I think that this is one of the most interesting books I’ve read in a long time, but I also did not give it five stars because the ending was not my favorite I guess. The characters are all so clear to me (no I have not seen the movie so I have no reference in that sense) and while a lot of the language is outdated and offensive from time to time, it was a well written book for sure.
So far for my research, this book has been the most beneficial in terms of information and of ideas. I have read many other pieces that argue with Walkowitz and disagree with her arguments, yet I believe she still has the most extensive and arguably correct piece.
I think that this book had a lot of interesting questions and a lot of good information, but it was not really easy to follow in some of the parts. It felt a little repetetive towards the end, and for a book about the history of sex work, Howell truly did not bring in the voices of many women, in primary OR secondary sources. I understand that primary source material from women may be scarce, but Josephine Butler and other activists had extensive material that he could have used more frequently, AND it could have helped his point! Other than that, this book did make me think through a historical lens that I usually don't, and I will be using his findings for at least some of my research.
I am currently doing research regarding the Contagious Diseases Acts, and that is why I picked up Attwood's book in the first place. I think that had an argument that is very important to understand not only the concept of sex work itself, but to better understand the Victorian era. History has been divided up into all of these sections that are taught and seen as static in values and beliefs, but that is simply not the case. We could never define now as one dominant way of life or event, so why should history be viewed that way at all?
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.0
I was never assigned this in high school and think that is when most people tend to read this book, so I thought that I would read it and see why it is assigned so frequently. I liked it, but I dont think that it really lived up to the expectations I had, because so many people seem to love it.
I think that this book had a lot of important questions that are difficult but need to be talked about. The concepts of bare life I found particularly helpful, but I found myself confused with a lot of the discussion of removing identity politics. I guess that may be "the point" in some ways, but I would have liked a little more info. A lot can also be applied to Foucauldian concepts of biopolitics, and it also would have been nice to see a little more of that. overall, very important read, especially for those interested in political theory.