Much more nuanced. Doesn’t hit it square on the nose by saying “she was, at base, a liberal bourgeois academic who never fully opened her eyes to it even after nearly being ground in the gears of that system” but basically hints at that. The end of that one even says that you should read her despite her, shall we say, banal liberal racism/orientalism (including, famously, against poor, Eastern European Jews). But the context helps to understand when she is making valid observations and decent (and sometimes controversial) insights and when she misses the mark because of her prejudices.