Laurie King does a magnificent job of portraying a mysterious story about a young woman on a mission to solve a murder case while also adding the concept of feminism in to the book. Due to there being a lot of emphasis on feminism, the main argument of the book is that women and men are created equal, but some men choose to be afraid of that belief. During the whole novel, there are several mentions of the temple; a place where mostly women and some men gathered in order to hear from a preacher several nights a week. This relates to the thesis because part of the reason the temple existed was to show that women had rights by using quotes and passages from the bible. Not only does Laurie King go into detail about feminism in the 1920’s, but
…show more content…
Back in the 1920’s and even earlier, women were looked down upon and viewed as potential threats yet physically they looked weaker and could probably never be able to take on a man. Once again, mankind thought of themselves as being better than womankind but when it comes to mental capabilities, and most other things, women and men are both equal (pg. …show more content…
Laurie King continued to show the audience how feminism was blooming in the 1920’s by telling us how all these woman came together at one time to hear from a speaker. She also showed us how the bible was changed through translations to become more manly and less feminism by having Mary teach Margery all about the original bible. Compared to real life, the novel does a decent job of what it was like in the real world. Just like in real life, the book had many influential characters, but it was lacking more of the outside world. There was only one mention of congress because one of the members of the temple wanted to become the first female member. The book could have definitely showed more about the protests to show how women across the country came together to fight for their rights and to give a sense of what it was like to be in the 1920’s. rather than having a murder mystery. Overall, the book was a decent idea of what the Women’s Rights Movement was like in real life and was not surprising since nothing major regarding equality happened except for the temple. The book was not as realistic as it could have
Back in the 1920’s and even earlier, women were looked down upon and viewed as potential threats yet physically they looked weaker and could probably never be able to take on a man. Once again, mankind thought of themselves as being better than womankind but when it comes to mental capabilities, and most other things, women and men are both equal (pg. …show more content…
Laurie King continued to show the audience how feminism was blooming in the 1920’s by telling us how all these woman came together at one time to hear from a speaker. She also showed us how the bible was changed through translations to become more manly and less feminism by having Mary teach Margery all about the original bible. Compared to real life, the novel does a decent job of what it was like in the real world. Just like in real life, the book had many influential characters, but it was lacking more of the outside world. There was only one mention of congress because one of the members of the temple wanted to become the first female member. The book could have definitely showed more about the protests to show how women across the country came together to fight for their rights and to give a sense of what it was like to be in the 1920’s. rather than having a murder mystery. Overall, the book was a decent idea of what the Women’s Rights Movement was like in real life and was not surprising since nothing major regarding equality happened except for the temple. The book was not as realistic as it could have