reviews109 or freedom ofself-identity, these texts all eventually end with 'being' (p. 212). A final word about the format ofthis book is necessary. It includes a fairly thorough bibliography of primary and secondary literature and a section on gender theory. The index is also helpful. The inclusion of a plot synopsis for each romance is a good idea since all readers may not be familiarwith the German Arthurian romances. Unfortunately, this book reveals some ofthe shortcomings ofa revised dissertation. Sterling-Hellenbrand is inconsistent about providing English translations for the Middle High German textual quotations. There are repetitions of arguments. In light ofthe multitude of notes (one chapter has 131), footnotes instead ofendnotes would have been more 'user-friendly' The proofreading is poor. There are numerous typographical errors which detract from the book. The topics gender and gender theory, however, certainly receive the attention which they merit in this book. Consequently, Sterling-Hellenbrand's book should help to promote more discussion about gender theory vis à vis the Middle High German Arthurian romances. SUSANN T. SAMPLES Mount Saint Mary's College Anthony winterbourne, A Pagan Spoiled: Sex and Character in Wagner's Parsifal. Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2003. Pp.142, isbn: 0—83863978 -x. $36.50. Save your $36.50—this is not a book you need to read. It takes place on a stylistically and logically darkling plain, where the erudite, the obvious, the long-established, and the outlandish strive for the upper hand, and no one is the winner. Winterbourne wants to refute charges laid against Kundry, in particular by Otto Weininger, whose once very influential Geschlecht und Charakter (Sex and Character, Vienna, 1903) is a seminal piece of, to use Jacques Le Rider's term, 'Jungendstilmisogyny ' and anti-Semitism. (One wonders why Weininger—whose sexist thinking has long been in eclipse—needs such extensive refutation. This would seem a task more suited to an article than to a book). But Winterbourne wants to go further, and make Kundry 'the focus of the entire music drama.' This second task is implausible on its face, and unfortunately in many ways the two arguments cancel each other out, partly because Winterboune does not get down to business until page 83. Even the title ofthe book makes no sense (who exactly is 'spoiled'?). There is a great deal of confused and confusing organization and writing here. Winterbourne certainly brings impressive erudition to the task. He is up to date on the latest in the scholarship in cultural history, psychology, mythology (including Wagnerite mythology), and nineteenth-century literature and thought. The problem is that he wanders about aimlessly and repetitiously among the various strands ofthought concerning Parsifal without finding any way to recast them in any meaningful way. Most ofwhat Winterbourne has to say about the misogyny, the anti-Semitism, and the uneasy blend of Christianity and Buddhism in the opera has been said (and better) noARTHURIANA many times before, and a lot ofit is old-hat for people who know the opera. Some ofhis speculation—his frequent attempts to relate the Parsifal myth to the Faust myth, for instance—results in dead ends. Winterbourne is much more interested in thescholarship than in the opera anyway, and he keeps askingour indulgence in his delayinghisdiscussion ofWeininger. Only occasionally does asustained insight arise out ofthis thematic soup—for example his discussion ofthe secret access between Montsalvat and Klingsor's realm (53-54). And the style hardly helps. There are too many elaborate sentences that scarcely conceal their pedestrian content (e.g., '...both groups are locked into a more or less permanent "dispersal," casting them adrift among sense-impressions and empirical determinations that are, ofnecessity, unfocused by means ofthe lawlike, self-regulating ego that should, in principle, be at the heart ofmale existence.'[6o]). In his roundabout way, Winterbourne successfully refutes Weininger's contention that Kundry is a typical woman in that she has no character. She is in fact the most complex and the 'healthiest' and 'most normal' ofall the characters, because 'she accepts the reality of her state' (37). This statement implies that she is self-contained from the start, that she does not essentially change. Unfortunately, it also does not preclude...