I’ll be back again.

The power dynamic is obvious and unweighted by gender expectations as well as everything else.

Right, gay men aren’t gendered: they can’t be masculine because they are homosexual, and they can’t be feminine because they aren’t women.

Thank you Sarah, for the suggestions, and Laura and Kate for the other suggestions and clarifications!

Because any power issues are there on purpose, rather than as a remnant of gender politics, and that’s just refreshing.

In many of the ones I’ve read (which admittedly are rather few in number) there are still power differences because of class, age, employment status, finances etc. So they didn’t seem that different to me. Then again, I prefer m/f romance which doesn’t have big power differentials, so maybe that means the differences between m/m and f/m in that respect aren’t so obvious to me?

#3: Apparently Steve Kluger’s “Almost Like Being in Love.” Haven’t read it myself, but it’s on the list. #2 rarely fits bill of #3. I was in The Different Light bookstore on Castro Street in SF last week and all the gay male *romance* that looked interesting was written, I happen to know, by women. I’m not saying they never overlap…but rarely.

#4: Eh, good luck.

#5: Because it’s super sexy. Because any power issues are there on purpose, rather than as a remnant of gender politics, and that’s just refreshing. And it’s super hot: did I mention that?

One of my favorite AA Romances (although I hate calling it AA Romance, as if it’s a subspecies or something)

Right, like m/m romance: Romance with a capital “R” is understood to be white Anglo hetero. Anything else is a “variation”, “not the norm”.

Thanks to you and Jill for the suggestions.

Please, everybody, head over to TMT to see what Laura’s got to say on the question of politics and Romance.

As for my lack of reviews .. let’s just say that

Puppy + kids on vacation = NO TIME TO MYSELF, DAMMIT!

I imagine that she’s very familiar with the political issues and doubt that she chose an African male character for titillation purposes.

I know a lot of authors are thoughtful about political issues. I’m just not sure that comes across with much nuance in these short-format novels with so much going on. However, Laura’s more generous than I am about that problem. E.g. sometimes I’m inclined to say a text is straight out of a 1950s housewifely handbook, whereas Laura might point out subtly subversive themes that update the female characters’ roles.

The African male character was an aspect I liked about the book. Not only because it’s unusual, but because it has potential to engage national/political issues on a level you rarely get in a more touristic approach (e.g. two foreigners exploring a strange land) or a do-gooder novel (e.g. nice American or British white girl cares for developing-world orphans).

Oh, yeah. IMO Monson wrote some of the most *aware* cultural critique in the genre, and Rangoon is an amazing example of really subtle insights, really clunky writing, fascinating characterizations, and some way over the top plotting. IMO it has lots of genre cliches and lots of undermining of those cliches. Given your comments about self-hood and the heroine in your DA post, though, I’m anxious to see what you think of the book. And I am trying not to drool with anticipation at being able to talk about it again, lol.

Also, I hope you’re going to be posting your review of Dead To The World soon.