Lily Burana

Bitch

Lily Burana reviews 'Bitch' by Elizabeth Wurtzel.

  • more
    • All Share Services

I was so hungry for this book. “Bitch” has been hyped as a text that would examine the way women are punished for misbehavior that would seem merely piquant in men, how female sexuality and credibility are seen as mutually exclusive and how women have — and haven’t — “gotten away with it.” Ah, would that it were so.

Wurtzel is the Marisa Tomei of literature: a cute, bright girl who has invoked wrath not because she has the audacity to be unashamedly cute and bright, but because she plays up the cuteness (winsome waif on the cover of her first book, “Prozac Nation”; glammed out, topless and middle finger aloft on the cover of “Bitch”) while creating mediocre works that those less attractive, less connected or simply less lucky probably couldn’t dream of seeing so richly rewarded. She’s seen as someone who skates by, an ugly reminder that life isn’t fair and success isn’t based on merit. People play on her self-absorption and problematic personality, too, but talent tends to obviate those things. Anne Sexton and Sylvia Plath were forgiven their trespasses (as are Philip Roth and the rest of the boys) because they wrote like motherfuckers. The dismissal of Miss Liz isn’t unchangeable; all Wurtzel would have to do to shut everybody up is write a really great book. Unfortunately, she hasn’t.

“Bitch” should have been subtitled “In Praise of the Semicolon.” Instead of the brilliant treatise that would silence Wurtzel’s detractors, it’s a fury of lists, signifying little. Wurtzel confessed in Newsweek that she had a drug problem during the time that she was writing the book, and the speed clearly drives the text. It jitterbugs from one woman stranded on society’s sexual barbed wire — Courtney! Delilah! Lolita! Margaux! Hillary! — to another, all rat-a-tat cultural citations interjected with moments of great craft and observation, then squeals off on some really looooong tangent that ends with a recitation of a commercial jingle or song lyric that confuses the point.

Hey, Liz, where you going with that gun in your hand? The women that Wurtzel ruminates about include, among others, Nicole Brown Simpson and Amy Fisher. Why? Is Amy Fisher anyone’s idea of a “bitch”? She’s a confused kid from Long Island with a felonious approach to resolving her inner conflicts. Wouldn’t Aileen Wuornos make a more interesting “bitch”? She at least chose her targets correctly. She felt helpless at the hands of men, so she attacked men. Fisher felt helpless at the hands of one man, so she shot his wife. And what about Tonya Harding? Unfortunately, Wurtzel focuses almost entirely on bitches vis-`-vis men. Bitch-against-bitch isn’t in her sights.

The reader gets so ground down by this book’s poorly presented arguments and solipsism, one’s own inner bitch is tempted to wield the lash, especially when Wurtzel’s sharp prose ends up nullified by cattiness. When, in trying to point out that Hillary Clinton gets short shrift, she writes, “The First Lady earns less than her secretary … The First Lady earns less than you do. And she has thick calves,” one wants to scream at the cover picture, “Damn, honey, no one’s gonna confuse you with a beauty queen, either.” “Bitch” begets bitchiness.

While supposedly celebrating women who call their own shots, to whatever effect, Wurtzel moans that the fate of a woman is to be at the mercy of the big bad man’s world and her own biological clock. It doesn’t quite work that way. Men may have the lion’s share of the money and control, yet nonetheless they’re extremely vulnerable to their desires. If it weren’t so, the “femme fatale” would be archetype non grata.

Count on this book to raise some interesting issues, but don’t expect any fresh or deep conclusions about them. I’m confident that Wurtzel has a great book in her, but she needs a forceful editor and all her wits about her to pull it off. “Bitch” is little more than occasional short puffs of fresh air in a long exercise in frustration for the reader (and, apparently, the writer). But I will grant her this: She has very pretty tits.

Vice grip

Sure, we all love stories of degradation and vice, especially when the storyteller has a pretty face. But how many bad-girl memoirs do we need, anyway?

  • more
    • All Share Services

if culture in the ’90s suffers from an aesthetic disease, it’s a crippling case of “realness.” Television has a stubborn rash of hyper-confessional talk shows, celebrities in every medium are obsessed with street cred and the publishing industry is fixated on the memoir. The latest mutant strain of this malady is a publishing phenomenon known colloquially as the “bad-girl memoir,” and it’s quintessentially Real(TM): The authors are real attractive, their life stories are real lurid, and those two elements combined make their books real marketable.

It all started with the stunning success of Elizabeth Wurtzel’s “Prozac Nation” (Doubleday, 1994), a bestselling memoir that chronicled the author’s troubles with depression and indiscriminate fellatio dispensation. Since then, we’ve faced a glut of confessionals that leave no taboo untapped: from alcoholism (Caroline Knapp’s “Drinking: A Love Story”) to teenage delinquency (Jill Ciment’s “Half a
Life”) to adult incest (Kathryn Harrison’s “The Kiss”). It’s all about ugly behaviors in pretty packages, bound in ribbons of sexual tension — and it’s all anyone I know in books is talking about.

The iconography of the Bad Girl is nothing new. From Carole Baker making mincemeat of her thumb in “Baby Doll” to the sullen party teens in current fashion advertising, the combination of beauty, youth and tragedy is irresistible. Everyone loves a perky-titted wreck, and mistakes are endearing in the unseasoned. If a young woman assumes a tattered-hem, hardscrabble stance, I usually suck it up like a sick little milkshake. I want to bind her bleeding wrists, trounce her perpetrators, raid her closet and, of course, hear her secrets. I’m glad that female writers are artfully revealing that young womanhood can be a pretty gruesome business, and doing so without the conventional posture of defeat or moral repentance.

Publishing wags and armchair critics harrumph that these writers are producing nothing more than carefully orchestrated burlesque shows — a double crime of market-savvy and exhibitionism. Feh, I say, particularly on the latter charge. To criticize an artist for being an exhibitionist is like criticizing a bird for having wings; it’s pointless to damn the design.

The problem is there’s just too damn much of this stuff. I want to be sisterly and supportive, but already I’m oversaturated. As ever more troubled women spleen their way across the page, the genre seems less edgily refreshing and more like a precocious 3-year-old pulling her dress up over her head again and again to show her bloomers to the dinner guests. Widget & Grommit Publishers presents the release of Tragic Teenage Fuckdoll Memoir #27753b? Oh joy.

This spate of memoirs has also generated rumblings of distaste among my female writer friends. Not because we’re so damn pure — most of us were jettisoned from the “girls you take home to meet Mom” list years ago, and have bared soul and flesh as writers and may well do so again. Our collective gripe is that the trend seems to have upped the ante for entree into the literary big time: tell-all to sell-all — or forget it. But what if you don’t want to build your future on your checkered past? What if you’re one of the three people left on the planet who believes there’s more power in a persona built on mystery than on wholesale revelation? It’s hard to not feel deep-gut twinges when Jane Random-Freelancer gets a six-figure deal based on an article she wrote about, say, giving a hand job to her sadistic Comp Lit professor her freshman year at Brown, while you’re filing birdseed reviews for Wren Weekly and worrying about the bills. Months later, you’re still piddling away in near-obscurity, and she’s looking bookishly wanton and consumptive in her author photo in “Hot Type.”

Well, why shouldn’t a hungry writer make hay of her bawdy youthful mishaps? After all, controversy makes a mighty fine calling card. One reason is that you may never really know whether your writing is popular for its literary merit or just its prurient appeal. That creates all sorts of subtle neuroses, especially in a young writer. There’s also something inherently creepy about turning your own life into a car crash for the literate rubbernecker. Not to mention the fact that coming out with a tell-all early in your career is like coming onstage screaming. What the hell do you do for an encore?

And of course, there’s the bothersome youth-’n'-beauty angle. Beauty was never a liability in a writer, but these days, especially for women, it seems more like a necessity. No longer is writing the last vestige of the famously lumpen, a welcoming haven for the pithy wart hog. Now writers are considering collagen and facing age-panic at 35. Imagine if it had always been this way: “Eudora’s prose is solid; pity she doesn’t have a more market-friendly look.” “Truman’s latest is totally creamy, but get him off the fois gras, willya?” I mean, really. If I can’t get wrinkles and a fat ass, you can keep your publishing revolution.

Like all literary frenzies, this, too, shall pass. But not before some poor sucker, like the unsuspecting victim of a publishing industry pyramid scam, gets her tell-all to market too late and spills her guts right into the remainders bin. Seems to me life as a writer is hard enough without the cheapening effect of being swept into a cattle-call of human misery, however gifted and comely the company. Doubtless, however, others will rush to join the herd. Meanwhile, my friends and I are sitting uneasily on the sidelines, our lives in our laps, waiting to see what comes next.

Continue Reading Close

Page 3 of 3 in Lily Burana