Native American...