Evex’s Weblog

Unbelievably, my first choice for the book club. I don’t usually like picking, as I enjoy it when I have to read something that I would never normally choose. Despite that, I was sure that I had picked at least one of the books before, but a quick flick through the blog told me otherwise. Girl Meets Boy is part of the Canongate myths series, where a well known author puts their own spin on a familiar myth. I had previously read The Penelopiad by Margaret Atwood, and Weight by Jeanette Winterson and been really impressed, so had high hopes for this one. The full list of publications can be found on http://www.themyths.co.uk/.

Girl Meets Boy professes to be a contemporary retelling of the myth of Iphis (check your Ovid), which is a tale of gender transformation through divine intervention, allowing two women in love to marry. There was some debate about whether it actually achieved this, which I’ll return to later. I think that everyone liked the book, although Ann was probably the most sceptical about whether the author had achieved what she set out to do. Daniel was the most passionate defender of the book; I don’t think I’ve ever seen him that enthusiastic about a work of fiction!

From the first line onwards, it was clear that thematically we were on the same territory as Lee Cotton. Gender, identity and transformation were the main concerns of this tale, and as Nicky pointed out, it is not as straightforward as the title suggests!

Ann didn’t feel that it was successful as a retelling of the story of Iphis. Pete and Nicky pointed out that although the myth itself was told by one of the characters, the storyline was not at all similar. I agreed, feeling that the book played off ideas contained in the original rather than telling the myth.  Nicky contrasted it with the Penelopiad, which tells the original story from a different perspective and with a contemporary voice, saying that she’d expected something similar. Ann initially felt that it didn’t work as a myth as it lacked the clear, formal structure that she thought was essential to this form of writing but Paddy disagreed, feeling that its modern structure was what made it a successful retelling. Ann thought that these changes from the traditional model i.e. stock characters, intervention by the gods, fixed structure etc. to a looser, self referential style was a post modern approach. However, she still felt that there wasn’t enough of a balance between the traditional and modern forms in this story. I wondered whether, by removing the divine element of the myth, the author was making a comment on the human rights- that people are allowed to choose their own destiny, and do not need to be transformed by the gods in order to be with the person that they love.

This was a very political book. It was definitely written from a feminist standpoint and, as Daniel mentioned, this was set out quite clearly at the beginning of the book with the grandparents’ stories about the suffragettes.  Pete pointed that the male figures in the book were either portrayed as misogynists, or were very feminised, which I think we all agreed with. Midge’s boyfriend was supposed to be the most sympathetic male character in the book (with the exception maybe of the grandfather, who I’m not even sure counts as male…) and he was extremely bland.  Anthea and Robin protest about issues that still affect women around the world. Daniel enjoyed what he called their ‘naive sloganeering’ feeling that this added idealism and passion to the book. Nicky felt that their protests about the killing of female children around the world cleverly linked back to the original myth, where Iphis faced death simply for being female. We found it quite shocking that this issue is still relevant today.

The author also tackles the issue of the commodification of water. The Pure water company where the sisters work allowed the author to put in some good gags. Paddy particularly enjoyed the Creative team’s Scottish branding of bottled water, with ‘Och Well’ and ‘Eau Caledonia’ raising a few giggles. Different people responded to the political element in different ways, with Ann feeling that it was included at the expense of the story.

Overall I think we found it a charming book. We were a little unclear about the role of the grandparents, and there were different reactions to the wedding scene at the end but it certainly provoked debate. It is also very short which is always good when choosing something for a book club!