An interesting book. Not the unrequited love I was expecting.

Frighteningly, Doc Golightly is the most moral character in this story.

I watched the movie after reading, and I can see how it has been distorted. Regardless, I can't see Ms. Golightly as someone to admire (which I feel I see a lot). Holly seems to be adept at wreaking havoc in her wake while adopting a carefree facade.

Holly is commonly cited as an empowering female figure; she is a complex character, but looking through a 21st century lens she is a poor role model of an independent woman. She is reliant on men for subsistence and struggles to forge meaningful connections, leaving her emotionally adrift. Like I said though, this is a modernist perspective. For the time at which she was written - she is an independent, sexually liberated, and headstrong lady forging her own path; all during a period where women might have to prove their use of birth control to secure a loan. One issue I take with this is that the destination at the end of her path is ultimately housewifery, and marriage to a rich and powerful man! I think it opens an interesting discussion into what empowerment means in a society.

In the process of writing this, I think that I have managed to change my own mind. I now am of the opinion that Holly is a good role model for empowerment; Holly chooses to pursue marriage and housewivery, and what is empowerment if not the power to choose? Fulfilling traditional gender roles is no less actualising than breaking them, the distinction gets made when one is coerced into doing so. Whether or not her goals have been determined by the 1950s environment she exists within is hard to tell, but I think she is frank and conscious enough that she realises any avenue to success is unfortunately mediated through a man. In addition, her willingness to break society's rules as a femme-fatale leads me to believe the desire for domesticity is her own, deliberate choice.