free counter with statistics At the Bottom of the Garden by Diane Purkiss | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

ddafairy.jpg
At the Bottom of the Garden by Diane Purkiss


Cannonball Read / Tyburn Blossom

Book Reviews | July 23, 2009 | Comments (19)


I love writing. I love the moments when all of the flotsam and jetsam in the back of my mind suddenly coalesces around the characters inhabiting the murky layers between my conscious and subconscious and a new story comes pouring out. Those ideas often send me tearing off on long research jags, because even if I write fantasy, there are still rules to follow. Everything might come out warped, but I’ve always found that the strongest fantasy is still grounded in reality.

The past couple of years, though, I haven’t written much. I’ve barely even made stabs at editing older works, and my inspiration has been sadly lacking. And I think I’ve finally hit on why.

My brain works best when fed a steady diet of fairy tales, folklore, mythology, old wives’ tales, and urban legends. And I’ve been neglecting to feed it. As a remedy, I’m going to alternate books covering just those subjects with my other reading. I’ve got a long list to go through, and I can’t tell you how happy I was when I dove in at last.

I started with At the Bottom of the Garden, which professes itself to be “A Dark History of Fairies, Hobgoblins, and Other Troublesome Things.” Diane Purkiss pushes the boundaries of what can be defined as a “fairy” nearly beyond the breaking point, starting with Lamia, nymphs, and djinn.

If you’re already knowledgeable about fairies and other mythology, this could be an interesting read, but I would never recommend it to anyone new to the field. Diane Purkiss tried to reference modern books and movies, but couldn’t always get the details right, including saying that the only Sith in the original Star Wars trilogy was Darth Vader, and made easily refutable errors, like claiming Disney based their Tinkerbell on Marilyn Monroe (although the truth couldn’t easily be found on Snopes at the time, I’d still expect better).

As her history approaches modern incarnations of fairies, her tone grows increasingly derisive, and her superior tone (including occasional asides to make sure you know how smart, rational, and very cool she is) grows more and more difficult to ignore. On numerous occasions, she makes reference to modern fairies reflecting the older fairy tropes by accident, since it’s obvious most people using fairies have never spared a moment for a scrap of research. But this is what pushed me over the edge:


The Irish fairies had a posterity too—a dignified one of folktale and careful, sceptical [sic] folkloric research, and a more dubious one of runaway post-Romantic pseudo-Celtic New Age posturing and calendar pictures. In fantasy writer Marion Bradley’s fearsomely long Mists of Avalon, King Arthur’s old enemy Morgan Le Fay, Morgaine the fairy, is reimagined as a radical feminist of the Seventies, battered, bruised, but always Very Strong, always in touch with her menstruating self. She meets from time to time with the Even Stronger Queen of the Fairies, who is even less embarrassed about her sexuality and fecundity. But somehow the whole thing never rises far above the ruck of sword and sorcery, a genre so utterly debased that little can be said for or even about it.


I don’t have any problem with her disliking Mists of Avalon, though I do find trashing an author in your book to be immature and unprofessional, and I cannot respect anyone who will dismiss an entire genre. And I have to go back to Tasha Robinson’s answer from the AV Club’s Q&A about Pop Culture Sacred Cows:


But what I absolutely can’t stand, and what puts me into a fighting mood faster than anything else, is people blanket-dismissing an entire genre or subculture or area of effort, especially with the always, always, always-uninformed “I’m not interested in that stuff because it’s all the same.” So here’s my pop-culture sacred-cow statement: Every genre is deep, nuanced, complicated, and diverse to its knowledgeable fans. That doesn’t mean every genre is for all tastes. You don’t have to like industrial or classical or conscious rap or Chicago blues or Beat poetry or fantasy novels or reality TV or whatever else. You aren’t even obligated to try them, much less to make the effort to immerse yourself in them enough to tell the classics and the keepers from the trash. Life is short, the world is big and full, and there’s nothing wrong with walking away from things that don’t speak to you. But people who get snotty or self-righteous about it, as though their personal tastes reflect some sort of immutable reality, steam the hell out of me. Ignorance isn’t attractive, but saying “I’ve never really gotten into [Westerns, opera, FPS games, whatever], and I’m not really interested” isn’t nearly as ignorant as lumping together every example of a genre as unnuanced and unworthy. People who do sound exactly like caricatures of ’50s parents, squawking about how Elvis and The Beatles are all just stupid noise.


I’ve tried to say it better, but she took the words right out of my mouth. My annoyance would be equal if she had been bashing romance, rap, or even some subgenre I’d never encountered.

My poor impression of Ms. Purkiss deepened as I drew towards the end of the book, which I continually had to force myself to keep reading instead of hurling across the room. Her distaste for the modern version of fairies was obvious, and my willingness to accept her version of events faded quickly.

For example:


…many of us can only feel nausea when our daughters and goddaughters invest int he fairy image. At my son’s Hallowe’en party, one five year old came dressed as a pretty fairy; her foamy pink skirts stood out like a wound among the ranks of matt-black ogres, vampires and Dark Lords of the Sith. The mothers hissed, ‘Who’s the little girl in pink?’ No one actually said ‘Urgh!’, but everyone, like Tim, looked sick, and her own mother was apologetic. Any self-respecting North Oxford mummy would rather her daughter was a vampire than a fairy.


I can’t help but wonder if the mother in question was only badgered into apologies when confronted with Ms. Purkiss’s attitude. She also devoted an entire passage to the owner of a fairy shop in Australia who wouldn’t allow her to take pictures inside her shop, and refused to bow down after the author whipped out her academic credentials. So, obviously, the professional thing for her to do was trash the woman in question in her book.

She finally wrapped it up by drawing parallels between aliens and fairies, and a lot of talk of the “X-Files,” even reproducing a little fanfic. She took one last shot at the speculative fiction genre with, “I do not think I can argue that these stories come from fairy sources; I would be greatly surprised if science-fiction writer…had made much of a study of European folklore.”

By the end, I didn’t feel her work deserved anymore respect than she was willing to give so many others, and I’m glad to be done with her book. I definitely won’t be picking up anymore of her work.

This review is part of the Cannonball Read series. For more of Tyburn Blossom’s reviews, check out his blog, The Congering Basket.


The Supersizers Go | Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Remake



Comments

Wow, that lady sounds crazy. -_- I looooove folklore and mythology. Love it. But getting all snooty about how it's been bastardized, especially to people (like the girl in the fairy getup and her mom) who probably have no clue in the first place and are just unaware rather than willfully stupid, really doesn't do anyone a bit of good, especially if we're dealing with fiction, where for chrissakes you can make up any damn thing you want. I could write an epic fantasy novel where Kali wears pink leg warmers if I wanted to, and somehow I suspect that it wouldn't suddenly shake the very foundations of the Hindu faith.

For a good fairy folklore read on the scholarly side, I'd recommend "The Fairy Faith in Celtic Countries," which is DRY AS HELL (I've had it for years and I go through long stretches of time where I don't even wanna look at it) but contains a lot of awesome primary research and really cool anecdotes from random Celtic people who claim to've had fairy encounters.

It can be found online here: http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/celt/ffcc/index.htm

Posted by: Nat at July 23, 2009 8:26 AM

You might hate her writing for being somewhat superior in attitude and inferior in substance, but you can't hate her for being a hater when your review does to her what she has done to part of a genre. You're dismissive of all her work based on one bad book? Isn't that the same mind crime you're convicting her of?

Seems somewhat lacking real insight to take it upon yourself to condemn an athor for condemning other authors and artists.

Here's what you might have said: "Tyburn Blossom's approach to this stuff can't muster any sympathy for it -- and while she may or may not be right, she has an obligation to reach for a small dose of the other guy's opiate as she walks through a genre of fiction. Credible criticism is one thing, but blatant scorn with no reflection on the pathos of the other guy is simply vile. It's inhuman in a way that even fairies can't muster."

And in that, you would show yourself a better person, and a better critic, than your hapless victim in this review.

Posted by: hater from siloam springs at July 23, 2009 8:39 AM

This doesn't sound like my kind of book.

I prefer "Lady Cottington's Fairy Album." Pressed fairies mooning you. WHEEEEEEEE!

Posted by: BWeaves at July 23, 2009 8:56 AM

You're dismissive of all her work based on one bad book? Isn't that the same mind crime you're convicting her of?

I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with this assessment. The author of the book is dismissing an entire genre, not one author in that genre. Additionally, Tyburn's overall tone was not nearly as derogatory as the author's, judging by the passages quoted. And I don't believe she trashed the author so much as pointed out the reasons why she found the book an unpleasant read. And she began her review with a statement of her love for the genre.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at July 23, 2009 9:09 AM

You're dismissive of all her work based on one bad book? Isn't that the same mind crime you're convicting her of?

No, it really isn't. One is deciding that this author isn't for him. The other is deciding that an entire genre is not merely uninteresting to her but totally worthless.

I don't buy the Halloween story, and if I did I'd find the girl's mom to be pretty pathetic for being "apologetic" rather than saying, "My daughter can dress up as anything she wants, and if you don't like it, fuck off."

Posted by: Todd at July 23, 2009 9:27 AM

wow. just wow.
i will have to check this out.
i LOVE being indignant about the stupidest things!

Posted by: gp at July 23, 2009 9:40 AM

Any self-respecting North Oxford mummy would rather her daughter was a vampire than a fairy.

Excuse my ignorance, but are children's costumes now dependant upon where one lives? Because then my kids are going to have to dress up as retirees and start swinging canes at their playmates. Actually, that kind of sounds like fun.

Posted by: admin at July 23, 2009 9:52 AM

I think I dressed up as a pink fluffy fairy for at least the first 8 years of my life for Halloween. Thank god I'm not from North Oxford. The good folks of Tacoma, WA are accepting of all forms of non-historically based supernatural beings! My parents were significantly less delighted when I hit junior high and wanted to be, like, Kurt Cobain.

This book sounds annoying.

Posted by: HB at July 23, 2009 10:37 AM

You're dismissive of all her work based on one bad book? Isn't that the same mind crime you're convicting her of?

Actually, I'd be guilty of it if I said that her book sucked, so I'm never going to bother with any other folkloric research books. I'm still reading on folklore--I'm just not wasting my time on one author.

And that's the thing about any genre or discipline. There will be good and bad examples, and when there's such a wide selection of authors and historians to chose from, why spend more of my time on one author whose research gets sketchy when she decides she doesn't care when there are far better out there?

Posted by: Tyburn Blossom at July 23, 2009 10:45 AM

Thanks, Nat, I'm going to have to check that one out.

Also, BWeaves, I adore Lady Angela Cottington's Pressed Fairy Book, and it's sequel, Strange Stains and Mysterious Smells. The Pressed Fairy Book in particularly was funny and then tremendously sad.

Posted by: Tyburn Blossom at July 23, 2009 10:49 AM

Nat: I have Lady Cottington's Pressed Fairy Book and Lady Cottonton's Fairy Album. I can't remember off the top of my head which one came first, since they do sort of need to be read in sequence. But I love all the squashed fairies doing naughty things at you, and the story is interesting because the little girl is clueless, and you have to work it out for yourself.

Posted by: BWeaves at July 23, 2009 11:12 AM

Oh yeah, the Lady Cottington (Cottingley? I forget) books are hilarious fun. I liked Froud's "Faeries" and not-exactly-sequel "Good Faeries, Bad Faeries," too. Gorgeous artwork, and a nice sense of fun with the source material, without Disneyfying OR gothing the fairies up too much.

I'm baffled why the author cares so much if little girls want to dress up in pink fairy princess gear or whatever (hell, I'll take it over a slutty Hannah Montana costume any day); I sure don't, and I love fairy lore with a love rivaled only by comic book geeks and their favored issues. If the kid seems interested in learning more about fairies, sure, I'll give them the "real" deal or maybe loan them some nice starter books, but gosh, if we shun anyone whose happy fun dress-up time costume isn't exactly accurate to whatever its source is, next we'll be jumping people at Renaissance Festivals going "THIS IS A RENAISSANCE FESTIVAL BUT YOU'RE ALL DRESSED MEDIEVAL. AND YOU'RE WEARING GLASSES. AND YOU'RE WEARING BRACES. AND YOU'VE GOT BOOB IMPLANTS SO GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY HISTORY PLAYSET. WHY ARE WE EVEN EATING TURKEY DRUMSTICKS."

FAIRIES AND TURKEYS ARE SERIOUS BUSINESS, Y'ALL.

Posted by: Nat at July 23, 2009 11:47 AM

I'd like to know where I could find some good information about the actual mythology of faeries. You guys seem to know a lot about this subject, and after reading the comments here, I'm interested in learning a bit more myself.

I only have the most basic of knowledge about the subject, but it sounds as if it could be very interesting. What do y'all recommend?

Posted by: ZombieNurse at July 23, 2009 1:04 PM

ZombieNurse, two good places to start are The Mabinogion and The Tain, which are the two big Welsh and Celtic books of mythology, and then work outwards from there to their other mythology books. That'll provide you with two very important things: context for the mythological world Celtic fairies inhabited, as well as the famous myths featuring fairies, and the foundation for a bullshit meter for when you start hitting the fluffy twee stuff where authors make shit up.

From there, you can check out the book I recommended in my first comment up above, and also start looking at more "encyclopedia of fairy critters" style books published by university presses - uni presses are always my first stops for folklore because they're peer-reviewed, which means anyone who writes a book where the grand finale is "And I know all this about fairies because I'm the reincarnation of Magical Princess Moonpixiepants and these are the secret histories of my fairy people!" will not get through.

From THERE, the easiest thing to do is bibliography hunting. If you find a book that seems really good (and passes your Bullshit Meter scan), and it has a bibliography of resources that author used, look at those resources and try to find the books they were going off of.

And for the love of all that is sparkly and periwinkle, avoid anything published by Llewellyn Press, at least until you have a really good mental foundation in fairy folklore and can weed out the crap. They cater to that very twee new agey crowd that has shit for brains and wants to live in fantasy land at any cost, so their fairy books are GREAT for ideas for writing your next great fantasy novel (I've used their "A Witch's Guide to Fairy Folk" to very densely populate one of my RPG campaigns before), but shit for if you actually want to know the lore, as I found out the hard way, when the abovementioned guide to fairy folk was 1/3 actual lore and 2/3 "I dropped acid one time and this is all totally true fairy stuff I learned, y'all."

Lest I sound too stuffy, though, let it be known that I also own a bunch of hilarious Victorian fairy guidebooks where the authors very much make shit up on the fly, and obviously I own some of those godawful Llewellyn books too, so it's not all high tea, monocles and harrumphing at Casa Nat. ^_^

Posted by: Nat at July 23, 2009 1:37 PM

it's not all high tea, monocles and harrumphing at Casa Nat.

But god, how I wish it were....

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at July 23, 2009 1:56 PM

Well, Ms. AvB, there is an awful LOT of high tea and harrumphing (especially when I come to Pajiba to read trade news and the latest remake is announced -_-). And I wear contacts, which is KIND of like having little monocles on my eyeballs...

I'm moving to the Baltimore area in a few weeks, so if you're in the neighborhood and want to have tea and complain (while wearing huge hats whose production required the extinction of at least 3 species of bird), I'll bring the scones and the righteous indignation.

Posted by: Nat at July 23, 2009 2:07 PM

"Morgaine the fairy, is reimagined as a radical feminist of the Seventies, battered, bruised, but always Very Strong, always in touch with her menstruating self."

Holy freshman women's studies. Deconstructing sexual stereotypes and redefining the agency of women in a masculine defined world, ahoy, hoy! Yow. It all comes flooding back, synapses a firing like a tiny aneurysm. Here I thought I'd buried that crap with my unfortunate bi-curious phase.

Posted by: Leigh at July 23, 2009 2:10 PM

And I wear contacts, which is KIND of like having little monocles on my eyeballs...

(while wearing huge hats whose production required the extinction of at least 3 species of bird)

....

I think I might need to move to Baltimore. Largely because I have just a slight, tiny crush on Nat and *might* want to be nearby for stalking purposes. Also, isn't that close to lizzieborden? 2 for the price of one!

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at July 23, 2009 2:49 PM

Thanks, Nat!

Posted by: ZombieNurse at July 24, 2009 10:43 AM