| 100 Most Important Women of the 20th Century Compiled by the editors of Ladies' Home Jornal Barbara Walters (Fwd.) Des Moines, Iowa: Ladies Home Journal Books, 1998 |
Rating: 2.5 Fair |
|||
| ISBN 0-696-20823-7 | 192p. | HC/LF/FCI | $34.95 | |
I have not read the entire text, only about one-third of the entries. They are one-page summaries, well-written given those narrow constraints. But the book is in the "modern" idiom, replete with pictures, large multicolored headings and pull quotes — very much like a set of Web pages. So I content myself with listing the names of these 100 women, as they are presented in the book's table of contents, and making some general comments about each category. (The formatting is mine.)
| Activists & Politicians | My comments |
|---|---|
|
Looks like a fairly decent list to me, at least per the publication year of 1998. But still, I'd love to know the selection criteria used. I have to wonder why Anita Hill is more worthy than Margaret Chase Smith, say, or Shirley Chisholm, Barbara Jordan, Ella Grasso (first female governor, CT), Hazel O'Leary, Bella Abzug. Why is Phyllis Schlafly more important than Jean Kirkpatrick or Dixy Lee Ray? What of Paul McCarthy's former wife, who led a decades-long effort to ban land mines? What of the two women in Ireland who fought the Troubles and the killings by IRA members? What of Walis Diri? Wangari Maathi? And what of the woman who ran for the vice presidency on Walter Mondale's ticket (Geraldine Ferraro)? |
| Writers & Journalists | My comments |
|---|---|
|
Well, here the ladies missed some names. Why is Oriana Fallaci missing? She's one of the finest journalists of the century, her book Interview with History a landmark in the field. Margaret Mitchell was a novelist (Gone with the Wind). Is not Harper Lee (To Kill a Mockingbird) equally important? Barbara Walters is a television journalist, and a good one. But, therefore, should not Clare Booth Luce, Janet Flanner, Therese Bonney, Connie Chung, Christine Amanpour or Anne Garrels be included too? |
| Doctors & Scientists | My comments |
|---|---|
|
Looks mostly like a decent list to me, at least per the publication year of 1998. But I question the inclusion of Helen Caldicott. She is a pediatrician, but she is known for opposition to nuclear fission in all forms — a misguided opposition, IMO. She belongs in the "Activists & Politicians" category. |
| Entrepreneurs | My comments |
|---|---|
|
This seems a very "Ladies' Home Journal" list: Fashion, makeup, cooking, home decor, and Oprah. What about the female entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley: Carol Bartz of Autodesk; Sandra Kurtzig of ASK; Heidi Roizen of T/Maker, Ann Winblad of Hummer Winblad Venture Partners — among others? |
| Artists & Entertainers | My comments |
|---|---|
|
Interesting choices, and some puzzling ones. Jane Fonda is a fine actress, but surely she belongs in the "activist" category. This entire category has a "catchall" feel to it. Isadora Duncan, Martha Graham, Frida Kahlo and Georgia O'Keeffe are all artists; but the former two are dancers, while the latter two are painters. Some distinction should be made. Similarly, both Greta Garbo and Madonna are entertainers; but Garbo was a famously reclusive film actress, while Madonna at the peak of her career was a flamboyant singer-dancer. |
| Athletes | My comments |
|---|---|
|
Why Billie Jean King and not Althea Gibson? |
| Pioneers & Adventurers | My comments |
|---|---|
|
Why Valentina Tereshkova and not Sally Ride? What of the other female American astronauts, such as Mae Jemison (who is also a medical doctor)? And if Jane Roe (of Roe v Wade), why omit the female half of the couple in Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruling which struck down laws against interracial marriage? |
The total of the names presented in these seven categories is indeed 100. I note that categories 3, 4 and 7 each contain ten names. I wonder if this was the residue of an original intent to have ten categories with ten names each. No matter; it's hard to limit any "best" list to a fixed number of entries.
But the selections are something else again. I suspect that current popularity (and perhaps financial "heft") were weighted too heavily. How else to explain, for example, why Jane Goodall (pioneer observer of chimpanzees) was included, while Dian Fossie (pioneer observer of gorillas) was not? Why is Oriana Fallaci, one of the most eminent journalists of the twentieth century, missing from the "Writers & Journalists" category? (For that matter, these all seem to be writers except Barbara Walters, who is a television journalist. Should not, therefore, Clare Booth Luce, Janet Flanner, Therese Bonney, Connie Chung, Christine Amanpour or Anne Garrels be included too?) Why Billie Jean King and not Althea Gibson? Why Valentina Tereshkova and not Jerrie Cobb or Sally Ride or Mae Jemison?
In summary, many of these names would be on my own list of important women of the twentieth century. I doubt that anyone would omit Wilma Rudolph from the "Athletes" category; the way she came back from severe burns is remarkable and inspiring. But, turning to "Artists and Entertainers": why, first of all, is this one category? There's a great difference, in temperament and lifestyle, between a painter like Georgia O'Keefe and a singer/dancer like Madonna. As for selections here, Janis Joplin was a great singer-songwriter. But is she more important than Joan Baez, another great singer-songwriter who used (and still uses) her music to promote peace and justice? I think not.
In sum, this book would be useful as a quick reference, but I do not consider it either a must-read or a keeper.
For more data and other opinions on this book, see:
To contact Chris Winter, send email to this address.