![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Went to hear Lois Bujold read today. The crowd was an interesting split between nerdy university students and nerdy people my parents' age (who presumably can afford more books); there were the requisite annoyances, including the person sitting next to me who hissed when the inevitable cell phone went off despite the fact that she was reading Diane Duane's newest So You Want to Be a Wizard? book while Lois Bujold read, and the people in line for book signing (stood in line for
glasseye, since he couldn't come) discussing which of their friends had brought more books to the signing by "Misty," a.k.a. Mercedes Lackey.
However, I did get to hear unpublished pseudo-German fiction about wolves and sleepwalking. And hear answers to various questions, largely of the "So when will you publish more about MY favorite character?" variety. I write this entry, however, because she remarked that a novella about Miles' marriage is forthcoming in a collection of short stories put forward by a coalition of science fiction and romance authors. This collection was created by Catherine Asaro, who apparently writes both hard science fiction and romance novels. This fact fills me with a deep feeling of enlightenment, since I have stopped reading Catherine Asaro's books due to the general gratuitousness of her plots. (I'd prefer to like the hero for reasons other than how hot he looks in a half-laced velvet jerkin, for instance. And I don't care how beautiful the heroine's red hair is, there are limits to the amount of time I want to watch Hot Blond Android and Hot Dark, Brooding Scientist fight over her.)
I feel somewhat guilty about immediately judging Catherine Asaro by her other genre, since I am tending more and more toward the belief that society is prejudiced against romance novels for reasons that have very little to do with their writing quality or lack thereof. On the other hand, Catherine Asaro did prove to me that I object as much to blatant objectification of men as to blatant objectification of women, and can therefore dislike Heinlein in good faith.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
However, I did get to hear unpublished pseudo-German fiction about wolves and sleepwalking. And hear answers to various questions, largely of the "So when will you publish more about MY favorite character?" variety. I write this entry, however, because she remarked that a novella about Miles' marriage is forthcoming in a collection of short stories put forward by a coalition of science fiction and romance authors. This collection was created by Catherine Asaro, who apparently writes both hard science fiction and romance novels. This fact fills me with a deep feeling of enlightenment, since I have stopped reading Catherine Asaro's books due to the general gratuitousness of her plots. (I'd prefer to like the hero for reasons other than how hot he looks in a half-laced velvet jerkin, for instance. And I don't care how beautiful the heroine's red hair is, there are limits to the amount of time I want to watch Hot Blond Android and Hot Dark, Brooding Scientist fight over her.)
I feel somewhat guilty about immediately judging Catherine Asaro by her other genre, since I am tending more and more toward the belief that society is prejudiced against romance novels for reasons that have very little to do with their writing quality or lack thereof. On the other hand, Catherine Asaro did prove to me that I object as much to blatant objectification of men as to blatant objectification of women, and can therefore dislike Heinlein in good faith.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-10-02 07:36 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-10-02 04:24 pm (UTC)meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-02 12:57 pm (UTC)but in seriousness (as much as i can muster, about a thimble's worth) romance novels do get short shrift. everytime someone around me criticizes one (and being an english major, lemme tell ya, the general topic comes up suspiciously often, even with the men) i think of george eliot's essay on silly women novelists. i have found myself rather pleasantly suprised by the quality of romance novels even if the plots are formulaic. then again... supposedly there are only 4 plots. or 2. depends who you ask. i like the idea of two: 1) person leaves home or 2)stranger comes to town. blah blah blah.
but then again, i watch the man show sometimes. and don't really object to objectification. i see it as another form of flattery i guess. so i suppose i really should resign myself to my special level of hell full of bra burning feminists and shut up :P
Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-02 04:36 pm (UTC)I'd say that objectification in novels leads to bad characterization, and that's what really bothers me; but I suspect there's something more subtle going on.
Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-02 05:21 pm (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-02 05:51 pm (UTC)On the other hand, I think I may be more easily annoyed by literature than you are. There's a certain joy in a good critique.
Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-02 06:52 pm (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-02 10:20 pm (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-02 11:46 pm (UTC)it is also true that i don't really read a lot of bad writing. i tend to stick to things i either know are quite good from sources i trust or things i have read before.
there is the occasional bit though. like Mark of the Angel. can't recall the author. but she should be shot. in the feet. and left to bleed. and bleed. and then i would pee on her grave. but i beat that book! it tried to stop me from finishing it through sheer terribleness. even i was daunted, but like all true evil, never vanguished! i won! and it was free.
Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-03 09:12 pm (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-05 03:14 am (UTC)but the stories have merit beyond that you know... like all the really hot men. undead and were-men no less. hello? priorities? :P
in seriousness, well, more anyway... the anita blake books make my skin crawl. and some of her descriptions and action makes me physically sick or disturbed. it is a rare thing that does that to me... so i stay fascinated.
edward is the best character anyway. but i have a thing for pathological, psychotic men or something...
Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-05 02:01 pm (UTC)Edward is cool, since he actually seems to have a personality beyond a bad accent, albeit a psychotic one . . . But I heard he ends up with an annoying wife.
Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-06 02:40 pm (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-03 01:41 pm (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-05 03:16 am (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-05 11:55 am (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-05 12:15 pm (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-05 02:09 pm (UTC)Re: meandering whimsy
Date: 2003-10-05 03:26 pm (UTC)