Sean O'Hara's Reviews > Bridge of Birds

For years people have been telling me how great this book is, and I can only conclude that they read it when it first came out in the '80s and forgot all the awful bits, 'cause it turns out the story is littered with sexism and outright misogyny.

But, somebody is sure to say, isn't this a story of ancient China? Women's lib, not so big back then. That's true to some extent, though, as often the case with history, not to the extent we think. Furthermore, note the subtitle of the book -- "A Novel of an Ancient China That Never Was." Hughart plays fast and loose with Chinese history and culture whenever it suits his purpose, so he could've made a non-sexist world if he wanted, but he chose not to.

In point of fact, he altered part of Chinese culture to fit the sexist nature of his story. At the climax of the book we learn that the story is actually a secret history of the Qixi festival. In the real world the Qixi legend tells of how a goddess fell in love with a mortal cowherd, but her divine mother, Xi Wangmu, forced them to separate. This book then tells the story of how a pair of adventurers helped the cowherd reunite with the goddess -- but Hughart genderflips the whole thing so the cowherd is a peasant girl and the goddess is a divine shepherd. Because it's so much more fun when it's a helpless girl who needs rescuing -- making it a guy would just be boring. Oh, and Xi Wangmu is replaced by the male god, Yu Huang, which at least as some basis as an alternate version of the Qixi legend, but still, Hughart had a choice and opted for the version with a male god instead of a female.

Sadly, this is the least offensive example of sexism in the book. Let's just look at some passages:

"What are you doing?" cried Pretty Ping.

"I am undressing," I said, because I had been well brought up and I would never dream of contradicting so venerable a sage as Li Kao. Besides, I had been told to obey him by the abbot, who was praying for my soul.

"I shall scream!" cried Pretty Ping.

"I sincerely hope so. Ah, if I could only beninety again," Master Li said nostalgically. "Ox, flex a few muscles for the young lady."

Pretty Ping stared at me, as Li Kao turned and trotted back down the stairs... Her luscious lips parted. "Help," said Pretty Ping.

Yes, folks, Our Hero is a rapist! Oh frabjous day!

Now some folk have assured me that this scene is meant to be farcical and Pretty Ping is just feigning reluctance because of her social position. Okay, supposing that's true ... so what? That just means that the scene is playing into the tired old notion that sometimes "no" means "yes," and if the woman doesn't gouge the guy's eyes out she's really giving consent. That's not funny; it's fucking apologia for date rape.

A few chapters later we get this:

Lady Wu, whose beauty was said to rival that of the semi-legendary Queen Feiyen, was carried into the bushes by a creature who had no ears or nose, and whose eyes were as yellow as his teeth.

We all have our little weaknesses, but I must question the judgment of Cut-Off-Their-Balls Wang when he abandoned his fellow hooded monks to disport in the bushes with Lady Wu. He missed a great deal of excitement.

Ha-ha-ha! Rape is funny. Fuck you Barry Hughart.

But the pièce de résistance is this:

"I chopped [my wife] into pieces, and then I chopped her seven fat sisters to pieces. It was delightful," said Henpecked Ho. "Then I came here to try to chop the Ancestress to pieces, but her soldiers caught me first. Oh well, I suppose that one can’t have everything.

"Ho, you did splendidly!" Master Li said.

What did his wife and sisters-in-law do that was so awful as to deserve death by dismemberment? Nothing that we saw in the story -- we just know that Henpecked Ho finds them fat and annoying, which apparently is a crime deserving of axe-murder. And before anyone suggests that maybe we shouldn't take Master Li and Number Ten Ox's opinions as being reflective of the author's views, nope, heaven itself gives a seal of approval to Henpecked Ho at the end of the book.

The fact is, every woman with any agency in this book is portrayed as a wicked harridan who deserves to be put into the woodchipper, and every other female character is a damsel in distress or other object to be moved about by the male characters, who are the only people allowed to act on their own.

I know society has moved on since the 1980s, but Jesus, was it really that bad back then that crap like this got published and praised?