Wed Reading Meme...and stuff
Jul. 17th, 2013 10:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatEh should watch the tv shows saved on DVR, but do not feel like it. Was however highly entertained by my guilty pleasure series...General Hospital. Today's episode was a hoot.
Hey, it give me something besides work and the heat to discuss with my mother. The root to a good relationship with one's mother is to find a cultural item that you both like and can discuss to death.
Wednesday Reading Meme...seriously, does anyone out there care what I'm reading? I'm still on a romance novel binge. Which no one in my life shares a remote interest in, but is tolerating with a sort of loopy tolerant grin. My mother laughs at me, because she did it in her 40s. Now she's reading the literary novels that I read in my 20s, along with a lot of non-fiction biographies and historicals. Most of which are incredibly depressing.
I finished Eloisa James novel Pleasure for Pleasure, which is clearly a riff off of "Midsummer's Night's Dream" and "Measure for Measure", with "Little Women" serving as a foundation. She plants delightful little references to Shakespeare throughout her novels, which the former English Lit major and theater geek in me appreciates. It's not as good as some of her other books. Yet oddly better than Georgette Heyer, which she was admittedly honoring. The syntax for one thing was actually correct.
Apparently the Kindle likes Eloisa James and hates Heyer? Plus James is a heck of a lot cheaper. You'd think if a book cost $8.99 that Amazon would make an effort to prevent typos?
James' novel was no more than $4.99. Half the price. Romance novels unlike mystery and sci-fi novels are dirt cheap. For some reason this genre is cheaper than the others...which if we think too hard about this is not exactly a good thing. The other genres tend to be more male driven - so what, men are making more than women even in book publishing? Pshaw.
Stop buying these books people. Gorent check out books written by men in mystery and sci-fi genres from your library. That way you can boycott, but not deprive yourself at the same time. Win-win. Meanwhile spend the cash on female writers.
I wonder sometimes if my preoccupation with romance novels stems from a similar pre-occupation with traditional gender wars? Possibly. No genre plays with the traditional power struggle between men and women better than heterosexual romance novels. I honestly have no idea why I have this weird craving for romance novels. But that won't stop me from attempting to figure it out. Don't worry, like all my cravings or ahem obsessions, it will end eventually. Hopefully it will not take quite as long as my obsession with Buffy and Joss Whedon took to end - but I admittedly had encouragement in that one. Nothing like encouragement to keep an obsession going.
At any rate...this book was interesting if a wee bit scattered. There were four storylines. Three romances, and one villain. It was quite subversive in that one of the romances, which happened off-page but was referred to and hinted at, was a lesbian romance. The hero is smitten with a charming Frenchwoman who turns out to be lesbians. My one quibble about this romance is - it is a wee bit stereotypical, clearly the author doesn't have that many lesbian friends? Or does, but doesn't know much about them? Also the character who turns out to be a lesbian is a charming narcissist who I wanted to smack. Heterosexual biasis? Anyone? If you are going to write about a lesbian or homosexual relationship...at least do it well. But it is a small quibble - this relationship was actually done better than the one in The Ugly Duckling. And it is sort of in the periphery. The romance is subversive in other ways as well - the heroine is plumb not skinny, and worries over her weight, but is found to be rather appealing to the hero. (Although in Regency England, plump women were actually en vogue - so this isn't exactly accurate but romance novels seldom are. I laugh when reviewers whine about historical inaccuracies in historical romances...please. This is not a genre that needs to be historically accurate or is known for it. Even Heyer took liberties. Lots of them.) The other reason I don't really find the plump woman trope subversive is it is currently the in thing. Genre often is reactionary to whatever society is pushing. It reflects our culture and often rages against it - providing comfort fiction to the poor souls who do not fit in. Since skinny = beauty in 2013 (regardless of the fact that some of these women look positively skeletal...the camera may add weight, but honey if you look that thin on screen, I shudder to think what you look like off camera).
The best subversive bit...is the older woman/younger man romance. Granted they are secondary characters...but I seldom see this in historically. Sherry Thomas did it a few times. But it is rare. Usually it's the older guy- younger girl. Which is the main romance in this book, unfortunately. I wish the book focused more on Griselda and Darlington. Griselda is 32, Darlington, she thinks is a mere 24 (but in reality he's 27 and a writer). Their romance is delightful and one of equals. She also has the power in the relationship - she's from money and has the title. It's delightful. But unfortunately subordinate to the other romance which alas is a bit more paint by numbers. It does however have it's fun bits. One great bit is the hero, a former rake, is teaching the heroine how to walk by wearing her discarded gown.
Hilarious. The writer has a nice sense of humor. Key to this type of romance novel - which is light and breezy and charmingly witty.
There's also a subplot about who the writer of a controversial sexual memoir is, a memoir that appears to be based on the hero's exploits, even though the hero did not write it.
And a somewhat comical Shakespearean villain..who gets handed his just deserts.
Next up? Eh I don't know. May read the first one in this series...Much Ado About You.
This series is about the Essex Sisters and is based on Shakespeare and Little Women. I preferred the fairy tale device better. Little Women has never really enthralled me. May come from having never had sisters.
Still hot and humid. The heat isn't really all that bad. It's the humidity that sucks the life out of you. What I wouldn't do for a nice breeze. Oh well, at least my commute starts at 6:45 am in the morning - it's about 75-80 at that time. It's the afternoon bit that hurts.
In other news? I can't help rolling my eyes at the bewildered reactions to the George Zimmerman verdict. Seriously? Are people this deluded about our court system? People stop watching Law & Order - it's not real.
Co-worker and I discussed it the other day. He's a world-weary former criminal defense attorney and I've worked in criminal defense...so we both know how it works. Nothing makes you cynical about our justice system more than doing criminal defense internships in law school, well that and jury duty. Plus we've done jury duty. The US criminal justice system does not play out like it does on your tv sets. It's not Law & Order, CSI, or even the Good Wife (which honestly is the closest I've seen to anyone getting to the truth of it). The Good guys do not win. The Bad guys do not always get punished. Innocent people get convicted all the time. Guilty people go free all the time. Jurors tend to pick whatever side presented his/her case in the best way or jurors being human, which side they liked better. It's often the later. Lawyers avoid picking logical or critical thinkers - they go for people who think with their emotions. Imagine being told two stories then at the end being asked which one seemed more real, more touching and true to you? That's what it is like. There's no such thing as objectivity...that's a pipe dream. Whoever tells their version of the story the best wins. Justice has nothing to do with it. If you think justice happens in a court room you are naive. It's all about the presentation. What the judge lets into evidence. Which facts the judge decides are relevant and not prejudicial. And how those facts are presented. Is it racist? Well, it is decided by people and people are unfortunately racist, narrow-minded, self-absorbed, and limited.
And yet...this is still a much better system than most around the world, that vary. I wish there was a better way of doing it. But I have yet to find it.
Hey, it give me something besides work and the heat to discuss with my mother. The root to a good relationship with one's mother is to find a cultural item that you both like and can discuss to death.
Wednesday Reading Meme...seriously, does anyone out there care what I'm reading? I'm still on a romance novel binge. Which no one in my life shares a remote interest in, but is tolerating with a sort of loopy tolerant grin. My mother laughs at me, because she did it in her 40s. Now she's reading the literary novels that I read in my 20s, along with a lot of non-fiction biographies and historicals. Most of which are incredibly depressing.
I finished Eloisa James novel Pleasure for Pleasure, which is clearly a riff off of "Midsummer's Night's Dream" and "Measure for Measure", with "Little Women" serving as a foundation. She plants delightful little references to Shakespeare throughout her novels, which the former English Lit major and theater geek in me appreciates. It's not as good as some of her other books. Yet oddly better than Georgette Heyer, which she was admittedly honoring. The syntax for one thing was actually correct.
Apparently the Kindle likes Eloisa James and hates Heyer? Plus James is a heck of a lot cheaper. You'd think if a book cost $8.99 that Amazon would make an effort to prevent typos?
James' novel was no more than $4.99. Half the price. Romance novels unlike mystery and sci-fi novels are dirt cheap. For some reason this genre is cheaper than the others...which if we think too hard about this is not exactly a good thing. The other genres tend to be more male driven - so what, men are making more than women even in book publishing? Pshaw.
Stop buying these books people. Go
I wonder sometimes if my preoccupation with romance novels stems from a similar pre-occupation with traditional gender wars? Possibly. No genre plays with the traditional power struggle between men and women better than heterosexual romance novels. I honestly have no idea why I have this weird craving for romance novels. But that won't stop me from attempting to figure it out. Don't worry, like all my cravings or ahem obsessions, it will end eventually. Hopefully it will not take quite as long as my obsession with Buffy and Joss Whedon took to end - but I admittedly had encouragement in that one. Nothing like encouragement to keep an obsession going.
At any rate...this book was interesting if a wee bit scattered. There were four storylines. Three romances, and one villain. It was quite subversive in that one of the romances, which happened off-page but was referred to and hinted at, was a lesbian romance. The hero is smitten with a charming Frenchwoman who turns out to be lesbians. My one quibble about this romance is - it is a wee bit stereotypical, clearly the author doesn't have that many lesbian friends? Or does, but doesn't know much about them? Also the character who turns out to be a lesbian is a charming narcissist who I wanted to smack. Heterosexual biasis? Anyone? If you are going to write about a lesbian or homosexual relationship...at least do it well. But it is a small quibble - this relationship was actually done better than the one in The Ugly Duckling. And it is sort of in the periphery. The romance is subversive in other ways as well - the heroine is plumb not skinny, and worries over her weight, but is found to be rather appealing to the hero. (Although in Regency England, plump women were actually en vogue - so this isn't exactly accurate but romance novels seldom are. I laugh when reviewers whine about historical inaccuracies in historical romances...please. This is not a genre that needs to be historically accurate or is known for it. Even Heyer took liberties. Lots of them.) The other reason I don't really find the plump woman trope subversive is it is currently the in thing. Genre often is reactionary to whatever society is pushing. It reflects our culture and often rages against it - providing comfort fiction to the poor souls who do not fit in. Since skinny = beauty in 2013 (regardless of the fact that some of these women look positively skeletal...the camera may add weight, but honey if you look that thin on screen, I shudder to think what you look like off camera).
The best subversive bit...is the older woman/younger man romance. Granted they are secondary characters...but I seldom see this in historically. Sherry Thomas did it a few times. But it is rare. Usually it's the older guy- younger girl. Which is the main romance in this book, unfortunately. I wish the book focused more on Griselda and Darlington. Griselda is 32, Darlington, she thinks is a mere 24 (but in reality he's 27 and a writer). Their romance is delightful and one of equals. She also has the power in the relationship - she's from money and has the title. It's delightful. But unfortunately subordinate to the other romance which alas is a bit more paint by numbers. It does however have it's fun bits. One great bit is the hero, a former rake, is teaching the heroine how to walk by wearing her discarded gown.
Hilarious. The writer has a nice sense of humor. Key to this type of romance novel - which is light and breezy and charmingly witty.
There's also a subplot about who the writer of a controversial sexual memoir is, a memoir that appears to be based on the hero's exploits, even though the hero did not write it.
And a somewhat comical Shakespearean villain..who gets handed his just deserts.
Next up? Eh I don't know. May read the first one in this series...Much Ado About You.
This series is about the Essex Sisters and is based on Shakespeare and Little Women. I preferred the fairy tale device better. Little Women has never really enthralled me. May come from having never had sisters.
Still hot and humid. The heat isn't really all that bad. It's the humidity that sucks the life out of you. What I wouldn't do for a nice breeze. Oh well, at least my commute starts at 6:45 am in the morning - it's about 75-80 at that time. It's the afternoon bit that hurts.
In other news? I can't help rolling my eyes at the bewildered reactions to the George Zimmerman verdict. Seriously? Are people this deluded about our court system? People stop watching Law & Order - it's not real.
Co-worker and I discussed it the other day. He's a world-weary former criminal defense attorney and I've worked in criminal defense...so we both know how it works. Nothing makes you cynical about our justice system more than doing criminal defense internships in law school, well that and jury duty. Plus we've done jury duty. The US criminal justice system does not play out like it does on your tv sets. It's not Law & Order, CSI, or even the Good Wife (which honestly is the closest I've seen to anyone getting to the truth of it). The Good guys do not win. The Bad guys do not always get punished. Innocent people get convicted all the time. Guilty people go free all the time. Jurors tend to pick whatever side presented his/her case in the best way or jurors being human, which side they liked better. It's often the later. Lawyers avoid picking logical or critical thinkers - they go for people who think with their emotions. Imagine being told two stories then at the end being asked which one seemed more real, more touching and true to you? That's what it is like. There's no such thing as objectivity...that's a pipe dream. Whoever tells their version of the story the best wins. Justice has nothing to do with it. If you think justice happens in a court room you are naive. It's all about the presentation. What the judge lets into evidence. Which facts the judge decides are relevant and not prejudicial. And how those facts are presented. Is it racist? Well, it is decided by people and people are unfortunately racist, narrow-minded, self-absorbed, and limited.
And yet...this is still a much better system than most around the world, that vary. I wish there was a better way of doing it. But I have yet to find it.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-07-19 01:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-07-19 01:55 am (UTC)Don't know...if I'd like it. I'm in a weird mood. I crave sex and romance in books. If it's not in them, I get impatient. I'd blame work, but I think it's a mixture of things. You don't have to think as hard while reading a romance. The suspense is emotional not intellectual. And you can skim a lot, doesn't require focus or attention. Plus, doesn't stick with you. Great genre to read when under a great deal of mental/work stress. Sort of like PD Wodehouse, but less concentration required and not as witty.
I want Vol 3 of Captive Prince. Still curious to know where that goes.
Oh, not sure I'd recommend Eloisa James for my queer/non-heterosexual friends, while she takes risks, she also..is somewhat stereotypical.