Romance Month (February Reading)
Mar. 6th, 2007 10:18 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
aseOnly two books, and both - by an extremely flexible definition - romances. In revenge compensation, I intend to spend March reading The Vagina Monologues and popular science nonfiction.
Outlander (Diana Gabaldon): I think I hated this book.
A former nurse is swept from her 1945 second honeymoon among the Scottish highlands into the 18th century, two years before the Rising. You may mock me for reading romance, and a doorstop doozy at that, and you would probably be right to. This hits all sorts of cliches: there is a witch-hunt, an evil sadistic gay man who tries to assault both romantic partners (though not at the same time - a vaguely serial monogamist sadistic bisexual man? Someone stop me, please), competing passions in the protagonist's heart, and at least one metal-free use of "sheathe". It's 850 pages in paperback, and people are occasionally stupid for the purpose of getting them in bed. I find that my science fiction roots serve me poorly in romances for two reasons: first, I expect something to explode every fifty pages at least, and for the explosion to be physical, not emotional, at least every 100 pages; secondly, when presented with the question, "sacrifice love for the world, or the world for love?" I quote Spock* and go for the former without hesitation. This puts me in a bad place when the genre dictates that Twu Wuv comes first.
*"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Memo to James Kirk: being mad your BFF kicked the bucket is not an excuse for enacting an "oh no they don't!" attitude.
I got bored and started looking for The Wacky (tm) somewhere in the 400 - 600 region, and pretty much gave up after the prison sequence. Since that unfortunate back-to-back Lackey/Asaro binge (followed by Elizabeth Moon's Once a Hero, and I swear, I was 16, I didn't know what I was doing), I've realized that I greatly dislike novels which fetishize rape, or use it as a quick hurt-comfort device. So the entire "Jack Randall screws Jamie! In an unwelcome fashion!" thing, complete with flashbacks and loving descriptions of bruises, really disgusted me. That's exactly where I said, "this isn't fun anymore." From my limited experience with romance novels, I get the picture this could be a huge stumbling-block to me ever enjoying anything in the genre.
Structural notes: the novel is told entirely from Claire's PoV, which means the author must contrive an infodump whenever an important event happens that Claire is absent from. This happens an awful lot over the course of the story. There are many backstory infodumps. There are very emotional scenes which Claire witnesses, but isn't really a part of, like Jamie's argumentative reunion with his sister. There's just a lot of gratuitous stuff, to my eye. A better novel might have cut some of that, and let evocation take up the slack. Also, everyone else hates it, all for different reasons, so just this once, I'll go with the majority opinion.
My One True Romance goes something like this: Person A and Person B must solve a problem. Resolving the McGuffin brings them closer together. Plot, smartass banter and comedy ensue. Ultimately, the problem is solved, and A+B form a lasting romantic partnership with smartass banter, comedy, and possibly cohabitation. Steamy sex scenes or fade to black on the smooches both acceptable. I know exactly the emotional charge I want here.
It occurs to me, at least four years after the fact, that Gaudy Night may have set or reinforced some of my romantic preferences, and also that I may have done myself a grave disservice when I said, "Lord Peter novels? Well, everyone gushes over Gaudy Night, I'll start there!"
Another example of my One True Romance:
SAX RUSSELL: After 2 1/2 novels of fighting with each other, I am not in love with Ann. We're friends. Really. Friends who are both lab rat die-hards, except for the part where she doesn't want Mars terraformed and I'm one of the stars of the terraforming effort. Denial is a river in Egypt!
ANN CLAYBOURNE: Sax? Evil. Really. Evil terraformer. I hate his guts. I am not in denial of any mutual spark!
Sax: Hey, remember Antarctica?
BOTH: Aw, f-
AND THEY LIVE HAPPILY EVER AFTER.
Please note this is a secondary (or tertiary) thread in a 900-plus page epic about colonizing Mars.
Having read a modern romance, I dug into my "to read" pile and found something a little more related to the literary concept of romance.
The King of Elfland's Daughter (Lord Dunsany): The peace of the vale of Erl is slowly undone after the Parliament of Erl asks for a magic lord.
I don't read a lot of early 20th C prose, so the story seemed very slow, if conveyed in lovely prose. It wasn't until the last four pages that I realize my assumptions had ambushed me: the story of true love reunited I expected was not the story of Erl's future Dunsany told, so I'm tempted to reread it now that I know where it's going.
The prose is absolutely stunning, so I'm throwing up a bunch of quotes for my future reference and your entertainment.
The "language and ink" paragraph on p105 is exactly what a book-lover would write for his (or her) enjoyment.
The "I would give you spells against [everything], but not against magic" (p212) is a particularly cool set-piece.
I feel like I should try to broaden my reading horizons, but bad books are a real turnoff. If you can, reccomend me one (1) romance, one nonfiction book, and/or one mystery.
Outlander (Diana Gabaldon): I think I hated this book.
A former nurse is swept from her 1945 second honeymoon among the Scottish highlands into the 18th century, two years before the Rising. You may mock me for reading romance, and a doorstop doozy at that, and you would probably be right to. This hits all sorts of cliches: there is a witch-hunt, an evil sadistic gay man who tries to assault both romantic partners (though not at the same time - a vaguely serial monogamist sadistic bisexual man? Someone stop me, please), competing passions in the protagonist's heart, and at least one metal-free use of "sheathe". It's 850 pages in paperback, and people are occasionally stupid for the purpose of getting them in bed. I find that my science fiction roots serve me poorly in romances for two reasons: first, I expect something to explode every fifty pages at least, and for the explosion to be physical, not emotional, at least every 100 pages; secondly, when presented with the question, "sacrifice love for the world, or the world for love?" I quote Spock* and go for the former without hesitation. This puts me in a bad place when the genre dictates that Twu Wuv comes first.
*"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Memo to James Kirk: being mad your BFF kicked the bucket is not an excuse for enacting an "oh no they don't!" attitude.
I got bored and started looking for The Wacky (tm) somewhere in the 400 - 600 region, and pretty much gave up after the prison sequence. Since that unfortunate back-to-back Lackey/Asaro binge (followed by Elizabeth Moon's Once a Hero, and I swear, I was 16, I didn't know what I was doing), I've realized that I greatly dislike novels which fetishize rape, or use it as a quick hurt-comfort device. So the entire "Jack Randall screws Jamie! In an unwelcome fashion!" thing, complete with flashbacks and loving descriptions of bruises, really disgusted me. That's exactly where I said, "this isn't fun anymore." From my limited experience with romance novels, I get the picture this could be a huge stumbling-block to me ever enjoying anything in the genre.
Structural notes: the novel is told entirely from Claire's PoV, which means the author must contrive an infodump whenever an important event happens that Claire is absent from. This happens an awful lot over the course of the story. There are many backstory infodumps. There are very emotional scenes which Claire witnesses, but isn't really a part of, like Jamie's argumentative reunion with his sister. There's just a lot of gratuitous stuff, to my eye. A better novel might have cut some of that, and let evocation take up the slack. Also, everyone else hates it, all for different reasons, so just this once, I'll go with the majority opinion.
My One True Romance goes something like this: Person A and Person B must solve a problem. Resolving the McGuffin brings them closer together. Plot, smartass banter and comedy ensue. Ultimately, the problem is solved, and A+B form a lasting romantic partnership with smartass banter, comedy, and possibly cohabitation. Steamy sex scenes or fade to black on the smooches both acceptable. I know exactly the emotional charge I want here.
It occurs to me, at least four years after the fact, that Gaudy Night may have set or reinforced some of my romantic preferences, and also that I may have done myself a grave disservice when I said, "Lord Peter novels? Well, everyone gushes over Gaudy Night, I'll start there!"
Another example of my One True Romance:
SAX RUSSELL: After 2 1/2 novels of fighting with each other, I am not in love with Ann. We're friends. Really. Friends who are both lab rat die-hards, except for the part where she doesn't want Mars terraformed and I'm one of the stars of the terraforming effort. Denial is a river in Egypt!
ANN CLAYBOURNE: Sax? Evil. Really. Evil terraformer. I hate his guts. I am not in denial of any mutual spark!
Sax: Hey, remember Antarctica?
BOTH: Aw, f-
AND THEY LIVE HAPPILY EVER AFTER.
Please note this is a secondary (or tertiary) thread in a 900-plus page epic about colonizing Mars.
Having read a modern romance, I dug into my "to read" pile and found something a little more related to the literary concept of romance.
The King of Elfland's Daughter (Lord Dunsany): The peace of the vale of Erl is slowly undone after the Parliament of Erl asks for a magic lord.
I don't read a lot of early 20th C prose, so the story seemed very slow, if conveyed in lovely prose. It wasn't until the last four pages that I realize my assumptions had ambushed me: the story of true love reunited I expected was not the story of Erl's future Dunsany told, so I'm tempted to reread it now that I know where it's going.
The prose is absolutely stunning, so I'm throwing up a bunch of quotes for my future reference and your entertainment.
And Alveric did not know that the time must come when some simple trivial thing would divide them utterly.-p58
It was but a petulance that had made her take it from the coffer in which it lay, and the petulance might have passed and she might not have unrolled the scroll, only that it was there in her hand. -p62
And at that moment a wind came out of the northwest, and and entered the woods and bared the golden branches, and danced on over the downs, and led a company of scarlet and golden leaves, that had dreaded this day but danced now it had come; and away with a riot of dancing and glory of colour, high in the light of the sun that had set from the sight of the fields, went wind and leaves together. With them let Lirazel.-p63
...but he followed one idea, one inspiration, one hope; and so shared something of the strangeness that all men have who do this. -p83
And in the talk was contempt of Alveric's quest, and and pity, and ridicule; and sometimes affection spoke and sometimes scorn; yet in the hearts of all was envy; for their reason mocked the lonely roving of that outlandish adventure, but their hearts would have gone. -p96
And now the King and his daughter drifted away...as dreams drift away at dawn... all Elfland drifted with them. -p103
The "language and ink" paragraph on p105 is exactly what a book-lover would write for his (or her) enjoyment.
...and the angels heard that music but were forbidden to envy it. -p175
And soon he was come by unsure paths to the reeds and the thin rushes, to which a wind was telling tales that have no meaning to men, long histories of bleakness and ancient legends of rain; while on the high darkening land far off behind him he saw lights begin to blink where the houses were. -p201/2
The "I would give you spells against [everything], but not against magic" (p212) is a particularly cool set-piece.
I feel like I should try to broaden my reading horizons, but bad books are a real turnoff. If you can, rec me one (1) romance, one nonfiction book, and/or one mystery.
I feel like I should try to broaden my reading horizons, but bad books are a real turnoff. If you can, reccomend me one (1) romance, one nonfiction book, and/or one mystery.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-09 07:44 pm (UTC)But this seemed to be descriptive without being wordy if that makes sense.
"Evocative", maybe.
Sometimes reading books out of order is a blessing in disguise; it gives the illusion of depth where there's just obsessive fanboys. (Star Wars novels, I may be looking at you.)
Gabaldon named their daughter Brianna? That's a name I haven't seen outside of fiction in a while (which probably means it'll hit the top 10 girl baby names lists next year, hah).
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-09 07:50 pm (UTC)This is true. But you thought he would have gotten the hint when no one wanted to publish his poetry.
Sometimes reading books out of order is a blessing in disguise; it gives the illusion of depth where there's just obsessive fanboys. (Star Wars novels, I may be looking at you.)
Let's not start on the New Jedi Order. We'd be here all day. The only good thing to come out of those would be Jaina's struggle with the Dark Side. (I identify with Jaina)
Gabaldon named their daughter Brianna? That's a name I haven't seen outside of fiction in a while (which probably means it'll hit the top 10 girl baby names lists next year, hah).
Yep. And the first time we meet her she's all nervous about taking her boyfriend (who sounds like John Lennon -- no really they say so in the book) to meet her Dad. I was a Freshman in High School. Time traveling to introduce SOs to parents kind of rocked.