Oh Look, Another Manic Woman: A Review of Boy Parts

I’m sick of romance. Every February, I read romance after romance and share book review after book review to celebrate Valentine’s Day. I fully support showing love to the people who matter most in our lives, but I’m tired of happy endings. This year, I’m into scary women. Disgruntled women. Women who defy societal expectations of them. Too often women are type-cast as an anecdote to a man’s journey toward love. This year I broke from my mold and sought out female characters who challenge the box they’re placed in.

Warning: stop reading here if you don’t want any spoilers!

The opening scene tells us everything we need to know about the inferiority assigned to women who display emotion. A distraught mother slaps Irina across the face after she learns Irina explicitly photographed her underage son. She is vilified, reckless and hysterical, for disrupting the bar, even though she has every right to defend her child. Yet Irina gets off scot-free. She is conventionally attractive, and she did enough of her job to count as due diligence. She didn’t cause the scene or react to further escalate it, and the violence inflicted upon her makes her a victim.

It speaks volumes when management rewards Irina with 6 weeks of paid time off, especially since her behavior prompted the mother’s outburst. The way Irina is able to manipulate the mother, her manager, and the male patrons of the bar highlights the extent of power she wields. Whether that power is derived from her looks, her essence, or her intellect, it’s clear that Irina does not operate by a moral code. She willing to manipulate any situation so that it best suits her.

Praising White Mediocrity in the Art World

One drastically misrepresented take in online reviews of Boy Parts is white mediocrity, especially amongst creatives. At no point in the book does Irina receive true praise for her artistic ability. She shows potential, but her only acclaim comes from her inner monologue. There are a handful of articles from her early career, but most of them are born out of her connection to her institution. This is very common in the art world. It’s rarely what you know, rather who you know, as we will see later in the novel.

Irina received the opportunity to showcase at the Hackney Space because the graphic, perverse media she shoots is a niche space where there are few other artists. The art world assigns value in the shock factor for a woman to shoot such violent, sexual work, not on the quality of the work itself. And Irina leans into this. She forces her friends to watch graphic cinema more so to observe their discomfort, not because she enjoys it herself. She specializes in fetish-based photography as a way to humiliate men. This is a trauma response to her own vulnerability exploited at such a young age. There is nothing sexual in nature with the majority of men she photographs, even if she occasionally engages in sexual acts.

Sex and its Power Dynamics

The only time she experiences arousal is when her subject is meek, nonthreatening, and unimposing. Weak. The power dynamic balancing in her favor is where she thrives, which coincidentally is the body of her of work that receives the most external praise. It’s quite ironic. The critic gravitates toward the images of Eddie sodomized by a wine bottle. She comments how intriguing it is that Irina’s “actor” was able to get into role so convincingly. Little does she know Irina was actually inflicting violence to capture that shot. But then again, men surely can’t be victims of sexual violence, especially at the hands of a woman, so it must be an act, right?

Dead wrong.

“My darling girl, when are you going to realize that being normal is not necessarily a virtue? It rather denotes a lack of courage.”

The Perpetual Mental Health Battle

It is later revealed that the only reason Irina’s name was passed along to the Hackney Space was through an acquaintance. An equally mediocre white female artist who survives in the space solely off family money put forth her name. She pitied Irina post breakdown. Her name wasn’t even passed along to major decision makers at the Hackney. An intern showcased her work. We’re led to believe Irina basks in praise and acclaim from her creative counterparts throughout the novel. The admiration is as a sham.

Her mental breakdown after her Hackney invitation highlights multiple degrees of lacking in both Irina’s artistic ability and mental stability.

The downward spiral highlights two major revelations in the artistic ability Irina presents.

1. The nervous breakdown could be attributed to her deep understanding that her work is not worthy of being shown at such a prominent venue.
2. In preparing content, she must revisit all the crude, bothersome photo shoots she didn’t enjoy directing in the past. She also must revisit the memory of the 16-year-old boy she possibly murdered. 

Comparisons to American Psycho

One point I specifically want to refute is the comparison to American Psycho. Irina possibly killed a 16-year-old boy, but the pretenses of the potential murder had zero similarities to Patrick Bateman. Bateman is a narcissistic sociopath. He designed his strict daily regiment to combat the urges he felt toward violence. There was a premeditation and awareness around these urges that he constantly battled. This explains Bateman’s devotion to routine. He fully knew what he was capable of.

Irina does not have these same urges. There is fascination with death, but hers is more based in curiosity. “What could I get away with as a woman? Who predetermines victimhood at the hands of men? Just how far would a man’s perceived weakness of me allow me to cross the threshold of violent retribution?” We could further delve into the societal impact of living under a patriarchy and how this norm changes our perceptions of Bateman and Irina. I don’t think you can make any of my arguments without also accounting for the drastically different roles men and women serve in the patriarchy. Bateman presented as a predator on the offensive. Irina forever plays the role of prey backed into a corner, forced to claw her way out.

Irina herself was a victim at the hands of a man with power and influence. The circumstance of Irina’s draw toward violence differs from Bateman. Had she never been groomed or faced attempted assault after assault, I doubt she’d be curious about violence at all. Bateman was a born killer, Irina was made, yet both were monsters in their own right.

What does Accountability Look Like?

“Sometimes, it’s the people who no one imagines anything of who do the things that no one can imagine.”

Boy Parts is the first book that spun gender, sexuality, and power dynamics on its head. I have never read a book that forced me to confront my own biases in an attempt to understand a character. I challenge you to toe the line of sympathizing and empathizing with Irina. Hold her accountable at the same standard we hold society’s expected monsters.

If you’re looking to purchase a copy of Boy Parts, you can find it on my Amazon Storefront: 2024 Reading List.