Book Review: Marge Piercy Woman on the Edge of Time

Marge Piercy is a poet and novelist whose work often addresses feminist and social issues. By all accounts, she is "kind of a big deal" which is why I am a little embarrassed to admit that I had never heard of her until a local book group selected Woman on the Edge of Time for its monthly read. Only then did I find out that this book, first published in 1976, is regarded as both a feminist classic as well as a classic of utopian science fiction. To top it all off, William Gibson credits it as the birthplace of Cyberpunk.

Woman on the Edge of Time follows Conseulo "Connie" Ramos, a 37 year-old Hispanic woman previously committed to a mental institution for the drug-fueled abuse of her own child, and soon recommitted after attacking her niece's pimp. At around about the same time that she is recommitted, she starts to communicate with Luciente, an androgynous woman living in a future utopian socialist world. Although Luciente is reluctant to directly discuss Connie's pivotal role in history, as the doctors at the institution begin to experiment with mind control and mood alteration via both pharmaceuticals and surgical intervention, Connie is drawn into an alternative future in which a wealthy elite uses these techniques to control the population (this is the birth of Cyberpunk). The tension ratchets up as Connie fights to escape or undermine these experiments and also considers striking back at the doctors directly.

The first 100-150 pages of the book are brutal. Littered with depictions of domestic abuse, Connie's abuse of her own child, as well as the abuse of the mentally ill, it is a very challenging read that I had to break into pieces. This part of the book is also hard to read because, for the most part, Connie is quite passive. The book begins to pick up steam when Connie starts planning her escape from the institution.

Like many authors who only occasionally dabble in SFF, Piercy at times struggles to find the right balance between moving the story forward and pausing the action to exposit aspects of the alternative futures. She does much better showing (and not telling) us about the dystopian future than she does with the utopian one where the action pauses for long stretches.

The utopian future has a lot of elements that will be familiar to the modern reader, but which probably appeared fresher when the book was written. Conflict in this future has been reduced by eliminating many of the differences between people. Differences between the sexes have been minimized: women have been emancipated from childbirth by the use of artificial wombs and childcare is shared between three adults with men being modified so as to be able to breastfeed. The gender neutral pronoun 'per' short for 'person' is used exclusively. Differences between the races have been reduced by deliberate inter-breeding. Even cultural differences have been reduced while still being celebrated: different villages adopt a cultural identity, but people are free to move between them in a fluid dance of appropriation and repudiation of culture. Hierarchies have been limited through fixed term limits for leadership positions followed by mandatory service in less prestigious/powerful jobs. Much effort is devoted to keeping humanity in balance with the environment. Direct democracy seems to be the rule and population growth is tightly restricted.

I had a bit of trouble suspending my disbelief about the utopian future. Somehow, this future possesses a highly advanced society despite living a very decentralized agrarian lifestyle. Science appears to have progressed even as the arts have somewhat atrophied (Connie describes some of the public art as childlike). Medicine has gone backwards: the residents of this future are supposed to be content to live shortened lifespans. Direct democracy seems to be effective in spite of lengthy meetings to debate even relatively modest decisions. And the people are supposed to have won a war against the wealthy industrialized corporations of the potentially dystopian future despite what appears to be limited resources and the absence of a professional army.

I wonder a little about the reaction of a modern audience to this book written as it is by a white and presumably affluent woman about a poor Hispanic woman who is a bit of a negative stereotype. I thought the depiction was well realized and in no-way voyeuristic, but would someone from that background agree? I also wonder about the response to the books apparent advocacy of cultural appropriation as not just acceptable but in fact necessary for the promotion of harmony between different people. For myself, I thought the idea was interesting and worth thinking more about, although I suspect some people might be hostile.

A question that naturally arises is whether or not Connie's contact with the future is real, or delusional. In one of her trips to the future, she sees the doctors from her institution fighting against her utopian socialist allies, suggesting that this vision at least is a delusion. But are the others? Connie sees her own daughter in Luciente's child suggesting it might also be a delusion. She is also able to interact with people from the future when she travels to their time, but they rarely come to her time and do not interact with anyone there. I kind of like the idea that it is all in her head, but I think we are meant to believe that it is real. The book works either way.

For some modern readers, the long pauses in the narrative for exposition purposes will be frustrating, and what was fresh about the book in 1976 will appear far less fresh now, suggesting the book deserves a "good" 7 out of 10. As for me, I was less bothered by the expositional pauses and thought the character of Connie was compelling and the brutality of her life exceptionally well realized. Most importantly, the book made me think. In any case, I think a book should be judged in the context of the time it was published. If I had read this back in 1976, I expect I would be rating it a "brilliant" ...

R⁴ Rating: 9 out of 10.

Next year will mark the 40th anniversary of the publication of Piercy's brilliant book. I presume there are plans to celebrate it. If not, if anyone is interested in putting something together, I would be happy to help.