Buildingsroman? or BOLD feminist novel?

When I first began to read this book I was a bit confused of why it was considered a buildings roman book. It seemed to me to be about every thing but the growth of the main character and a coming of age tale. I could see the growth of the city much more than I could the growth of Janie. It was not until much later did I realize the growth that Janie was going through. It really becomes evident in my opinion when Janie gets beat for the first time by Jody, and then again during the storm. When she gets beat, she begins to realize that she had been living in a pretty bad fantasy world and that she needed to lock herself out of the real world that she had created for herself. She began to grow and deal with things like a rational adult. However, she began to become impulsive when the opportunity struck and so she ran away again with Tea Cake after Jody’s death. But while with Tea Cake she was able to do all the things that she always wanted to do. She was able to do all the things the men did, she could hunt, listen to the jokes and conversations on the porches, go to parties, and even work in the fields along side her husband like an equal rather than another work horse. She was growing and was completely happy about it. Now one thing that still is bothering me about our discussions about this book is that the general consensus seemed to be, all from the female majority I might add, was that this was a BOLD feminist novel. I remain unconvinced and to be honest, all the arguments they made for the bold aspect of it actually pushed me further away from believing that it was. Every example given was a minute aspect of the book that could be taken in so many different ways. Yes the grandmother raised Janie on her own but what other choice did she have? She was also still very poor and clearly uneducated, both of which could be argued as downsides to being a woman in that time period. If this were a bold novel the main women would have at least persevered a bit more. That was just one example but there were many more, but I just do not have time to name them all. The arguments made in class were such that they could be put to any novel. By their standards Harry Potter is a bold feminist novel because the main female character is so powerful, she converts the men around her, and she makes her own decisions. The other female characters could also boost that claim by their actions as well, well at least according to the arguments made in class. I can see where there is some feminism in this book but to call it a BOLD feminist novel is stretching it as far as saying Harry Potter is one too, and that just is missing the point in my opinion. Sorry to rant, but I just do not agree, and it is safer to do it here than in a class full of women…