In Which We Discuss Viral

Recently, my feminist group was offered the opportunity to read a preview copy of Helen Fitzgerald's latest novel, Viral.

Though the name seemed familiar, it wasn't until I looked back through my goodreads archive that I realised I'd actually read two of her books before - The Donor in 2013 and The Exit earlier this year.  That wasn't intentional; I just liked the blurbs and didn't twig that The Exit was by the same author as The Donor.

While I enjoyed reading The Donor I wouldn't have gone out of my way to pick up another book by the same author.  The plot hinged on the main characters all being completely oblivious of the fact that two blue or green-eyed parents are extremely unlikely to have brown-eyed children, and it just doesn't ring true to me that someone would remain ignorant of that for their entire adult life, let alone three people.  I may be biased though, since I am in the process of applying to study genetics.

I did quite like The Exit.  One of the characters is a young girl, who begins as selfie-obsessed and lazy, but rapidly matures under the circumstances.  There's a twist near the end that made me feel quite ill, but it was a good twist nonetheless - interesting and compelling.

Helen Fitzgerald is the author of a dozen other novels, and I am quite tempted to read those, especially after reading Viral.

Viral opens with the line "I sucked twelve cocks in Magaluf".  It then goes on to explain - as the blurb says - that this was filmed and has now gone viral.

This is another element that doesn't quite ring true to me.  Though the video is dramatic for the subject (Su), it's not particularly amazing compared to pornography in general.  Plus, the fact that it is pornography means it can't be shared openly, like on Facebook or Twitter.

I did actually assume that pornography couldn't be shared on Youtube, but I've just searched and there's loads on there.  So maybe it is believable and I'm just quite naive.

Anyway, the video goes viral and this allows the novel to explore several different conflicts.  Firstly, the sort of person who would pressure someone into a non-consensual (due to inebriation) sex act, film it, and put it online.  They're fairly closely related to the sort of people who cheer someone on to commit a sex act while also despising them as a 'slut'. 

This explains why the book was offered to feminist reading groups.  Our society has a terrible attitude towards sex.  Have you heard that terrible lock and key joke?  The one about why a woman is called a slut when a man would be called a stud?  And the reply is that a key that opens a lot of locks is a master key but a lock that opens for anything is a shitty lock?

I hate and despise that stupid joke with all of my being.  It's circular logic; the "explanation" only works if you've already subscribed to the idea that men should be having sex with as many women as possible while women should be keeping themselves pure; it doesn't actually offer any rationale or explanation for that concept.

The sort of characters who share this video are the sort of people who would find that "joke" hilarious.  And it's worse because they're not fictitious in the way that Tess Gerritsen's serial killers or Stephen King's demons are - they're walking around, posting on twitter and facebook and youtube, sharing their sexist and victim-blaming views with the world.  Some of them are fairly influential.

In short, this book made me feel very angry because it reflected a part of our population that I wish did not exist.

Su, the victim and heroine of the piece, is a Good Girl.  Still a virgin, rarely drinks, works hard at school.  She is hated by her younger sister Leah, partly because Leah is not so good and partly because of their specific family dynamics.

Su was adopted from Korea at a time when her (white, Scottish) parents believed they were not able to have children.  As in so many cases, as soon as they stopped being concerned about it, they conceived, resulting in Leah.  This is something with which I can sympathise; my sister and I are both mixed race, and as young children I looked more Indian while she looked more white.  I can remember how very pissed off my mother was when people asked her if we have the same father and I remember being confused on the issue myself for a while, when I was three or four.  It's odd, not looking like your family.  It tells people a lot more than you'd like to share with strangers.

Ruth, their mother, has also felt that she had more to prove to Su than to Leah, which results in Leah feeling left out.  Which results in Leah taking her frustrations out on Su.

This also resulted in Leah cheering Su on, and I quite like the way Ruth calls her out on this.  It is important to look out for your friends and make sure they're okay with what's happening, rather than just letting it go on.  I also like the way that Ruth is a Ms, for the same reason I am.  If it were so important for people to know your martial status on introduction then men would signal it too.

I like Ruth.  I like that she's an angry feminist.  I like that she fights.

I like Su, too.  I like that while she regrets the sex act and the video she is also open to her own sexuality.  Many women are aroused by submission, even by rape fantasies.  I like that she's able to acknowledge that and still enjoy being a sexual being despite what she comes to think of as "The Event".  It adds a bit of nuance to the situation.

I am less happy about the fact that Su is a Good Girl.  The back cover describes her as a "dutiful, virginal daughter".  Would the sex act have been portrayed as so terrible if it had happened to Leah, who was less dutiful, drank more, took more drugs and had had sex before?

At rape trials and in the press questions are often asked about the victims previous sex life, as if it's relevant.  There's an idea that 'slutty' women can't be raped, as if saying yes 'too many' times degrades your right to say no.   I don't like that Fitzgerald has pandered to this.  It is an important part of the characterisation, and I can see that it would be impossible to write a unique character who wasn't a stereotype, who didn't have any kind of unfortunate implications when applied to a wider audience.  Sometimes people do match stereotypes or say and do problematic things; you can't avoid all of them.  Writing is a fine art between describing one specific series of events and making a point or describing a person that speaks to a wide audience.  It's forgiveable.

The book raises some important issues about how our society treats women and sexuality.  However, I felt let down by the ending.  I can see why it ended that way, and why the characters made those decisions.  I can also see that the ending doesn't actually resolve the situation.  There are a lot of questions left unanswered at the end of this book, and the ending almost feels like a cop-out.

The book's a short read; it's less than 250 pages, which I finished in one evening.  I'd give it three out of five stars, and, as mentioned above, I am very tempted to check out the author's other works.  I'll let you know.