of their relationship is formed: theirnsex life is great, their ideologies arenpoles apart.nDolores Durer is the original bleedingnheart of the title: her heart bleeds fornthe unfortunates of the world as wellnas for herself. She worries about pollution,nwomen, crime, women, drugs,nwomen, capitalist corruption and women.nThe subject of her sabbatical researchnis the suffering of women. FornDolores, reality can be seen or interpretednonly in terms of its effect onnwomen. And reality affects women onlynin negative ways. Whatever is wrongnwith the world is the fault of men. Dolores’sneldest daughter committed suicide,nher son is an itinerant, pennilessnmusician, her youngest daughter livesnin a lesbian commune, and it’s all thenfault of Anthony, her former husbandnwho also committed suicide. Corporationsnrun by men create industrial slavesnand pollution, governments run by mennmake women slaves, allow poverty tonexist, etc., etc., ad nauseam.nVictor is a successful cog in thencorporate machine, a representative ofnthe male power structure —in othernwords, everything Dolores despises. Hisnmarriage, too, has been dismal, althoughnin a different fashion. His wife was thenperfect mate in every way, but after severalnyears she angrily revealed that shenhad been unhappy all along. Her lack ofnconfidence in her ability to supportnherself (even with a college degree)nforced her to return to Victor. Life continued.nTwenty years later, upon her discoverynof his infidelity, she leaves in anfit of rage, has a terrible car accidentnand is permanently crippled.nThere is no distance between MarilynnFrench and Dolores Durer. Reviewersnhave speculated that Ms. French writesnautobiographical novels, but whethernthe events themselves are autobiographicalnhardly matters; French has writtennher novel only to express her ownnopinion about the condition of womennthroughout the ages. Dolores Durer isnMarilyn French in one—the only—importantnaspect: ideology. It’s a simplenm^mmmm^mmmmmnChronicles of Culturenview of life, even simplistic: four legsngood, two legs bad—women good, mennbad. Dolores Durer, alias MarilynnFrench, lives in a neat little black-andwhitenworld. Everything fits into its ownntidy little box; her only problem is annoccasional difficulty in deciding in whichnbox someone or something belongs. Forninstance, the renowned cathedral ofnNotre Dame in Paris is breathtaking,nand from her position as an arty intellectualnshe would classify it as good. Butnit was built by men, and is so imposingnthat it intimidates humans, so it mustnbe bad. There’s no room for gray, andneven less for gray matter, in such a blackand-whitenlife. None of French’s charactersnis permitted to have emotions or tonact in a way that does not fit the feministnperception of humanity. Victor, as a partnof mankind, must be condemned at anyncost. And that price turns out to be verynhigh, as Dolores learns that she cannotnchange the world that has existed fornmillennia. Her only alternative, givennher rigid worldview, is to separate herselfnfrom it. Although Victor decides tonleave his wife and remain true to Dolores,nshe will not accept it. She knowsnin every fiber of her being that he willnnever really change, that he will eventuallyntry to put her into the samen”pumpkin shell” where he kept his wife.nGeneralization is the rule, not thenexception, in French’s feminist manual:n”men always . . .” “women would nevern…” Some critics have chastised her fornbeing too vituperative; they like prescriptionsnfor lifestyles to be more polite.nThese reviewers don’t disagree with her;nthey only wish she had been a little lessnstrident—which makes them even lessnhonest than French. She, at least, is honestnin her hatred, if nothing else: shendoes, indeed, loathe men, and the worldnshe believes they have created. She cannadmit no approval of anything male: “Incannot give an inch.” And that verynstatement exposes the lie that French isntrying to promulgate: she must be right,nno matter what. Even if the facts of angiven situation prove that a man is beingnkind, fair and understanding and annnwoman is being unreasonable, mean andnobtuse, French is forced by her inflexibilitynto twist and manipulate those factsnand convince herself that the man hasnforced the woman to behave that way.nThis paradox is apparent throughout thennovel: Victor listens to Dolores, offersnhis views, repents of all his chauvinisticnsins, tries to understand her point ofnview. Dolores does nothing of the kind:nshe proclaims her ideology as the onlynvalid one and Victor must either agreenand conform or be despised. He gives allnof himself that he can—she cannot givenan inch.nOomewhere along the line, Frenchnlost track of the reality of being human;nat some point she began looking for victimsnand oppressors. One gets the feelingnthat it’s easier for her to explain thingsnthat way; the complexities of life are toonfrustrating. Thus she doesn’t have tonface the fact that people, both male andnfemale, constantly interact in ways thatnboth hurt and heal one another. Bondsnand disparities between the sexes havenplagued mankind (personkind?) for centuries.nBy the mid-20th century womennhad, to a large extent, been released fromntheir biological imperatives, whichncaused untold confusion in the culturalnarena. Despite any technical changes orncultural upheavals, however, many,neven most, women seem to opt for somenversion of the traditional feminine role.nThose who choose to march to a differentndrummer find the going rough, “salmonnswimming upstream” according tonFrench. What she ignores is that mennor women whose lives or beliefs rejectnthe prevailing norms and traditions havenalways had to “swim upstream,” fromnSocrates to Galileo to Martin Luther tonSusan B. Anthony. Initial rejection ofnnew, untried notions is society’s waynof testing the value of a novel conceptnfor life. Like the new kid on the block,nit must be proved worthy of acceptance;nif it is valid it will survive; if not, itnwill fade away like any other fad ornfashion.nMs. French does not like such facts,n