The Society of Shame Review (Jane Roper)
Cover for “The Society of Shame” by Jane Roper. Image taken from the Penguin Random House website.
The fourth book I’ll be reviewing is The Society of Shame by Jane Roper. I found this at my local bookstore as opposed to Amazon, both for ethical reasons and because I don’t want to be constrained by an algorithm. The premise jumped out at me, even though I imagine I, as a childless twenty-something man, am not part of the target audience.
The Society of Shame is a political drama that starts just like so many others. Bill Held is running for the United States Senate as a Democrat to represent the State of New York. Given that New York is a blue state, he is expected to win the election easily. That is, until he’s found to be having an affair with a staffer more than twenty years his junior.
In a sane world, the affair should be the scandal that breaks the Internet. However, this novel is set in modern-day America, where nothing makes sense whatsoever. A photo of Bill’s wife Kathleen, with a giant period stain on her pants, goes viral instead, leading to immense mockery online. I felt that this plot point really demonstrates the double standard present in today’s politics - people castigate Kathleen for her bodily functions rather than Bill for betraying his wife’s trust.
Overall, I found the novel to be an effective political satire. Much like Bluebird Day by Megan Tady, The Society of Shame says something substantive while still making you laugh. You’ll be laughing not just at the fictional events described in the novel, but also the real-world politics of the United States. As someone who follows politics too closely for my own good, the line that jumped out at me and induced me to purchase the book was about the perils of being extremely online. As Kathleen becomes the face of a social movement (#YesWeBleed) to destigmatize menstruation, she and her 12-year-old daughter Aggie are forced to navigate what it means to “go viral” in this day and age.
Gone are the days when most people would subscribe to a newspaper and have it delivered to their door in physical form. In those days, the barrier to posting information that might be considered “newsworthy” was far higher than it is today - you had to go to journalism school or whatnot and be hired by a paper. And if it was truly newsworthy, Walter Cronkite would tell you about it on the evening news.
However, newspapers have massively declined in influence due to the Internet. In fact, more than a quarter of American news outlets that existed in 2005 had shut down by 2022. Why would you pay for a subscription when there’s free news at your fingertips that costs you nothing but your mental health?
These days, all you need to do is get on your preferred social media app and repost a picture of a politician’s wife’s embarrassing moment. Within hours, minutes even, people all over the country, and even the world, know about Kathleen’s menstrual mishap. It’s just like the world-famous photo of Trump raising his fist in front of the American flag after almost getting assassinated. Even now, photos have power, and the Internet allows them to circulate more widely, more quickly.
A viral photo of Donald Trump, once and future President of the United States, holding his fist in the air after a bullet grazed his ear. Love him or hate him, he looked tough here. Image taken from the New Yorker.
While right-wing trolls mock her online, Kathleen is determined to turn her humiliation into a greater good. This isn’t easy, however, when social media makes her life a living hell. Kathleen may be able to cope with the harassment herself, but she doesn’t want to subject Aggie to the consequences of her Internet presence. The novel frequently contains excerpts from social media posts both supporting the #YesWeBleed movement and attacking it with slogans like #AllBloodMatters.
In addition to the #YesWeBleed movement, Kathleen finds herself in a secret society of famous people who were “canceled” due to their actions - it’s the “Society of Shame” from which the novel gets its title. Although it’s invoked farcically by the right-wing at times, cancel culture is a real issue that’s been exacerbated by the rise of social media.
Let me give an example: I am a longtime viewer of the CBS reality show Survivor. You know, it’s the one where people vote each other off the island. And don’t call it a live-action version of Total Drama Island; someone did that once, and I cannot tell you how much that hurt.
In any case, past seasons of Survivor were chock-full of drama, such as ontestants stealing each other’s shoes or dumping rice on the fire. However, more recent seasons, particularly those in the “New Era”, have tended to contain very little conflict between the contestants. It’s not just that nobody wants to be a villain, or that nobody is voted out anymore on the basis of “I don’t like you” or “You’re annoying”. Nobody seems to care when they lose, and the few players who are outwardly salty upon their blindside end up iconic.
Now, why am I telling you this?
Simply put, the lack of drama on modern Survivor seasons is a direct result of social media. Nobody wants to get death threats on Xitter just because they did something mildly mean. Last year, Maria Shrime Gonzalez, a jury member on Survivor 46, was harassed and stalked in real life because she didn’t vote for longtime ally Charlie Davis to win the game. It’s one thing to disagree with her decision to award Kenzie Petty the title instead, but some people took it way too far. And social media makes it a hell of a lot easier for rabid viewers to take it way too far.
A statement CBS felt the need to post on social media after the finale of Survivor 46. Image taken from r/Survivor.
No matter how much she might like to be anonymous at first, that’s no longer an option for Kathleen. By virtue of her husband’s status as a politician, she’s kind of forced to be a public figure. In the weeks following the infamous photo, she feels the need to constantly check her phone, an illustration of just how addicted we’ve become to the stimulation of getting news right this second.
Furthermore, every little thing Kathleen says while being interviewed is scrutinized. The leader of the titular Society of Shame is a writer who made derogatory comments about her readers, whereas Kathleen’s answer of “Um, yeah, no” is turned into a viral catchphrase. Whenever you’re a public figure, by chance or by choice, every word you speak matters. The Society members cannot escape that reality.
There’s one other theme of the novel that I want to discuss, which is the conflict between a politician’s personal life and their political views.
When Bill Held runs for Senate, his positions on issues like reproductive rights make him a better ally for women, politically speaking, than his opponent. However, when the affair is brought to light, Bill’s poll numbers drop, jeopardizing what should be a solidly Democratic Senate seat. Some voters have trouble reconciling Bill’s political stances with the disrespect he’s shown toward his wife, even if his opponent is a hard-right, Blue Lives Matter Republican.
Kathleen and the #YesWeBleed movement also face criticism. For instance, several times in the novel, characters remark that #YesWeBleed isn’t intersectional enough. There’s another scene where this is emphasized in which…well, I won’t spoil it. But you won’t be disappointed.
Of course, we see plenty of political hypocrisy in real life. There’s the term “champagne socialist”, used to describe highly wealthy people who advocate for progressive economic policies. And don’t forget Herschel Walker, the “100% pro-life™” 2022 Senate candidate who paid for his mistress’ abortion.
The Society of Shame felt very “on the nose.” As stated above, it’s a political satire, but it didn’t feel very exaggerated, even if it was a lot funnier than most movements are in the real world. Of the four books I’ve reviewed so far, this was the most hilarious and entertaining. Yes, even more so than Bluebird Day. The only minor gripe I have is that the ending felt a bit rushed.
This book’s target audience was probably middle-aged women, of which I am not one. That being said, I would recommend the read for anyone who can enjoy a good political satire without weeping too much for the state of the U.S.A. or the world at large. I will give The Society of Shame a rating of 9.5/10.
