Lynne Cheney’s 1981 novel—offensive in more ways than one

Reader N. writes:

That Lynne Cheney had written softcore porn in 1981 was news to me. A copy of the book in PDF is pointed to here.

You can see selected passages from the book here, and even buy a copy that appears to be autographed here.

I recall 1981 pretty well. In the late 70’s, with movies like Clayburgh’s An Unmarried Woman, it became chic in certain circles to trod the feminist path: an abortion, a lesbian affair, possibly a divorce … not necessarily in that order. Lynne Cheney is a bookish sort, who surely was at least on the periphery of the neo-bluestockings (actually bluestocking-wannabes IMO).

So what we have here probably is Cheney’s version of a fling; writing a novel that includes some things she had fantasies about. Note that in ‘04, when republication was considered by a branch of Penguin, the lawyer representing Cheney and others (note who the “others” are) in literary issues declined to give permission.

Should we hold this book against her? Yes, we should, because she has never stood up and said “I wrote that, but I was wrong, here’s why.” Instead, weaseling has been employed, such as calling it “not her best work.” And yes, this is a liberal sort of thing to do; a conservative would know the path to redemption starts with confession.

(LA replying.) I recommend that readers take a look at the passages. Also, N. has not mentioned the book’s blurb (reproduced on the same webpage), which describes the book as being about a 19th century Wyoming where

women were treated either as decorative figurines or as abject sexual vassals … where the relationship between women and men became a kind of guerrilla warfare in which women were forced to band together for the strength they needed and at times for the love they wanted [i.e. lesbian affairs, which as can be seen from the extensive quotes on this webpage, or central to the novel].

Assuming the blurb is a reasonably accurate portrayal of the book, the book’s feminist slant is more objectionable than its mildly sexual content (though all that lesbian sighing and blushing is surely sickening). That Lynne Cheney could be so ignorant and biased as to think of the 19th century American West in such ugly terms is unbelievable. In the first, instance, the life of pioneer families was very hard, for men and women. Second, 19th century American women were the freest who had ever lived, and in the American West sexual equality was more advanced than anywhere in the country. It was in western states where women first got the right to vote. Lynne Cheney in this book is on the liberal bandwagon of creating resentment toward the past, resentment toward everything in our history that is not modern and liberal in a post-1960s kind of way.

But what can we expect of a woman who supports homosexual marriage and whose idea of conservatism is endless genuflections to Martin Luther King?

Also, here’s an odd thought. Mary Cheney was born in 1969, so she was about 12 when the book was published. Presumably she had not evinced lesbian tendencies at that point in her life. So, Mary’s mother wrote a novel that portrayed lesbian relationships in a positive light, and Mary then became a lesbian. I’m not saying the first caused the second. But the fact remains that Mary Cheney became what her mother had approvingly portrayed. In a spiritual sense, Lynne Cheney chose for her daughter to be a lesbian.

But Michelle Malkin says we must not judge works of fiction by any moral standards, because, as she elegantly put it, that’s just “[y]ou know, stuff that’s made up.”

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 31, 2006 12:20 PM | Send