I was extremely disappointed in the book in the fact that it tells a story about a traumatic time in Irish life that has not had a lot of depictions in either a cinematic or literary landscape, and it chooses to tell it from the perspective of a man saving a woman. Women were second class citizens because men chose not to stand up, and in most cases propagated the system that oppressed them, so I find it highly disrespectful to not only tell a story about a heroic man, but to have him literally save a woman depicted as nothing more than a victim. If the book had any class it would have given a victim as much page count as a non-existent hero. The Magdalene Laundrys were a failure of a society and to write a book that washes it through a fable of male heroism is fake at best, and willfully ignorant at worst.
It’s a mistake to read the book with the expectation of learning about the history of the Magdalene laundries; there is plenty of online and offline material available on the topic, including the movie "The Magdalene Sisters" that came out in 2002 starring Eileen Walsh (the actress here). This is a piece of fiction that revolves around real events, conveying a message about the importance of not being a silent observer. It tells how a small act of kindness can be impactful and even save a life, even at the cost of isolating oneself from family.
Yes, and the character is, or was as a child, socially depleted because of his illegitimacy which was a factor of 'shame' and alienation. He thinks of it still as an adult, covertly and inwardly flinching from his wife's allusion to his own mother's 'falleness' and her escape from admission into the Magdalen house. He too is a victim of discrimination, censure and societal/religious strictures and draconian hypocrisy. The fear has never left him, the rescued girl is emblematic of his own mother and all the victims of the Magdalen system/regime. He is nameless in terms of legitimacy, fatherless outside of patriarchy (Mrs Wilson's House as microcosm of female strength etc), therefore he is not some patriarchal 'hero', rather one 'mishap' rescuing another (in context).
The book is fiction set within an historical context. Bill Furlong is presented as a human being with connective trauma to this historical nightmare. His life, fictional or not, shouldn't be shucked aside because of his gender. There is no good or bad gender here. Women and men were all complacent and did very little to change things until 1996. Besides, what is wrong with a man doing something noble like helping the girl? Maybe the symbol of a Bill Furlong is the kind of person we want our boys to be - men who aren't heroes, but who do good. The fact is - men are the ones who got the girls in the Magdelene laundries to begin with. Here is a man who got one out. The way you present it - any story about a man doing good for the female gender is all about the patriarchy. In STLT I didn't see that - and I also didn't see a hero. I saw a meek and damaged man doing something beautiful and risky - who had everything to lose. Apparently, I read an entirely different story than you did.
You need to read the book again. As Keegan herself says there is nothing about Bill that is a hero, he is a man having a nervous breakdown. He cannot save anyone until he saves himself and wow, your interpretation is incredibly hostile to FATHERS terrified their daughters will be ruined by an oppressive institution. Father's have the right of a point of view .
