Although only Sam, Yisheng and Aaron showed up, it was a fruitful discussion. S. told us that she borrowed it from Queenstown Library, which had a display for queer YA post-377A. Say what you will about the repeal, but the effects are palpable. YS noted that the novel is part of a wave to introduce Asian history to the western world; and admired it for its vividness and innovation as if watching historical drama on TV. It’s precisely because its dramalike action that A. didn’t like it, bringing the cliff scene and the ending scene as examples of cliches in c-drama.
A. also didn’t like the awkward writing—
“Feels something at the pit of the stomach. It was angry.”
“He never felt layers of feelings before. Love and hate.”
—although A. also noted that there are some brilliant metaphors like “offended like a wet cat.”
We also discussed:
-the significance of ghosts (is there meaning? What are their functions? Why do they surround Ouyang?);
-the sense of manhood (Xu Da, Ouyang, Isen, Lord Wang); why are there so many unlikeable male characters?
-sexuality (what does it mean to be forcibly castrated for Ouyang and Zhu? Why did the lack of an appendage prevent Ouyang-Isen from romantic love but aid in Zhu-Ma’s relationship?);
-is there misgendering of Zhu? or is it fluidity? S. informed us that the author identifies with being nonbinary (they/them)
-gender- is it possible to reimagine women in power in a patriarchy?
-ableism? Ouyang’s pov that a disabled person is worse than death.
-love: sequences between Ma and Zhu are good
-violence – is violence necessary for social progress? Is fighting for survival better than fighting for ideology? Are they the same?
-ethics- as Zhu makes bigger and bigger gamble to survive and thrive, how much of humanity is one willing to sacrifice to get power?
Queer Book & Movie Club (Singapore) 