Kris Chau
Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In Books
Popular Articles
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
or something
That said, there are many many women -- like me! hello there! -- who love romance, and the smut that goes with it. And I ain't nobody's maiden aunt.
That said, writing about sex is hard. I mean -- a slippery slope. I mean -- things get sticky. I mean -- you get the point. And this book sounds terrible.
You are right on about the squickiness of weeping cocks. Whatever it ought to be doing, crying ain't it.
Honeyâliberally ladled in Romance of all kindsâcertainly arises in places no self-respecting bee would care to wax a comb in⌠Iâm just saying.
The alternative, of course,is that you're wrong about romance novels being socially conservative and wrong about the women who read them.
Which, actually, you are.
(Because my vision for how you came to read this book goes along the lines of: Paul Constant tossed it at your desk, going "This came in the mail and it's for straight women, and it looks like it might be wacky, and you're in charge of wacky around here.")
@7/8 - you suck. Get thee bug out thy ass and SHOVE IT.
I wouldn't want to write about Oliver Cromwell. Everyone had shitty haircuts and outfits. Totally sucky time of history.
You should check out Smart Bitches Read Trashy Books. Those ladies have v. funny reviews of romances for people who aren't matronly aunts. Which is most romance readers.
I know as well as anyone that there are wackos and pervs in slash fandom, but I also know a great deal of fannish writing and writers that surpass "professional" published fiction, of any genre. As a slash fan and writer, I'd appreciate a bit more respect, especially coming from someone whose sole lifetime accomplishment is writing movie reviews for a local rag.
While I'd agree that I found slash that was good while I was researching my piece, I would have to say that I found a lot that was bad, too. However, I don't think it'd be my place to write a negative review of it because it's amateur fiction, and I'm a professional critic and that's a cruel and unnecessary line to cross.
However, this book was (presumably) edited and published professionally, and they sent copies to a professional reviewer for review, and so I think a negative review is a perfectly fine thing to write if the book warrants it. Lindy's piece brings attention to a whole genre, but unfortunately the book that she's highlighting is not so good. (I looked at the book myself, and I assure you it isn't good.)
Personally, what I hope will come of this is that someone will find the subject matter interesting, read Lindy's review, laugh, and then, if he or she is interested in the idea of the book being reviewed, seek out something better.
Forsooth, thou art mistaken, madam, in the broad sweeping of thine inept brush.
As for the book? Well I rarely allow reviews, good or bad, to decide for me whether it's a good book or not. I'm waiting for my copy to arrive, so can't say either way.
All the phrases this silly straight lady mocks I have heard many a time in gay males sexual revolution culture, the pillow talk that is part of hours of hot sex with highly sexed, literate and verbal modern male queers.... here in SEATTLE, in THIS century.
The review is written by a bit of a silly twit.
Weeping dicks are the pre come wonders, and they are a niffty deal. And, yes the term is weeping.
Fisting as in using you fist to jack off is a right on phrase. That crowd of fisters is far bigger than the handball players, ie. fisters.
Is ignorance akin to humor, only to un informed straight ladies with few gay sex clues on hand.
Oh, well, the rubes on Slog liked it.
Alex la Rouge
But I gotta say if you think that mainstream guy/gal romances are 'conservative' you haven't read anything written after the 1960's.
I write both straight and gay erotic fiction and erotic romance. I've been publishing since 2000 and have six print titles to my credit as well as many more ebook titles. I review erotica for two well known websites, though I suppose I can't claim to be a professional critic since I do reviews out of the goodness of my heart and in quest of honesty about the genre.
You're clearly entitled to your own opinion, but I can tell you from personal experience that the market for M/M erotic romance is huge, enthusiastic, and not particularly conservative. I don't think that you really understand that market (which of course may be your point).
Personally, I like Erastes' writing, though I haven't read "Transgressions". You need to recognize that not only is this M/M erotic romance, it's HISTORICAL M/M romance. Erastes is deliberately using flowery language, at least partially, because in general people in that period tended to employ less direct and more complex locutions. If you read contemporary M/M erotic romance (such as my own work), you will find a very different style.
That being the case, it is true that M/M erotic romance tends to be gentler than at least some of the gay erotica that I've read and reviewed. Fundamentally, romance in any sub-genre is about love, not just sex. Readers expect not only passion but also emotional commitment. Anonymous sex, celebrated in gay erotica, doesn't really interest romance readers unless it turns into a relationship.
I took a survey of my readers a while ago, asking them whether they liked M/M romance and if so, why. I got some fascinating responses. You can read more at
http://totalebound.blogspot.com/2009/04/…
I'd like to suggest that before you pass judgment on the genre, you explore it a bit more widely.
Best regards,
Lisabet Sarai
http://www.lisabetsarai.com
But it's always preferred when people actually research the topic they're writing about. Lindy.
No, actually, that's what makes it funny to all the rest of us.
These books might not be to everyone's taste and they might not enjoy the style of writing. That's fine. As a friend said to me recently, books are like opinions. That's why there are so many of them.
I need to find better slash to read ...
Plus, if you guys are into this genre and want an actual review of the book, why the hell are you turning to the Stranger? This article is meant to be funny, not a a real review. Duh.
To be historically accurate, a 1600's gay romance would have to end with a big bonfire. Not a happy ending.
The only good thing about this was the review.
Ye olde drawing of ye stereotypical half-naked hunkye young male on the cover of this tome shouldst giveth fair warning for those who wouldst plunder its depths, seeking for literary treasures and alas finding nought but overwrought prose which leaveth a bad taste in thy mouth, then wishing in vain for the return of lost pieces of gold which hath been wasted.
Once again, the abundance of many-starred gushing reviews on Ye Olde Amazon.com leaves one pondering on the likelihood of their bona fides.
First: "I am also aware of slash fiction (dirty gay fanfic about, like, Harry Potter touching Voldemort's magic johnson)"
While I would happily be the first to point out that 90% of slash fanfiction (actually, probably ALL fanfic) is pretty terribad, I feel that the 10% that is well written and engaging deserves some respect. A well written story is not something everyone can accomplish, and I for one am impressed by those who have the talent. I'm also disturbed by the phrase "dirty gay fanfic" and the subsequent pause in train of thought while Lindy attempts to conjure up the worst case scenario. It's that this fanfiction was labeled dirty before you even had an example in mind that bothers me. Is it that it's dirty because it's fanfiction, or because it's homosexual in nature?
The second major issue I have with this article:
"David slipped into his lover's mouth, just as Tobias slid a slender finger into his entrance [note: This entrance is also an exit!]."
Technically, ALL "entrances" on the human body are also exits. At least, I personally can't think of an orifice that doesn't excrete something at some point. By your implication then, the only sex anyone should be having should consist entirely of handjobs and frottage. Good god does THAT sound boring.
While I can appreciate the attempt at humor here, I feel Ms. Lindy is a bit too sexually conservative to appreciate this genre, and find myself agreeing with #3 when they say this is "kind of like a Vegetarian Critic at a Steak House". For heavens sake, if you don't even properly understand or recognize the terms "weeping" and "fisting" how much romance, gay OR straight, could you really have read?
However, I've read this review, and I must say I found it ... unprofessional. I understand that it is intended to be funny and I very much appreciate journalism that use humor to offer insight, but I felt that this review is written with more intention to offend than to inform.
1) I fail to understand why this book is chosen if these things make you uncomfortable. When I finish the first paragraph, my impression is that you are using this book as a convenient platform to prove your point, which is your distaste for the genre. Reviews, by nature, has an element of subjectivity, but the first sentences gave me the sense that this is a highly personal and emotional opinionâand by extention, has little credibility. You are ready to bash it before you begin.
But I read on...
2) The nerds you claimed to claimed to have "put nothing past" had a derogatory description; also, I honestly fail to see the difference between "matronly aunts" and "straight women who ..."; they are all females and each have their own tasteâand I found this condescending to both groups. Slash fiction, meanwhile, has many pairings, with Kirk/Spock being the most traditional and well known. Why not use that pair as an example rather than an underage wizard and his evil nemesis? I understand those are all arguments for your perspective and I try to understand your logic, but was more distracted by the contempt you displayed with your language.
Then just a few added opinions because I'm long winded like that:
- Elegant and explicit aren't inherent opposites; I do believe there's common ground. Good writing can make anything not awkward and beautiful. Romance in the media (films, books etc) have proven that to be possible.
- Nobody has a right to judge other people's thing, but we all doâwe have opinions. And it's ironic that you ask about judging (maybe it's meant to be funny?) you have judged with a whole review. For someone like me, a lay reader, my judgement means little, but yours carry more weight as a criticâplease use it wisely to persuade us who take time to read your thoughts.
@39 look for a fandom with older fans if you're looking for men that are less feminized. Teenage women tend to prefer androgynous pretty boys because they're less threatening to their developing sexuality. Also avoid fandoms with a lot of crossover with anime or manga, since the Japanese analogue of slash is very gender structured and usually puts one character in the female role.
(And yes, I am a slash writer. The difference is that I'm a slash writer with a SENSE OF HUMOR.)
(And yes, I am a slash writer. The difference is that I'm a slash writer with a SENSE OF HUMOR.)
I love it!
This book looks awful.
Most of us slash-ers are more of....well.
We're kinky assed sonsofbitches. We like the sex to be rough, we like bondage (and not silk scarves and a bit of slap & tickle). The main reason most of my fellow slashers read gay porn is because it's hot, it's dirty, and it's a little bit wrong (not really, but according to society, blah blah blah - not the point here).
Also. "Honeyed cleft".
...
.....No it's an asshole.
"Fisting as in using you fist to jack off is a right on phrase. That crowd of fisters is far bigger than the handball players, ie. fisters."
Do I correctly understand that the M/M romance reader/writer crowd has made up a new definition for fisting? You'd better realize that attempting to reuse a word that already means one sexual activity (and has for at least three or four decades, maybe longer) for a different one is going to lead to what simply looks like ignorance of the (not exclusively) gay sexual practices you purport to write about.
And dialogue like "Just let me do this for thee, and if you like it not, I shall stop" suggests that the author is just as ignorant about historical usage as she is about sex. She uses the singular/intimate and the plural/formal to refer to the same person in the same sentence!
The weeping cock grosses me out, too. Sounds like either syphilis or herpes.
"Fisting as in using you fist to jack off is a right on phrase. That crowd of fisters is far bigger than the handball players, ie. fisters."
Do I correctly understand that the M/M romance reader/writer crowd has made up a new definition for fisting? You'd better realize that attempting to reuse a word that already means one sexual activity (and has for at least three or four decades, maybe longer) for a different one is going to lead to what simply looks like ignorance of the (not exclusively) gay sexual practices you purport to write about.
And dialogue like "Just let me do this for thee, and if you like it not, I shall stop" suggests that the author is just as ignorant about historical usage as she is about sex. She uses the singular/intimate and the plural/formal to refer to the same person in the same sentence!
The weeping cock grosses me out, too. Sounds like either syphilis or herpes.
also, harry potter and the honeyed cleft. also.
I was vaguely offended by several of your comments, but that simply increased my amusement. I would like to submit to anyone else who actually reads this far down the comments that that was rather the point.
I'm slightly annoyed by your dismissal of slash culture-- it's way more ridiculous and weird than you made it out to be, although you're entirely correct about the girls at Con (they will do anything. Anything). I'm also a little bit miffed at the whole dismissal of British history.
However, I was amused. And that counts for a lot.
Damn! I've must have missed all these fun conventions. Woe me!
As a snarker who mods a large community dedicated to mocking shitty (fanfic) writing, I would have enjoyed your review, which was hilarious in parts. As a slash fan, your introduction just pissed me off by the amount of ignorance displayed about the topic. Seriously, not all (slash) fan fic is Harry Potter/Star Trek. Do some research next time. It won't kill you.
(Also, I am fascinated to find out that I am either straight, or not a slasher, being bisexual...)
Damn! I've must have missed all these fun conventions. Woe me!
As a snarker who mods a large community dedicated to mocking shitty (fanfic) writing, I would have enjoyed your review, which was hilarious in parts. As a slash fan, your introduction just pissed me off by the amount of ignorance displayed about the topic. Seriously, not all (slash) fan fic is Harry Potter/Star Trek. Do some research next time. It won't kill you.
(Also, I am fascinated to find out that I am either straight, or not a slasher, being bisexual...)
While I'd agree that I found slash that was good while I was researching my piece, I would have to say that I found a lot that was bad, too. However, I don't think it'd be my place to write a negative review of it because it's amateur fiction, and I'm a professional critic and that's a cruel and unnecessary line to cross.
which is mighty white of you, not to mention the demonstrative of journalistic ethics 101.
However, this book was (presumably) edited and published professionally, and they sent copies to a professional reviewer for review, and so I think a negative review is a perfectly fine thing to write if the book warrants it. Lindy's piece brings attention to a whole genre, but unfortunately the book that she's highlighting is not so good. (I looked at the book myself, and I assure you it isn't good.)
except that Lindy has taken it upon herself to review an entire genre based on the specifics that she attributes to this book-- a genre that she doesn't know jack whatsit about.
Personally, what I hope will come of this is that someone will find the subject matter interesting, read Lindy's review, laugh, and then, if he or she is interested in the idea of the book being reviewed, seek out something better.
Personally what I hope is that lindy won't write arrogant ignorance again.
But.. hope in one hand, sh*t in the other, and see which fills up fastest, right?