The Big Book of Pussy

Reviewers largely praise the book as a fascinating and intriguing exploration of its subject matter, often described as an artbook with high-quality, engaging visuals. Many found the historical context, presented through both photography and accompanying texts, to be insightful and well-written. The book is lauded for its humor, sarcasm, and ability to spark conversation, with some enjoying its explicit nature as "good clean fun" and an "inverted taco paradise." It's seen as a modern history of an enduring human obsession, offering an open and empathetic perspective on a historically sensitive topic.

Conversely, a significant portion of reviews express strong criticism regarding the book's content and presentation. Some find it disappointingly pornographic rather than artistic or nuanced, raising serious concerns about exploitation. Specific criticisms include the inclusion of images of "unknown" women, some recent and featuring faces, which reviewers deem neglectful, exploitative, and potentially non-consensual, particularly regarding sex workers whose labor and bodies may be uncredited or unpaid. Other negatives point to a perceived lack of clear message, insufficient due diligence, and an unrepresentative portrayal of diverse body types. Additionally, some practical drawbacks are noted, such as the book being written in four languages, which limits the readable content for many, and specific pages being described as "disgusting."

Overall, this book appears to be a highly polarizing work, appreciated by some for its bold visual narrative and historical insights, while strongly criticized by others for its explicit content and ethical concerns. It is predominantly a visual book, often described as a graphic review or a history of female nude photography with a focus on the vulva. Readers who will likely enjoy this book are those interested in an explicit visual exploration of this specific subject within a historical and cultural context, who appreciate high-quality photography, humor, and a provocative approach. However, those seeking a purely academic or non-explicit art history, or who are sensitive to issues of exploitation and consent in visual media, may find it problematic or unfulfilling.