Vulpes Libris

A collective of bibliophiles talking about books. Book Fox (vulpes libris): small bibliovorous mammal of overactive imagination and uncommonly large bookshop expenses. Habitat: anywhere the rustle of pages can be heard.

Who is Gillian Flynn and why does she hate women so much?

sharp objects by gillian flynn

It takes a while sometimes to work out what you like and what you don’t like about a book. It took me a while to work out what I didn’t like about Gone Girl, maybe because everyone else loved it so much and the premise was fabulous and it featured, for once, a woman being bad. I felt primed to like it, but I didn’t and it was only after several weeks of living with a niggling sense that something important was eluding me that I realized why.

I explained my theory here  and it turned out – or so I believed – that my problems with Gone Girl have more to do with who we are as a society than the book itself, so when I ordered Sharp Objects, Flynn’s debut, I didn’t expect to have the same reaction. It’s a different book, about a different character and it didn’t get the reaction as Flynn’s third and currently most-famous book. This meant I came to it without expectations. Yet, despite myself, despite the writing (which is really, really good) I ended up feeling the same way about Sharp Objects as I did about Gone Girl: wishing I hadn’t read it.

This is my problem. I can sum it up in three words:

Flynn hates women.

Now by that I don’t mean that Gillian Flynn as a person hates women. I’m sure she doesn’t. I’m sure she’s a well-balanced individual who approaches people, like most of us do, with the sense that we’re all human and we all deserve respect. I’m sure she has good, solid relationships with other women and is a true and trusted friend to many.

That’s Gillian Flynn the person.

Gillian Flynn the writer is a different matter. Gillian Flynn the writer has an unnerving talent for putting female behaviour under a microscope and watching it wriggle.

But don’t take it from me. Let’s allow Flynn to speak for herself.

Here’s the one-line premise for Sharp Objects: Camille, a journalist for a struggling Chicago daily, has been sent by her boss to her home town of Wind Gap, Missouri to report on the killings of two young girls. In this scene, the main character Camille is taking lunch with some friends of her mother. Amma is her much younger half-sister.

‘Oh shit, I always forget Amma and Camille are related – different lifetimes, you know?’ Jackie smiled.  A hearty pop sounded behind her and she lifted her wineglass without even looking at the waiter. ‘Camille, you might as well hear it here: Your little Amma is truuuuuble.’

‘I hear they come to all the high-school parties,’ DeeAnna said. ‘And take all the boys. And do things we didn’t do till we were old married women- and then only after the transaction of a few nice pieces of jewelry.’ She twirled a diamond tennis bracelet.

These women are straight out of a Jackie Collins potboiler – the kind of puddle-deep harpies whose mercenary view of male-female relationships would cause a medieval marriage-fixer to blush – but entertaining as they are, the tone is disturbing. Women stab each other in the back, reads the subtext. They use sex as currency. They compete with other women for male attention and resort to slut shaming if they lose.

But these are the secondary characters. What about Camille herself? It could be that Flynn’s tactic is to highlight the difference between what these women are and what they could be by giving us a main character we can respect.

Camille is a cutter, her body covered in scars. My skin, you see, screams she says. It’s covered with words. She carves words into herself, the choices apparently random and inexplicable. I had a dirty streak my senior year, which I later rectified, she reveals. A few quick cuts and ‘cunt’ becomes ‘can’t’.

You can’t help, in some dark way, being enchanted by the twisted inventiveness of Flynn and the monstrous, bleeding Camille. Yes, at some level Camille – the result of a truly autistic form of mothering – represents how women deal with pain. We turn it inward. We obliterate ourselves. We turn cunt into can’t. Camille shows moments of decency and clear-thinking. She attempts to rescue Amma. She sees the people of her hometown the way they really are – petty, cruel, deluded – and digs away to get at the truth of what happened to the dead girls. She also says this to Richard, the police officer in charge of the investigation:

‘If I got a little too drunk tonight and was out of my head and had sex with four guys, that would be rape?’

‘Legally, I don’t know, it’d depend on a lot of things – like your attorney. But ethically, hell yes.’

‘You’re sexist.’


‘You’re sexist. I’m so sick of liberal lefty men practicing sexual discrimination under the guise of protecting women against sexual discrimination.’

‘I can assure you I’m doing nothing of the sort.’

‘I have a guy in my office – sensitive. When I got passed over for a promotion, he suggested I sue for discrimination. I wasn’t discriminated against, I was a mediocre reporter. And sometimes drunk women aren’t raped; they just make stupid choices – and to say we deserve special treatment when we’re drunk because we’re women, to say we need to be looked after, I find offensive.’

Sometimes drunk women aren’t raped; they just make stupid choices. At this point I badly wanted Richard to point out to her that the law doesn’t take into account whether our choices are stupid or not. It takes into account whether we were able to give informed consent. You don’t need to dig too far under the skin of Camille to understand that her hatred of women runs deeper than simply observing the antics of her mother’s silly friends and the equally silly women she grew up with. Her attitude is that women need to understand that they live in a world where the chips are stacked against them. If they get drunk and shit happens to them, no one should care.

You can find attitudes like that all over 4chan. It’s depressing to find them in a work of fiction too, especially one written by someone as talented as Flynn. If you think, halfway through Sharp Objects that the point of all this anti-female vitriol is to give Camille a redemptive arc; then you are wrong. The only two decent characters in the book are both men: John, the brother of one of the victims, who genuinely mourns the death of his younger sister and Curry, her boss and the father figure who sends her back to Wind Gap. It might be good for you he says. Get you back on your feet.

Listen up, Flynn is saying in Sharp Objects. Women hate each other. They hate themselves. And Daddy always knows best.


7 comments on “Who is Gillian Flynn and why does she hate women so much?

  1. Kate
    April 29, 2016

    Fascinating, but yikes.

  2. Noémi
    April 29, 2016

    I just read your first piece on Gone Girl and I couldn’t agree more. ´Our´reaction was exactly what bothered me too. And the fact that yes, Amy IS a Men’s Right’s Activist’s worst nightmare come to life makes it even more jarring. (Again, she could just be a truly awful fictional character, a female psychopath to add to all the male ones, but as you write, the problem is our culture actually buying this image of women).

    I had Sharp Objects on my TBR-list but maybe I’ll have to pass now. I think what really annoys me too is passing of these remarks (like what Camille says to the officer) as the ‘actually’ feminist ones. Ugh. I can’t even begin with how many problems I have with that reasoning.
    I remember reading the quote on Flynne’s website about bad women and how she wants more female villains. And I can understand that sentiment I just wish that female villain didn’t translate to…. the most basic hateful stereotypes about women.

    But thanks for this review, at least I’ll know what I’m up for if I ever read it!

  3. Leila from Megaphone
    April 29, 2016

    Good review. Never read these books, the genre has never appealed to me. The writing in the excerpt you give is abysmal. I’m surprised – I was under the impression this was meant to be good commercial literature. And the message, in the hands of someone who can’t write – yes, there’s not going to be any real subtlety or insight, is there. Troubling that these books have been so popular, really.

  4. heavenali
    April 29, 2016

    I hated Gone Girl passionately. I only read it for a book group. Granted it wasn’t really my kind of book in the first place – still you couldn’t pay me enough to read another one of her books.
    Great review. 😉

  5. Susan
    April 30, 2016

    Glad to see I wasn’t the only person who disliked Gone Girl – I was taken with it until Amy appeared as a current character – at that point it fell apart and became totally unbelievable and I totally lost interest in it.

  6. Conor
    May 1, 2016

    I’m amazed at these readings of one of the most highly praised crime novels of our time, admired for its plot, ideas, social satire and quality of writing. The long Wikipedia entry is good on this. It reminds me of ‘Lolita’, another wildly comic, daringly unorthodox take on some of the same issues, and of ‘Emma’, whose dysfunctional family can similarly be blamed for her Amy-like scheming. The sight of a cherished child genius going off the rails so catastrophically because of thwarted love should inspire awe rather than contempt, so maybe the book is at fault for being over-ambitious or not making its intentions clearer.

  7. CJ
    May 1, 2016

    Great analysis! I have not yet read Sharp Objects but did read Gone Girl, which I both liked and hated. A strange and fascinating reaction to a book – unusual for me. Didn’t like the story or where it was going but could not look away.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


This entry was posted on April 29, 2016 by in Entries by Cath, Fiction: 21st Century, Fiction: thriller and tagged , , .



Editorial Policy

The views expressed in the articles and reviews on Vulpes Libris are those of the authors, and not of Vulpes Libris itself.

Quoting from Vulpes Libris

You are very welcome to quote up to 100 words from any article posted on Vulpes Libris - as long as you quote accurately, give us due credit and link back to the original post. If you would like to quote MORE than 100 words, please ask us first via the email address in the Contact details.


  • (The header image is from Aesop's Fables, illustrated by Francis Barlow (1666), and appears courtesy of the Digital and Multimedia Center at the Michigan State University Libraries.)
  • %d bloggers like this: