Heaven: 2021 May Book Club: The Passion, by Jeanette Winterson
For May, we are reading The Passion, by Jeanette Winterson, which is a historical, magical realism novel. It's also quite a slim novel, quick to read, so you might want to also read Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit, another quick read, which is a coming-of-age novel, influenced by Winterson's own life, about a lesbian girl growing up in a Pentecostal community.
When we were discussing in the book group thread which Jeanette Winterson book to read, people were interested in both these books, so I thought, since they are such short novels, people could read either or both, and I'll post questions about both, and a comparison question or two, for people who read both. They are quite different in some ways, but also have some similar themes.
By the way, if you're in the UK and happen to have an Audible subscription, Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit is one of the books in the £3 sale at the moment (here, though the sale finishes in six hours time at the time I am posting this - midnight at the end of 1st May here in the UK). Jeanette Winterson is reading it and has an introduction where she talks about it - I have only listened to the sample so far, but I've bought it and am going to listen to the whole thing.
When we were discussing in the book group thread which Jeanette Winterson book to read, people were interested in both these books, so I thought, since they are such short novels, people could read either or both, and I'll post questions about both, and a comparison question or two, for people who read both. They are quite different in some ways, but also have some similar themes.
By the way, if you're in the UK and happen to have an Audible subscription, Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit is one of the books in the £3 sale at the moment (here, though the sale finishes in six hours time at the time I am posting this - midnight at the end of 1st May here in the UK). Jeanette Winterson is reading it and has an introduction where she talks about it - I have only listened to the sample so far, but I've bought it and am going to listen to the whole thing.
Comments
I have this book, but haven't read it yet. If I have time, I would like to read this, in addition to rereading Passion and Oranges.
So with time on my side, I may move on to Oranges are not the only fruit, as according to Fineline in her OP, it is likewise short and easy to read.
I'll post some discussion questions on Friday.
The Passion
1. What were your overall impressions of The Passion?
2. How did you find yourself responding to Villanelle and Henri? Did you warm to them? Could you imagine being friends with them?
3. Did you have a favourite character? Were there characters you found yourself strongly disliking?
4. What did you think of the magical elements of the novel? Were they offputting or did they enhance the story for you? Could you see a purpose to them?
5. How did you feel about historical characters and events being used in an imaginative way? Such as Napoleon's love for chicken, which was an invention of this story rather than a known historical fact.
6. What did you make of the depiction of Venice?
7. How did you interpret Henri's repeated phrase of 'Trust me, I'm telling you stories'? Did you trust him, and if so, in what sort of way?
Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit
1. What were your overall impressions of Oranges?
2. Did you find yourself warming to the character of Jeanette?
3. How did you find yourself responding to Jeanette's mother throughout the novel? Did your feelings change at all?
4. What about the entire Pentecostal community which they belong to - were there particular characters you especially liked or disliked?
5. Is this sort of church community something you have experience with - if not in the specifics, in the types of mindset?
6. What did you think of the various fairy tales and legends that were interspersed throughout the story? What, if anything, did they add to the story for you?
7. Jeanette Winterson (the author, not the character) makes a point in the introduction that when male authors call themselves by name in their works, it is understood by critics to be playful meta-fiction, but when a woman does it, it is assumed to be confessional. Did the fact that the main character has the author's name influence your interpretation of her? Would it have been a different reading experience if she'd had a different name?
Both books
1. Did you have a favourite of the two books? Which did you prefer and why?
2. Were there any themes/topics/ideas that struck you as being central to both novels?
3. Is there anything else you found interesting about either book, or both?
2. How did you find yourself responding to Villanelle and Henri? Did you warm to them? Could you imagine being friends with them?
I enjoyed reading their stories and came to care about their fates. It seemed like the type of book where tragedy might be around any corner, so I didn't get too attached! I don't think I would have enough in common with either of them to be true friends, but they would be interesting to have as part of a wider social circle. Villanelle reminds me of a close childhood friend who I fell out with in high school after I chose not to follow her lead down a rebellious path. But later she became close friends with my sister and spent a lot of time staying over at our house so is now is kind of like a cousin to me.
3. Did you have a favourite character? Were there characters you found yourself strongly disliking?
I didn't have a favourite character, but I liked how Villanelle's mother and step father were so accepting of her and they seemed like nice people. Villanelle's disgusting husband was easy to hate.
4. What did you think of the magical elements of the novel? Were they offputting or did they enhance the story for you? Could you see a purpose to them?
I really enjoyed the magic elements and fairy tale like stories. They had a true magical quality and reminded me of watching The Storyteller T.V. series that used Jim Henson puppets or some of the tales my mother used to tell us about children with magic gold rings etc. that when eventually removed led to a tragedy such as a head falling off. So magical and sometimes a bit grotesque. I was a bit of a gruesome child. I also enjoyed perusing the photos of maladies in my mum's nursing books!
5. How did you feel about historical characters and events being used in an imaginative way? Such as Napoleon's love for chicken, which was an invention of this story rather than a known historical fact.
I thought I would find this off-putting, but found I didn't mind the combination of history and fiction in this book, because it wasn't pretending to be factual. I still found the chicken scenes on the battlefield stomach turning - maybe due to having taste synesthesia so getting a taste of chicken and mud and rottenness when I read those scenes.
6. What did you make of the depiction of Venice?
I have been to Florence and Tuscany, but nowhere else in Italy. As a child I found the idea of Venice fascinating and wanted to visit. However I have a terrible sense of direction and every fictional story I have read about Venice involved getting lost and usually murder or some sort of crime which I think put me off going there. This book also makes the place seem magical and mysterious, as do other fictional stories set there. I'm afraid real Venice wouldn't live up to the magic of the stories about it, but might still be dangerous. I could be wrong though! Anyone who has been there can correct me!
7. How did you interpret Henri's repeated phrase of 'Trust me, I'm telling you stories'? Did you trust him, and if so, in what sort of way?
I trusted him in the way you would trust any good storyteller and wanted to believe the stories were true.
Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit
3. How did you find yourself responding to Jeanette's mother throughout the novel? Did your feelings change at all?
I felt sympathy for her character, but wished she had never chosen to be a mother. She did seem to love Jeanette in a way, but only if she lived up to the person she wanted to create which is a terrible way to treat a child. I really disliked her after she disowned Jeanette and had mixed feelings about them semi-reconciling at the end.
5. Is this sort of church community something you have experience with - if not in the specifics, in the types of mindset?
Not my church, but I joined a mostly lovely bible study group when in-between churches that I still attend. It was great until the latest study series which is all about 'culture wars' and how gay and trans people and pretty much anything to the left of ultra-conservative is causing society to degenerate. I am evangelical and believe that some people have charismatic gifts (have had some possible prophetic experiences myself), but am also progressive, which puts me on the edge of most church communities. I wish the church would accept people for who they are and also have a gay brother, so have had to have some heavy conversations with my friends who lead the group and am currently not attending. I feel called to keep attending after this series is over, but may have to leave if their church continues focusing on culture wars and scapegoating groups of people instead of centring Jesus. This book helped me stand firmer in speaking about my beliefs even though I feared rejection. They are not as extreme as the group in the book, but I was shocked to find out they believe people can change their sexuality as it is all down to upbringing, and that it is also a good idea for gay people to marry somebody of the opposite sex! Most Australian conservative churches just preach celibacy outside of heterosexual marriage as they accept people can't change their sexuality, and even this is harmful and non-accepting, except in their eyes. I tried explaining that out of five kids, four of us are straight and one brother is gay, so how could it be down to parenting? But you can't reason with these sorts of ingrained ideas easily. They also say they have nothing against gay or trans people and just want to help them, but the talk about degeneration of society if we don't all live in heterosexual couples with children belies that fact. I am one of two white people in the group so also feel bad if I argue too much, rightly or wrongly, and also confusingly since I am on the left and they are on the right of politics, but I do think people do not have to be left-wing just because they are not white in a country (Australia) where white people are dominant and the majority (Rant finished).
6. What did you think of the various fairy tales and legends that were interspersed throughout the story? What, if anything, did they add to the story for you?
In this book I found them distracting, and found myself skim reading them to get to the next part of Jeanette's life story.
7. Jeanette Winterson (the author, not the character) makes a point in the introduction that when male authors call themselves by name in their works, it is understood by critics to be playful meta-fiction, but when a woman does it, it is assumed to be confessional. Did the fact that the main character has the author's name influence your interpretation of her? Would it have been a different reading experience if she'd had a different name?
I did wonder how much was based on her childhood and how much is fiction. I will probably read her memoir in the future as I am interested to read more about her life.
I found the descriptions of Venice interesting. I've never been there but it's often, in my experience, romanticised. To have it rendered as an extraordinary place interlaced with dirty smelly water seemed a lot more realistic; and then we're pushed over the edge of credibility into believing that routes disappear and change and you can get lost for five days at a time.
I feel I came very late in the day to Oranges and wish I'd read it years ago. It made me sad and freshly aware of how "exorcising the gay" has been a practice in some circles up until quite recently (perhaps still is) as anyone who's read Vicky Beeching's "Undivided" will know. Like @Mili I had mixed feelings about the reconciliation at the end.
I thought both the books were playing with the ideas of certainty versus uncertainty, and I saw the depiction of Venice as also about that - Henri expects there should be a map to show him the way, Villanelle tells him it wouldn't help, as things change, and he says cities don't, while she assures him they do. It seemed that both books were challenging the idea of binary opposites, black and white thinking, and it was more literal in Oranges, embodied by Jeanette's mother, who has 'never heard of mixed feelings,' and more symbolic in The Passion, with fantastical things like the webbed feet crossing the binary ideas of male versus female, and the heart thing crossing binary ideas of literal versus symbolic. And both books seem to be challenging the idea of fact and fiction as binary opposites too.
What I am getting my head around is the challenging of the binary thinking that leads to certainty, is also setting up certainty and uncertainty as binaries themselves - though I get the feeling Winterson is aware of this as part of the paradox. One thing that struck me in Oranges is that Jeanette's determination, confidence, strength, ability to insist on being herself, speaking her truth, without shame, while Melanie and Katy are intimidated by the church's judgement, is the very certainty of binary thinking that her mother had instilled in her - the fact that she grew up knowing she was special, she was one of God's chosen. And so with this confidence and certainty, when her mother turns against her, she sees her mother as the bad person, not herself - and it's interesting that the thing that causes her to be most disgusted with her mother is not her mother's stance on homosexuality, but the fact that her mother reveals some inconsistency in her standards.
I hadn't seen the end as a reconciliation as such. I'd seen it as Jeanette going back to process it all, to see her parents, her community, her town, from the larger perspective of having been away, and so being able to detach from it all better, to see it more for what it is, a community of people living in poverty, and religion providing a sense of meaning and power to their very limited lives. And how what they cling to and focus on changes as their circumstances change and develop. I was very struck by the woman in the vermin shop complaining that her business is failing now that the homes have been given bathrooms and new central heating, so vermin aren't much of a problem any more. I saw a sort of parallel with the community's religion there - it is reliant on poverty and limitations to survive. I found the scene where Jeanette sees her mother again as almost humorous - her mother all pleased with her new keyboard, seeing herself as being modern, like a self-centred child wanting to show off her new toy, and Jeanette meets her at this superficial level. Her mother had previously been a hugely influential force in her life, and now she sees her as this very limited, childish figure, whom she's outgrown in maturity. I saw it more as a new ability to detach from her than a reconciliation.
1. What were your overall impressions of The Passion?
• I enjoyed the historical fiction aspect of the novel. The alteration and the interlocking of the two protagonists was done well.
2. How did you find yourself responding to Villanelle and Henri? Did you warm to them? Could you imagine being friends with them? They were both survivors making the best of situations they found themselves facing. I found myself rooting for them throughout so in that sense I must have warmed to them. I think they both would be loyal friends although a little broken by their life circumstances.
3. Did you have a favourite character? Were there characters you found yourself strongly disliking?
• Villanelle’s mother was very likeable. I found myself disliking V’s husband and Napoleon.
4. What did you think of the magical elements of the novel? Were they offputting or did they enhance the story for you? Could you see a purpose to them?
• The magical elements were fairly minor and I found myself easily accepting them. It wasn’t stretching credulity as some magical realism.
5. How did you feel about historical characters and events being used in an imaginative way? Such as Napoleon's love for chicken, which was an invention of this story rather than a known historical fact. Napoleon’s love of chicken offered a bit of humor since it was taken to the absurd.
6. What did you make of the depiction of Venice? I read Donna Leon’s, Guido Brunetti mysteries which are set in modern Venice. It was easy for me to accept Winterson’s representation of Venice almost 200 years earlier.
7. How did you interpret Henri's repeated phrase of 'Trust me, I'm telling you stories'? Did you trust him, and if so, in what sort of way?
• I think he meant truth can be found in the embellishment of stories. I think he was suggesting that the “facts” do not always include the truth.
Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit
1. What were your overall impressions of Oranges?
• It seemed like a good period piece reflecting some of the religious and social mores of the time.
2. Did you find yourself warming to the character of Jeanette?
• I loved Jeanette. She was so imprisoned in her religious experience that it took her a long time to find the way out.
•
3. How did you find yourself responding to Jeanette's mother throughout the novel? Did your feelings change at all?
•
• Jeanette’s mother was a very damaged woman. She has essentially a loveless marriage. She found her power and means of expressing herself in one of the only socially acceptable means, church and missionary work.
•
4. What about the entire Pentecostal community which they belong to - were there particular characters you especially liked or disliked? Disliked the Pastor. I liked Elsie.
•
5. Is this sort of church community something you have experience with - if not in the specifics, in the types of mindset?
•
In my early twenties, I attended a Reformed Presbyterian church in Ottawa. Coming from an Anglican tradition, I found this to be very legalistic with a strong sense of fellowship with little tolerance for dissent. I went because a fellow classmate, born Jewish, had begun to attend it. I eventually left because it was far too conservative for my evolving socialist and progressive principles.
6. What did you think of the various fairy tales and legends that were interspersed throughout the story? What, if anything, did they add to the story for you?
I kept trying to see how they were commentary on the evolution of Jeanette’s character.
7. Jeanette Winterson (the author, not the character) makes a point in the introduction that when male authors call themselves by name in their works, it is understood by critics to be playful meta-fiction, but when a woman does it, it is assumed to be confessional. Did the fact that the main character has the author's name influence your interpretation of her? Would it have been a different reading experience if she'd had a different name?
I knew it was semi-autobiographical before I began reading so I do not think the protagonist’s name influenced my reading of the book.
Both books
1. Did you have a favourite of the two books? Which did you prefer and why? I think I ending up enjoying Oranges better because the plot and themes were ones I found more interesting. I like semi-autobiography. That said, I also enjoyed The Passion but less so. I was hoping for an ending where Henri was released from his physical and emotional prison.
2. Were there any themes/topics/ideas that struck you as being central to both novels?
Both books emphasized the finding of identity by their protagonists.
1. What were your overall impressions of The Passion?
I enjoyed the range of characters and watching their relationships. The interweaving of the stories fascinated me.
2. How did you find yourself responding to Villanelle and Henri? Did you warm to them? Could you imagine being friends with them?
Hmmm, I don't think I would ever have imagined them as friends. However, I was struck by the complementarity between Henri's naivete and Villanelle's worldliness (although that isn't quite the right word...). Both of them live through extremely difficult and painful situations and Henri seems, to me, to retain a kind of innocence while Villanelle seems to see the harshness of the world and it's actors more clearly. I wonder whether Henri's life in prison is an escape to the safety of his simplicity, or if he moves into a form of insanity. Or perhaps the two are not mutually exclusive options.
3. Did you have a favourite character? Were there characters you found yourself strongly disliking?
I like the way in which Villanelle claims her life, but at the same time her obsession with the Queen of Spades prevents her from claiming her life fully. In that way she is a very realistic character. How many of us tie ourselves up in similar knots? I admired her gumption. I detested the Cook/Villanelle's husband. He was slimy from beginning to end.
4. What did you think of the magical elements of the novel? Were they offputting or did they enhance the story for you? Could you see a purpose to them?
The magical elements become ways of accentuating certain character/personality traits of the characters. In that way, Venice itself becomes a character - wriggly, deceitful, unpredictable - and thus an appropriate location for Henri and Villanelle to find their relationship falling apart. Villanelle's webbed feet parallel her cross-dressing and taking on "masculine" roles. Patrick's telescopic eye suggests greater depth to his capacity to intuit and see what people are up to. I don't think the magic is intended to explain or provide analogies for the characteristics, but they magic heightens them. I loved it!
5. How did you feel about historical characters and events being used in an imaginative way? Such as Napoleon's love for chicken, which was an invention of this story rather than a known historical fact.
For me, in this novel, it served in a way similar to the magic as I described above. Specifically about Napoleon and the chicken, Napoleon's passion for chicken ultimately becomes a destructive obsession. Winterson seems to be using this as a device to draw our attention to the movement from passion to obsession for both Henri and Villanelle and how that movement becomes destructive.
6. What did you make of the depiction of Venice?
See my comments about Venice as a character, above. Venice, the city, is un-pin-downable and thus the location in which neither Henri nor Villanelle can be connected to each other. Each one's ultimate obsession (Henri with Villanelle, Villanelle with the Queen of Spades) lead them into tangled networks of emotional perplexity from which they cannot extricate themselves. Ultimately, they are ... dooooooomed
7. How did you interpret Henri's repeated phrase of 'Trust me, I'm telling you stories'? Did you trust him, and if so, in what sort of way?
The telling of tales and narratives is how we integrate and compose our worlds. Henri seems to be reminding us that he, like all of us, is relating his story. However, I can trust him because he is aware that he is telling his story. I just need to remember that it is not the ultimate story. But then, who knows what that is?
As to fineline's additional question: What do you make of the way Winterson depicts religion in either/both of these novels? In terms of its negatives and positives, for instance, and its psychological value.
I'm going to have to ponder this some more. I keep asking myself why Winterson gave the novel the title The Passion with all of the Christian lading that comes with that phrase. I'll sleep on it for a couple of days and let you know if I come up with anything. I've been feeling really thick for not being able to understand what she was up to with the title. Maybe someone else has some ideas.
Later, on rereading the novel, what interested me the most was the mother-daughter conflict and the key question of the book seemed to me: how does anyone survive a mother like this? Oranges was clearly IMO an autofiction and deeply, painfully autobiographical but told as a gothic comedy to mask not only the pain of the daughter but the damage done by a monstrous mother. This conformed my earlier intuitions that the narrator and autofictional self of Oranges was someone shaped in profound and irrevocable ways by having such a forceful eccentric mother and mostly absent father.
In recent years I read the more directly autobiographical memoir Why Be Happy When You Could Be Normal? to find a more unresolved and nuanced account of that early life. And I came across an account by Winterson of her meeting and tensions with her birth mother. So much of Winterson's work now reads to me as a marvellous gender-fluid and imaginative search for an identity or multiple shifting identities.
In contrast, I found the interspersed 'fairy tales' in Oranges to be more of a distraction. With some of the early ones, I could see how they were reflections of the stage Jeanette was up to, but the later ones just seemed so irrelevant to the much more interesting main story that I just skipped over them.
Regarding the reason for "The Passion" as a title, I think it's at least partly to do with the strong emotions there are through the book - not all of them what we would describe as healthy. In the very first line, Napoleon is described as having a passion for chicken, and his soldiers do extraordinary things in obeying him because, Henri says, "We are in love with him." Religion and religious people run as a theme through the book but without such rawness of emotion. Henri says he is not interested in the still small voice - "Surely a god can meet passion with passion?" Is it even meant to be ironic? The Passion is a loaded religious term, but the descriptions of passion are to do with human emotion, not religious zeal.
As someone who has been to Venice, how does it compare to the romanticised depictions in fiction? Did you find it very different to your preconceptions of the city, or much as expected?
Fifty years ago, Venice seemed to be a rather run-down city, with its glories (in the form of pallazi and churches) all looking rather dilapidated at least on the outside. The canals seemed a bit dirty rather than sparkling romantically. But it is certainly true that movement within the city is either by canal or by footpaths, linked occasionally by bridges. Both are labyrinthine, so without a good map and/or a good sense of direction it was certainly possible to be lost for most of a day, though lost for five days (as in Villanelle claimed) seems a bit strong. There are occasional public squares, but no roads as such. The novels of Donna Leon give what seems to me to be a fair description of Venice as it is now. .
Thanks for this.
I'm interested in the title as The Passion, as opposed to just Passion. The Passion evokes Good Friday for me, and I guess I was wondering if that was an intentional evocation. "Surely a god can meet passion with passion?" has got me thinking some more.
I've been to Venice a few times. We once spent a wonderful week on the Giudecca in an apartment with views across to St Marks. It is a city where the streets seem to change and the whole place does have a slightly magical feel to it. Roeg's Don't Look Now captures it well.
The hints of torture and nasty deaths were not really to my taste, but were so lightly done they didn't disturb me too much.
I assumed there was a religious element in the title and there was the idea that religion could be a comfort as well as a spectacle and an opportunity to ogle choirboys. I
Without any real resurrection. But that lack would be in keeping with the novel as a whole.
My church didn’t do exorcisms, I hasten to add, and generally they approved of me as I didn’t have the self-confidence to go near any worldly temptations. But so many other little details were familiar. Singing from the Redemption Hymnal (I still have my music copy somewhere). Being called on to testify at evangelistic meetings in your early teens. Inappropriately quoting the Bible in infant school because you hadn’t realised the other kids didn’t have it read to them every night before they went to bed. Trying to reassure yourself that Jesus called us to be separate from the world, so being slightly weird was OK. Singing a bizarrely worded hymn which someone claimed God had “given” them last week. Having your parents pray about illness instead of going to the doctor. Not being able to tell anyone at all that your parents partly threw themselves into church stuff to hide the fact that they didn’t really get on that well.
Like Jeanette, I escaped to university and found myself in another world. My belongings included a saucepan and a set of pencils with Bible verses on them from the Sunday school class I taught, and Grace’s old kettle with a note saying she wouldn’t need it any more as she was going into a residential home and it might be useful as I could find opportunities to mention the Lord to my new friends over a cuppa.
A possibly related insight from Oranges was the episode where their church community was disintegrating over the issue of lesbianism and the male Pastor and Jeanette's mother, as one of the church leaders, decided that the problem was that the congregation was letting women lead contrary to what hey saw as St Paul's teaching. Result: the congregation, which had been almost entirely female, disintegrated completely.
I was already broadly familiar with Ms Winterson's life story thanks to an extensive radio interview she gave once, though I can't recall exactly where. It may have been just after the publication of her memoir. One aspect that I missed in Oranges from that life story was how she had found the local public library to be an [almost literally] lifesaving escape to a broader range of thought than she was getting at home.
The Passion
1. What were your overall impressions of The Passion?
My overall view was that this was a sad story. It seemed both Villanelle and Henri were living by the skins of their teeth, having to endure so much hardship and forced to do things against their natures just to stay alive.
3. Did you have a favourite character? Were there characters you found yourself strongly disliking?
I really liked Patrick! Of all the characters, he seemed to me to be the most honest, and I liked his heart.
Like so many others, I strongly disliked the Cook/Villanelle's husband. What a creepy jerk!
Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit
1. What were your overall impressions of Oranges?
combined with
What do you make of the way Winterson depicts religion in either/both of these novels?
This book actually made me feel angry and uncomfortable. During my years working for churches, I saw and experienced so many of the outrages committed by judgmental church leaders who have no problem using people to their benefit, and also condemning them for not fitting into the mold they force on folks. Jeanette seemed to be so very forgiving of the meanness and prejudice she experienced.
3. How did you find yourself responding to Jeanette's mother throughout the novel? Did your feelings change at all?
I thought she was a horrible excuse for a mother. Towards the end, I did feel sorry for her (a little bit), because I think she was probably incapable of being a loving and supportive mother.
6. What did you think of the various fairy tales and legends that were interspersed throughout the story? What, if anything, did they add to the story for you?
At first they were surprising, then they seemed to be an escape for Jeanette, or maybe the reader. Like a little break from the helplessness I felt for Jeanette.
I did kind of wonder what happened to the characters in those tales!
All in all, I'm glad I read the books. I will not be looking for any others by Jeanette Winterson, however. They are too depressing for me.
That is such a strange story. Even a lowly author published by a small press gets to see and approve their covers and cover copy. How does someone of Winterson's statue NOT get the chance to OK this beforehand?
Written on the Body is one of my favourite Winterson novels, a breakthrough of the 1980s featuring a non-binary narrator (a major influence on Patricia Duncker's Hallucinating Foucault) and I had a look at Penguin's new reprint. The blurb is appalling ('masterful prose' to describe the writing of a feminist, FFS) and doesn't mention how radical, diverse and innovative Winterson's work has been for the last 40 years. It sounds as if it was written last week by a conventional romance writer.
That said, I find the notion of book burning really uncomfortable because of so many other associations.
Shortly afterwards while shelving books at the library Winterson was in the non-literature section where the fiction was categorised by genre, not alphabetical order, but labelled with coloured stickers for each genre. She finds Gertrude Stein's 'The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas' categorised as humour. She had been told by her English teacher that Oliphant's books should not be literature and the teacher plans to tell the librarian so. This leads to a conversation with the librarian about why Oliphant's books are in literature and Stein's book is not. Winterson also noticed that there were a lot more books by men categorised as literature than by women and that books about literature were all by men and about books by men. Gender can obviously play a part in how books are categorised and I think this continues today, even if as not as bad as in 1970 and before.