It was a fabulous scene, and what she described is similar in many ways to what it's like to be in a gaggle of sailplanes sharing a thermal. There were too many "Yes...but no...." moments.
I'm overly critical of descriptions of flying. I recognize it, but I can't stop doing it. It's stuff I'd like to think I know, even though I know my information is almost 15 years out of date.
But on just about anything but feminism she was reactionary even for her time.
Surely you're not faulting her for not being perfectly untimely and reactionary?
One way or another it's hard to tell how many people would translate into our oh-so-enlightened times. Some people would still sit squat upon their prejudices and hold them tight to their breasts, and others would let them fall away since they'd not been held with rigourous examination.
Surely you're not faulting her for not being perfectly untimely and reactionary.
I don't know about faulting her. She was reactionary on many issues, by the standards of her time. Not just by today's standards but by her own times standards. If she was a reactionary in the 20s by the standards of the 20s, then a best guess is that she would be a reactionary today by the standards of today.
Feminism was an exception. She was a feminist in her own time by her own times standards, albeit at the conservative end of the feminist spectrum of her time - thus I'm guessing today that she'd be a feminist by the standards of today, albeit a conservative feminist by today's standards. You can never know something like this for sure - but it seems plausible to translate where she was compared to others in her time to where she'd be today compared to others today.
(Sneaking in just to tell Typo Boy how much I love the tagline)
/alas, back to work
Donna Leon's Commissario Guido Brunetti mysteries are lovely little reads for down time that take place in Venice and have good food porn, Kristin.
Margery Allingham's Campion series is lots of fun, too. She's always struck me as a very modern-type detective writer.
it seems plausible to translate where she was compared to others in her time to where she'd be today compared to others today.
So she'd be just as anti-Semitic as is acceptable today, and reactionary still in the feminism front? Which would make her a bad Buffista how?
Anyone ever read anything by David Brock? The woman next to me on the bus asked me about my book this morning, which happened to be research materials for my WIP, which then led to a discussion of writing and how she likes historical fiction with alternative history and/or time travel twists. Apparently David Brock was one of her high school teachers, and she recommended his debut novel, If I Never Get Back. It's a time travel baseball story, and I've already got it on hold at the library.
At a guess she'd support the Iraq war, support torture, and think the worst racist problem was prejudice against white people. Her positions on gay rights would probably be sufficiently reactionary and insensitive to offend most Buffistas. Her feminism per se would probably be within buffistas norms. And I know there may well be Buffistas who hold those views. But you will note they don't express them on the board. I'm pretty sure this board is not a comfortable place to express those particular views. (The reason I use anti-gay views, is that I suspect homophobia holds approximately the same sway in the U.S. today as anti-semitism did in the UK of her time. )