![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Wed Reading Meme and other things..
Feb. 24th, 2016 07:12 pm1. So I sent a request to LJ Help Support - regarding "Who is "B Vonktake"? Whenever I respond to a comment or LJ post, I get this error message, which states that I'm posting under different user ID than my own. I am told to go to switch - which is highlighted in blue next to it. I do, along with my user name, there are options, Facebook, Twitter, Anonymous, and B Vonktake. Who in the heck is that?
And should I be worried?
2. Wed Reading Meme...
Still haven't read anything interesting of note. Just finished Once Upon a Marquess by Courtney Milan and will have to start Euphoria by Lily King which I've been procrastinating. Can't procrastinate any longer, the book club is in two and a half weeks.
Once Upon a Marquess was okay, better than Madeline Hunter's take on the same subject but not as good as Dorothy Dunnett's, but then that is Dorothy Dunnett, so hardly fair to compare. Both dealt with the horrible Opium trade. Dunnett in the 1700s, Hunter and Milan in the 1800s. Yes, that dreadful British East India Company, insisting on trading Opium for Tea in China. The plot of Milan's novel is that the brother of the heroine has been banished as a traitor for overlooking his father's trading of state secrets to China in order to prevent Britain smuggling Opium into China. China had made it illegal, but Britain needed an export -- something China wanted in exchange for tea. Otherwise, tea would be extremely expensive. (It does answer one question where did the British get all that tea or rather the idea for tea to begin with? Apparently from China. And where did China get the idea for heroin and opium, apparently Britain. I don't know, seems Britain got the better deal, which alas, is what the heroine's dear brother believes, hence the reason he became a traitor.)
The heroine's (Judith) brother, Anthony, is sold out by his best friend and her fiancee, Christian. Which sort of broke up that romance eight years ago, it also ruined their family.
The romance is about how Christian and Judith mend fences and fall back in love. The mystery about what happened to the heroine's brother, who is currently missing in action, and her younger sister, also missing in action, is hanging in the background, and the reason they reunite. Both mysteries are sort of answered at the end, but not necessarily in a satisfactory manner. It's all very passive and off stage.
That's my quibble with this genre, 98% of the action seems to happen off-stage, the focus is on whether the two people can get together, have sex, fall in love, and get married. Not always in that order. The rest is just window dressing or used for character development and conflict. It's the exact opposite of most of the other genres, where the romance is often window dressing or hanging in the background, and the action is front and center. Reading a romance novel can feel at times like reading the Tom Stoppard Play, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Except not as absurdly funny.
The other quibble I have with this genre is the slow pacing...it's build, build, build, worry, worry, navel gaze, navel gaze, and finally 84% of the way through huge breakup or conflict. Which of course is quickly and neatly wrapped up in an hour or two, because you know, 84 % of the way through.
Reminded me a little of Downton Abby actually.
This, by the way, is a genre specific quibble. They are all guilty of it. It's like its a rule or something that they don't dare break. Every romance that I've read in the last four years follows this frigging rule, well except for the romance novels published before 1990, they didn't follow it.
So it's a new rule. Say what you will about the 1980 and 1970s bodice rippers - they were more active, the action happened on the page, and the conflict came to a roaring head with at least 100 pages left in the novel. Of course, they were also about 100-200 pages longer, with lots of filler.
So there's that. Sometimes I think they must have been paid by the page. They probably were back then.
3. Fandom
Been lurking on soap opera fanboards and twitter feeds, mainly to find spoilers -- because that's the fun part of watching soaps, figuring out the spoilers. They have real and false one's out there.
Anyhow...I discovered last night that a poor actor in one of these soaps, who is in his early 20s, had to host a twitter feed and he got ripped apart by the fandom. Now admittedly, last year, he'd gotten into a fight with some twitter followers who started ripping into his family members, and he lost his temper and threatened to rip their fingers off. The fans could not forgive this and have been trying to get him fired.
Okay. This is when you need to hang up your fandom card, turn off your computer, stop watching your television and take up a nice sport like aerobics, biking, running or frisbee. (I'd say yoga but yoga is not a sport.) It's also why I tend to steer clear of fandom or stick to small safe ponds where brighter and more scholarly types prevail (hint? You won't find them on a daytime soap opera or comic book fan board, or it's highly unlikely).
It also made me realize how lucky I am not to be in the entertainment business. Yeah it looks glamorous from the outside, it's not. And there's a reason they are paid as much money as they are -- they have to put up with nasty people on social media, in interviews and at conventions.
The more I pondered this, the more I realized that bullying exists in every profession and literally everywhere. Listened to two of my cubicle mates being yelled at by their boss this week. Bullied by her. To the point that one told her to back off, and not take her anger out on him. Then my boss tried to play that game with me, I'm learning to bark back. Or shrug. Then his boss began to play it in emails. Seriously??
No wonder Trump is popular in the polls. 98% of American business, private, public, non-profit, is run by bullies. Governments are run by bullies. Social media - bullies. Fandom - bullies.
We have a culture overrun by bullies. Ack. Anyone know of a nice little mountain community somewhere...with lakes, few people, where everyone shares things? Oh right, Tibet. Too far.
And should I be worried?
2. Wed Reading Meme...
Still haven't read anything interesting of note. Just finished Once Upon a Marquess by Courtney Milan and will have to start Euphoria by Lily King which I've been procrastinating. Can't procrastinate any longer, the book club is in two and a half weeks.
Once Upon a Marquess was okay, better than Madeline Hunter's take on the same subject but not as good as Dorothy Dunnett's, but then that is Dorothy Dunnett, so hardly fair to compare. Both dealt with the horrible Opium trade. Dunnett in the 1700s, Hunter and Milan in the 1800s. Yes, that dreadful British East India Company, insisting on trading Opium for Tea in China. The plot of Milan's novel is that the brother of the heroine has been banished as a traitor for overlooking his father's trading of state secrets to China in order to prevent Britain smuggling Opium into China. China had made it illegal, but Britain needed an export -- something China wanted in exchange for tea. Otherwise, tea would be extremely expensive. (It does answer one question where did the British get all that tea or rather the idea for tea to begin with? Apparently from China. And where did China get the idea for heroin and opium, apparently Britain. I don't know, seems Britain got the better deal, which alas, is what the heroine's dear brother believes, hence the reason he became a traitor.)
The heroine's (Judith) brother, Anthony, is sold out by his best friend and her fiancee, Christian. Which sort of broke up that romance eight years ago, it also ruined their family.
The romance is about how Christian and Judith mend fences and fall back in love. The mystery about what happened to the heroine's brother, who is currently missing in action, and her younger sister, also missing in action, is hanging in the background, and the reason they reunite. Both mysteries are sort of answered at the end, but not necessarily in a satisfactory manner. It's all very passive and off stage.
That's my quibble with this genre, 98% of the action seems to happen off-stage, the focus is on whether the two people can get together, have sex, fall in love, and get married. Not always in that order. The rest is just window dressing or used for character development and conflict. It's the exact opposite of most of the other genres, where the romance is often window dressing or hanging in the background, and the action is front and center. Reading a romance novel can feel at times like reading the Tom Stoppard Play, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Except not as absurdly funny.
The other quibble I have with this genre is the slow pacing...it's build, build, build, worry, worry, navel gaze, navel gaze, and finally 84% of the way through huge breakup or conflict. Which of course is quickly and neatly wrapped up in an hour or two, because you know, 84 % of the way through.
Reminded me a little of Downton Abby actually.
This, by the way, is a genre specific quibble. They are all guilty of it. It's like its a rule or something that they don't dare break. Every romance that I've read in the last four years follows this frigging rule, well except for the romance novels published before 1990, they didn't follow it.
So it's a new rule. Say what you will about the 1980 and 1970s bodice rippers - they were more active, the action happened on the page, and the conflict came to a roaring head with at least 100 pages left in the novel. Of course, they were also about 100-200 pages longer, with lots of filler.
So there's that. Sometimes I think they must have been paid by the page. They probably were back then.
3. Fandom
Been lurking on soap opera fanboards and twitter feeds, mainly to find spoilers -- because that's the fun part of watching soaps, figuring out the spoilers. They have real and false one's out there.
Anyhow...I discovered last night that a poor actor in one of these soaps, who is in his early 20s, had to host a twitter feed and he got ripped apart by the fandom. Now admittedly, last year, he'd gotten into a fight with some twitter followers who started ripping into his family members, and he lost his temper and threatened to rip their fingers off. The fans could not forgive this and have been trying to get him fired.
Okay. This is when you need to hang up your fandom card, turn off your computer, stop watching your television and take up a nice sport like aerobics, biking, running or frisbee. (I'd say yoga but yoga is not a sport.) It's also why I tend to steer clear of fandom or stick to small safe ponds where brighter and more scholarly types prevail (hint? You won't find them on a daytime soap opera or comic book fan board, or it's highly unlikely).
It also made me realize how lucky I am not to be in the entertainment business. Yeah it looks glamorous from the outside, it's not. And there's a reason they are paid as much money as they are -- they have to put up with nasty people on social media, in interviews and at conventions.
The more I pondered this, the more I realized that bullying exists in every profession and literally everywhere. Listened to two of my cubicle mates being yelled at by their boss this week. Bullied by her. To the point that one told her to back off, and not take her anger out on him. Then my boss tried to play that game with me, I'm learning to bark back. Or shrug. Then his boss began to play it in emails. Seriously??
No wonder Trump is popular in the polls. 98% of American business, private, public, non-profit, is run by bullies. Governments are run by bullies. Social media - bullies. Fandom - bullies.
We have a culture overrun by bullies. Ack. Anyone know of a nice little mountain community somewhere...with lakes, few people, where everyone shares things? Oh right, Tibet. Too far.