We read The Red Tent here for discussion several years ago, so I am sure that discussion thread has dropped off into wherever such threads go!

I remember enjoying it and recommending it to friends. I was previously unaware of the historical background of the "Red Tent". I liked the idea of all women being Mothers to the younger females in a male dominated society where women could be married off to anyone without love or choice. Not that that would work today, but seemed to be right for those times.
As I said I read it years ago and only remember some parts but not all the story, but it is a book I remember really enjoying.

Pat

I read this book for my book club. And it generated a LOT of discussion. It was not my own personal favorite, nor my favorite "style" of book, but I made it through, enjoyed my club's discussion, and now I cannot remember a blessed thing about it.
PAM

I really disliked this book which was surprising because I generally like books that do twists on historical events or on famous stories. But the writing was a little too MOther Earth for me, and if they told me one more time what the Red Tent was for I was going to tear the book up. I did read it for a group, and was probably the only one who didn't like it, FWIW

Pat - I have to agree that the mother-daughter relationships described in the book are appealing. I wonder if that sort of closeness and sharing would naturally develop, even today, in a polygamous situation - like in the Warren Jeffs group, for example.

PAM - It's true that some of the "less-loved" books generate the best discussions at book club. When everyone likes a book, the discussion becomes pretty predictable.

Kathy

Cindy - Looks like we were posting at the same time. I agree that the book leaned too heavily on the Mother Earth theme. And I thought a few scenes were over the top - like the description of Dinah's "first blood" ceremony, as performed by her mother and aunts. -- Kathy

I had to add "More" to the subject of the posting because RP wouldn't let me post again so soon. It seemed to think I was repeating myself.

I read The Red Tent when it first came out. I remember that I loved it at the time and recommended it.

I was very taken with this book when I read it three or four years ago. I liked it a lot, though I remember I felt it kind of trailed off toward the end and lost the richness of the first two-thirds or so of the book.

I loved it. My feminist soul always deeply resented the separation of women during their menses that I read about in the Bible. The Red Tent gave me a fresh perspective on the subject. One of the mistakes I made in my youth was to disdain the traditional ways of women. I wanted to be a woman who could go toe to toe with men and the usual ways of women just didn't seem to suit my plans. It took me a long time to appreciate and value the ways of women and this book just happened to help me do so.

I appreciate hearing these thoughtful comments, and the fact that several of them highlight positive aspects of the book. I'm rethinking... - Kathy

I recall liking its theme initially. However, the novel seemed to lose momentum as it went on, IMO. The message was good, but I remember feeling as it I had been hit over the head with it, by the time I had finished. A good read, but certainly not great.

I had just about decided to bypass this thread and not say anything because too often I think I interject sour notes into harmony. But thanks to Mary's saying she felt "hit over the head" with the message, I do want to say that's exactly how I felt too.

There's something about these revisionist, feminist historical novels that really sticks in my craw. Most of the women-communing-with-women subgenre is too simplistic and idealized, in my opinion. I think this novel and so many of the others could be very interesting, but aren't -- to me, unfortunately.

friedag, I felt exactly the same. Not wanting to be negative, I didn't post, thinking my opinion would be the one all alone out in left field.
The Red Tent, was for me, a very forgettable book. I read it, gave it away, and never gave it another thought.
I judge books by how long and how often I think about them after the last page has been turned.

Frieda, I'm normally ready to throw revisionist history against the wall and am generally annoyed by anachronistic behavior. I'm not sure why this novel didn't evoke the usual reaction. It evoked no religious shibboleths for me. I've always wondered how multiple wives can co-exist and I thought the depiction realistic. (My own experience in cohabiting with another human is limited, so I may be way off base.) If we really don't have a clue about the lives of women from 3 millenia ago, how can it be revisionist? Isn't it conventional wisdom that this, roughly, was the time at which the Father God began to replace the Goddess? Why couldn't there be still extant rituals of women?

I sound defensive, don't I? Don't mean to. What was the message you felt beat over the head with? It has been a while since I read this and may be misremembering.

Frieda, yes, that's it exactly.

-- "Most of the women-communing-with-women subgenre is too simplistic and idealized, in my opinion. I think this novel and so many of the others could be very interesting, but aren't -- to me, unfortunately." --

Martin would call it "chick-lit". Written by women, about women, for women, and not worth remembering because there will be another "female relationship" book along in an hour or two. (There... how's that for being negative??)

PAM

Frieda and others - Thanks for passing along your less-than-flattering comments. I want to hear those too. As I mentioned earlier, my reaction to the novel was not very positive either, but I wanted to be open to hearing other opinions. However, I sure don't mind hearing from people who see it as I do!

PAM - I do agree that unfortunately, the book seems to fall into the "chick-lit" category. I was trying to imagine a man being interested enough to stick with this novel to the end, and I don't think it would happen often.

I can see that the book could easily generate a lot of discussion at a book club, but I've never recommended a book I didn't much like before. Something to consider.

Kathy

Kathy, I'm so glad I didn't throw a clinker into the works, which I'm wont to do from time to time.

Personally, if I thought I could get a good discussion out of it, I'd suggest it. There's nothing duller than a book group meeting where all that the members can say about the selection is they like it. The problem with this particular book, though, is it was done to death about four or five years ago. I got sick of seeing the cover and hearing mentions of it. But maybe enough time has passed that most of the gushing has settled down, and those who didn't read it back then would appreciate another opportunity to read and discuss it. If your group does decide on it, be sure to let us know how it goes.

Chris, I think Diamant's idea is a good one. The mention of Dinah in the Bible is so fleeting that she had to do a great deal of embroidering to get a good story out of it -- that she got a whole whopping book out of it is a credit to her imagination. The execution, though, to me, felt as if I was reading bits and pieces pulled out of a women's studies program, the theme of which was so often (in the seventies and eighties): if and when women get together in a cooperative way, ideals can be realized. That's the message I thought Diamant was belaboring. Frankly, I think she was pandering to wishful thinking. I'm sorry that I can't give you specific examples because I no longer have a copy of the book and I don't remember anything particular.

Actually, I think we have far more clues about women's lives three millenia ago than we often realize. As far as revisionism goes, I think it is a constant historical process: every generation or so rewrites history to suit their own agendas, and that certainly has been the case with the feminist movement. I'm not saying there's anything especially wrong with revisionism -- it's to be expected. But I do think it's important to be aware that revision is what's happening and to not accept it without a healthy dose of skepticism. The revision may bear only small resemblance to the reality of what was going on at the actual time...in women's lives during the patriarchal period of the Bible, in this case. I could get very tedious with examples -- heck, I'm already getting tedious so I'll just let it rest there.

We see what we need to see in novels, don't we? I was highly disdainful of almost all the feminist literature I read in my youth. Perhaps it took age and Diamant to make it palatable.

> I could get very tedious with examples -- heck, I'm already getting tedious so I'll just let it rest there.

Frieda - Thanks for the early-morning smile!

Again, I do appreciate all of these thoughtful comments from both sides of the fence. I'm somewhat of a newcomer to this particular book club, but I've already ascertained that they have not discussed The Red Tent. Perhaps I'll print out this discussion for others to read at our book-selection meeting.