1. Links of interest
A. Keishon has a great new look. Check it out!
B. Tumperkin is talking about Author Life Cycles, or Hitting Your Stride
C. I don’t understand the Twitter lists, but this guy seems to.
D. Go see what Karen Scott is totally, completely wrong about.
E. Romanceland is Pissed Off, and I am Too Lazy to Link
There are too many kerfuffles to count. Dear Author has been producing controversial posts at an unusual rate, on race in romance, ebooks, piracy, and whether “your kink is not my kink” means “don’t ever say anything negative about my kink”. TeddyPig has weighed in on the last on his own blog. At Smart Bitches Trashy Books, an open letter to MacMillan by Sarah has somehow turned into a piracy thread which rivals that at DA (along with some “help” to Sarah on the grammar and wording of a letter she’s already mailed. That kind of help? I will never ask you for.) A couple of nitwits on the AAR boards keep dissing blogs in the disingenuous, “who me?” way some women have when they think their audience is very stupid, and neither Wendy the Superlibrarian nor Mrs. Giggles is having any of it. Katiebabs questioned RT for not reviewing same sex romances, and KMont got mad at someone who accused book bloggers of lacking integrity because they take ARCs (not me. I dodged a bullet!). Holly of Book Binge ranted against bloggers stealing other bloggers’ ideas. Sarah Tanner, apparently sick of all this seriousness, questioned, in all seriousness, the derogatory use of the term “filler” post.
Most of those are good discussions, for which I had little time or energy (If only Romanceland would schedule these bursts of conflict in time with my work schedule.). But I do have to wonder how I am going to retain my smug sense of superiority if you all keep posting about important topics in such earnest? Sheesh!
2. The Acheron Effect
Is it just me, or is that last book in a series, you know, the one about the “leader” or “patriarch”, or “illusive figure” who has appeared in all the previous books, pretty much always a let down? I think this is true regardless of subgenre. I could not get through Acheron, although I had been really interested in his story while reading several of the prior books in Sherrilyn Kenyon’s Dark Hunter Series. I also like Keiran, Lord Rothewell, in Liz Carlyle’s recent trilogy, but Never Romance a Rake was a bit meh. I enjoyed the glimpses of the “slutty brother” in Kathleen O’Reilly’s Blaze trilogy about three brothers a couple years back, but when he got his own book, it was my least favorite. Meljean Brook has set us up big time for Michael’s book in her Guardians series, but I fear for him, I really do.
I think I may prefer it when the leader gets his HEA in the first book, as in Stephanie Laurens’ Devil’s Bride, Julia Quinn’s Bridgerton series, Lara Adrian’s Midnight Breed series, JR Ward’s Dark Lover (although I think the Vishous suffered from the build up to his book) and Shannon Stacey’s Devlin Group.
It’s very hard to fully meet expectations created over several books, especially about a hero who has been the leader of the group. Can you help me with counterexamples? Who has done this really well?
3. Same sex marriage. My state is voting tomorrow on whether to overturn our new state law allowing same sex couples to marry. I’ve already voted “no”, and I’m crossing my fingers that we will be the first state to have approved same sex marriage both via the legislature and via the ballot box. I am writing a post on the topic, so if you don’t like politics, stay away tomorrow.
4. I have taken to what @sonomalass calls “book mugging“, and my latest victim is my new hair stylist. After 6 years of the same exact cut and color every five weeks, my old stylist apparently couldn’t take the monotony and fled to another salon without leaving me her number.
But … I found out yesterday that my new stylist has read all of Sherrilyn Kenyon’s Dark Hunter books, as well as all the Sookie Stackhouse books. Getting dumped never felt so great!
Alas, when I inquired about JR Ward, Kresley Cole, and a few others, said stylist had no clue. How can this be? You finish with the Dark Hunters, and think, “Oh well. I guess that’s it for paranormal romance until Sherrilyn writes another one.”
Clearly, I have a lot of work ahead of me. But at least my hair looks good.
5. This post was fueled by Mary J. Blige, who offers a musical tonic for every conceivable ill. Tired of the kerfuffles? Put on those headphones and play No More Drama. Want to feel that sisterhood with your rom peeps? A Family Affair is what you want. Need to a little feminist-lite spiritual uplift? I dare you to listen to Just Fine without putting your hands in the air and and a smile on your face.
Happy Week!
Related posts:
- Monday Morning Stepback: 2 Fake Rants and 1 Real One 1. Rants On NPR’s Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me, they have a quiz where they give you a few bizarre...
- Monday Morning Stepback: Guess the fake fan letter 1. Quiz (ponder to the tune of Lady Gaga’s Paparazzi, or The Carpenters’ – or Sonic Youth’s – Superstar) Some...
- Monday Morning Stepback The weekly links and opinion post 1. I am sure I am the last to know, but there is a...
- Do Author Comments Have a Chilling Effect on Review Discussions? A number of things happened recently to raise this question for me, none of them on this blog. First, Mrs....
- Monday Morning Stepback: Yom Kippur edition! Actually, there is nothing Yom Kippurish about this post, except that it’s going up just after Yom Kippur ends. 1....
- Monday Morning Stepback –Updated with call for Winsor Lists!! UPDATE: On October 16, in honor of the birthdate of Kathleen Winsor, author of Forever Amber, please consider posting your...
#1 by katiebabs on November 2, 2009 - 1:11 pm
Quote
have you seen my WTFckery post today? I am all about balance at my place. heh.
#2 by Jane on November 2, 2009 - 1:15 pm
Quote
I am tired of kerfluffles.
#3 by Victoria Janssen on November 2, 2009 - 1:29 pm
Quote
2. I actually posted on this a while back. Please feel free to steal my ideas and post on it yourself!
http://victoriajanssen.blogspot.com/2009/07/its-bird-its-plane-its-ultra-brother.html
#4 by Jessica on November 2, 2009 - 1:36 pm
Quote
@katiebabs: You can always be counted on to bring the balance!
@Jane: Yeah, you have definitely borne the brunt of it. But I think they were all good discussions, and needed to take place, although maybe not all at once.
@Victoria Janssen: thank you so much for that link. I absolutely knew I was not the first to think of it, and meant to add a line asking for such posts. I love “Ultra Brother”! It’s perfect!
#5 by Wanderer on November 2, 2009 - 1:41 pm
Quote
Love Mary J. Blige’s No More Drama.
I have enough drama in real life, I can’t add the cyber version to it too.
Ah yes, the Acheron affect. I want to read the latest Bastion book which is about the leader of the pack. I only read the first 3 in the series and Dalziel was propped up on high so his book better be good. I tend to tire easily of “club” themed books so I can’t offer any counter examples.
Good luck with the vote. We already had that battle in our state and it went the other way. There are things in the works to overturn the decision but alas it doesn’t look good.
And now for some fun Monday stuff, I’m off to a meeting.
#6 by KMont on November 2, 2009 - 1:42 pm
Quote
What I like least about online kerfluffles these days is how they cause others to react, usually in a hurtful, second-guessing and/or self-questioning way. As if because someone else out there hates reviewers that take on ARCs, these reviewers then feel hurt, get up in arms or question how they do their blogs. Why? Why let the negginators get to them? Why give a crap if the blog next door doesn’t think you’re transparent enough? Why do their personal standards have to apply to anyone else?
Kerfluffles seem to be a dime a dozen these days. What they should never do is make people feel bad for the things they do on their blogs. I haven’t seen one person that is actually hurting anyone else, whether it’s through reviewing ARCs, gushing nonstop about a book, anything of that nature. Kerfluffles and their sources really can’t do anything to anyone unless those spectating let them.
And purely rhetorical – what in the world is Romanceland pissed off about now? *pushes nose back into book*
#7 by Tumperkin on November 2, 2009 - 3:22 pm
Quote
I’ve not got the energy for kerfuffles. And rarely care enough to invest in them.
Ultra-brothers (TM VJanssen): one that really works for me is Wulfric Bedwyn in the final book of Balogh’s Slightly series. I LOVE that book. In fairness though, I’m not a huge fan of any of the other books in that series. I also liked the Sins of Lord Easterbrook by Madeline Hunter.
I shall be doing Crimbo-book-mugging. This is where you give books you have liked as gifts. Lazy, thoughtless, intensely satisfying.
#8 by Robin on November 2, 2009 - 3:34 pm
Quote
Question: does grammar advice have to be correct to be helpful?
I know there was a lot more in the post, but I am fixated on the idea of having my hair cut the exact same way for five years. I’m trying to remember if I’ve ever had mine cut the same way twice. Right now I’m trying to grow mine out to donate and it’s become like another person attached to my head. Cannot wait to hack it all off and start over. Jessica, have you ever even had the urge to do something different?
#9 by Meljean on November 2, 2009 - 3:50 pm
Quote
“Meljean Brook has set us up big time for Michael’s book in her Guardians series, but I fear for him, I really do.”
Me, too.
#10 by Jessica on November 2, 2009 - 3:57 pm
Quote
@Tumperkin: Great counterexample! I loved Wulfric’s book.
@Robin: Yes, I think it does. But my issue with the “help” given to SB Sarah was that she had already sent the letter. So comments suggesting ways to improve the letter irritated me.
My hair. It gets worse. I’ve had the same stylist for 6 years. But the same haircut for 20. I have no desire to change it. I am still figuring out how to get it just right.
@Meljean: If anyone can do it, it’s you.
#11 by Robin on November 2, 2009 - 4:01 pm
Quote
@Jessica: Oh, see my problem with some of that grammar help was that it wasn’t IMO correct (e.g. run-on sentence v. compound/complex sentence).
Wow, I’m impressed at your hairstyle stamina.
#12 by jmc on November 2, 2009 - 4:09 pm
Quote
On the Acheron effect, have you read Jo Beverley’s Malloren series? By the time Rothgar’s story was released, he was Larger Than Life. And his romance was a bit of a let down.
On marriage-in-trouble stories, I don’t go looking for them. But I’ve read a couple categories (both HPs) that handled the MIT pretty well.
On the kerfluffles, I subscribed to the comments at first but eventually unsubscribed because I could NOT read any more.
#13 by LitaC on November 2, 2009 - 4:28 pm
Quote
On the “Acheron Effect” I think you’re pretty spot-on. The only one who actually surpassed the build-up was Wulfric’s story in “Slightly Dangerous”. Of course, Mary Balogh never overplayed Wulf in any of the previous books – he was always a bit mysterious, and you were always left wanting just a little bit more. Slightly Dangerous did not disappoint (at least, it didn’t disappoint ME) – the character that was built up in the previous books was fully realized and completely consistent in his own story.
#14 by Lusty Reader on November 2, 2009 - 4:36 pm
Quote
oh boo, im late to the party and everyone already said my examples. I absolutely agree with you on the “Archeron Affect” and Jo Beverly’s Devilish is my example in agreement, ugh it did NOT work for me at all.
However Balogh’s Slightly Dangerous is on my top 5 list of favorite romances of all time for a reason, and I completely agree with LitaC that since we were only fed the littlest intriguing scraps (like when Morgan saw him crying when they thought Alleyne died) it allowed Wulf to really come into his own in the final book.
Lastly, I agree that series following large families (Foley’s Knight Misc, Lindsey’s Malory family, Laurens’ Cynsters) usually start out great if they follow the eldest family member (usually the hero) and peter out as they get to the younger siblings.
#15 by AQ on November 2, 2009 - 6:05 pm
Quote
I’m of the opinion that after telling us about these special characters and seeing them in action from other POVs that it becomes extremely difficult to find that balance and perhaps “rightness” once an author needs to get inside their heads. Part of it’s because people view themselves differently than others do.
I also wonder whether another aspect of it is “you, insert character name, can’t do or think that because you’re one of the romantic leads now.” Whether consciously or not.
—-
Jane’s and the rest of the Dear Author gang are my heroes because I also think they are initiating difficult conversations that should be heard. I don’t envy the hate mail I’m sure they get but I applaud their willingness to put themselves out there and start the conversations. And, although I don’t always agree with them, I think they deserve lots and lots of pie.
I’ll be interested in your take on same sex marriage.
#16 by Wendy on November 2, 2009 - 6:14 pm
Quote
The whole thing annoys me, which I pretty much made known at my blog. Look, there are blogs I don’t like. Or blogs I half pay attention to and rarely comment on. Doesn’t make those blogs “bad.” Just means they ain’t my bag baby. Just as my blog isn’t going to be universally loved (I know, shocking. Some people don’t read or like the Bat Cave! The nerve!).
I just don’t “get” this Us Vs. Them nonsense. That one “group” has to be “better” than the other. Um, no it doesn’t. The Interwebs be a big, wide open place. Trust me. There’s room enough for all of us to wade around in the pond. Truly.
#17 by Karen Scott on November 2, 2009 - 6:36 pm
Quote
Kerfuffles galore? Crap, this is what happens when real life interferes, you miss all the fun stuff.*g*
#18 by Maili on November 2, 2009 - 7:02 pm
Quote
- The Acheron Effect
I remember the hype around Rothgar from one of Jo Beverly’s series. By the time he finally got a book of his own, the interest had pretty much vaporised. (I can’t remember if it was because it had been too long or that he didn’t live up to his reputation.)
The Effect rarely affects me, probably because I’m usually not a fan of longer-than-three-book connected series. I have the attention span of a drunken gnat.
- I actually don’t mind kerfluffles, but nothing pisses me off faster than someone making it personal, derailing a heated but good discussion. Yeah, I really don’t appreciate the name-calling and those moronic
pissurine contests. It’s unnecessary, a waste of time, and so bleeding boring. I wish there were a rubber stamp in red ink that I could use to punch their forehead: “It’s Not All About You”.- AAR vs. the World
Well, let’s be fair, it’s AAR Posters vs. the World.
It’s practically AAR’s trademark.
- I’m seriously impressed by the fact you visit a hairdresser’s every five weeks. I haven’t been to one since I was around sixteen or fourteen. I’d rather gnaw both of my arms off than let anyone with a pair of scissors come near me.
- I’m chuffed that you used ‘kerfuffle’. It’s a Scottish word. Go Go, Low Scotland!
#19 by Carolyn Crane on November 2, 2009 - 7:10 pm
Quote
There is something about these kerfluffles, I suppose the impersonal nature of online communication, but they get so awful, and it feels so awful to wade into them. Honestly, human beings aren’t meant to communicate by computer, and things get heated and ugly way too fast – more so than if people were in the room together. And I’m not exempting myself from culpability here whatsoever. It’s weirdly seductive.
Meljean had this great cartoon on her blog once, of a guy at a computer and the caption was like, “I can’t come to bed yet! Somebody on the Internet is wrong!”
#20 by Carolyn Crane on November 2, 2009 - 7:12 pm
Quote
Wait, did I just say human beings aren’t made to communicate by computer? That’s not really what I meant. Maybe, not fight by computer. I don’t know what I meant.
#21 by BevBB on November 2, 2009 - 7:23 pm
Quote
You know it’s so nice to mostly miss all the good stuff.
@Wendy:
Hey, I read the Bat Cave. I just can’t get to the Bat Cave.
And if anyone can tell me why that is I shall be forever grateful. Or something similar. 
As far as I know, Wendy’s site is the only blogspot blog that I can’t access. And you want to know what’s really weird? I just saw it on that websnap thing here. o.O
That “us vs. them” nonsense has been around since the beginning of AAR. What was the phrase Laurie used to use? One stop service for romance readers? Or something along those lines. I forget exactly but the implication was that the site should be designed so that readers wouldn’t need to go anywhere else. On the surface, it’s a great goal, but let’s just say it has its drawbacks.
We are talking about the Internet after all.
It does make one wonder just how many of the long timers there even venture elsewhere within the romance “world” online. And when newcomers do join, consider the picture they get of the broader romance community online.
#22 by BevBB on November 2, 2009 - 7:28 pm
Quote
@Maili:
Great minds, Maili, great minds.
Or is that simply shared experience speaking.
#23 by Janet W on November 2, 2009 - 7:38 pm
Quote
A couple series who got it right (altho I loved the build-up to Slightly Dangerous by Balogh)
a) Company of Rogues: first book was about King Rogue, Nicholas (An Arranged Marriage) … Jo Beverley
b) the Chesapeake series by Nora Roberts, oldest bro, first book
Another super blog: thanks … the kerfluffles are interesting and frankly, especially with AAR, I love that so many people pulled back the curtain and showed the level of hostility by some of their Forums posters towards book blogs. NOT everyone but enough that someone(s) needed to say something. IMO.
#24 by Rebecca on November 2, 2009 - 7:39 pm
Quote
So many kerfuffles. I didn’t even toe the water.
But- offering grammar advice for a letter that has already been mailed and probably received by that point (and this has been explicitly stated)? I think you said it best:
Yay civic duty! I’ll definitely be coming back tomorrow. I like politics. And that is a race I’m following closely.
#25 by Marianne McA on November 2, 2009 - 7:47 pm
Quote
I read ‘Acheron Effect’ and I think – Oooh, Thursday Next!
I liked Rothgar’s book, but it was the first of the series that I read, so that proves nothing.
I haven’t read many of the series you mention – just the Laurens and the Quinn. I read on with Laurens until the twins’ books, because I was interested to see how she’d write Cynster women. And I thought they were dreadful books. So you might get a great first book, but is the series as a whole any better?
(Carolyn, can you remember where the cartoon originated? I used to have that site bookmarked – that cartoon was my screensaver for a while – but our computer imploded and I’ve lost all my links. It’s something like XCD – but four letters instead of 3. Google isn’t helping…)
#26 by Michael on November 2, 2009 - 8:07 pm
Quote
Add me to the list of those who loved Slightly Dangerous. Wulfric was a fantastic hero and his book was the best of the series.
#27 by jmc on November 2, 2009 - 8:29 pm
Quote
@Marianne McA: Here’s the link to that cartoon: http://xkcd.com/386/
#28 by Sherry Thomas on November 2, 2009 - 8:37 pm
Quote
The Acheron effect is actually a cousin of the secondary-character effect.
It’s the degree of mystery.
I used to swear up-and-down that I would never write secondary romances, because it is the rare secondary romance that doesn’t somehow come across as more interesting than the primary romance (at least in the books I’d read), especially if the writer’s name is SEP.
Having a character who is a secondary character is so many books in a row–showing them only at their most interesting moments and no more–creates a mystique that is just difficult to sustain once you are in their heads 24/7.
Nobody is that badass. Or if they are, it’s hard to see how they could provide a woman that HEA.
I think it is smart of Janet Evanovich to provide only glimpses of Ranger in her Stephanie Plum books. Cuz it is superfun to lust after Ranger the Larger-than-Life Mystery Badass. It would be a great deal less fun if a) I had access to him all the time and 2) he turns out to be just another man.
#29 by Wendy on November 2, 2009 - 8:40 pm
Quote
@BevBB
Well take heart Bev – you’re not alone. I heard from someone else recently who also couldn’t access my blog. Is getting same 501/505 error message as you. Honestly, I have no clue. I posted a query on the Blogger Help forum and so far? I’ve heard back ziltch.
It’s depressing.
And now I am done hijacking Jessica’s comments
#30 by BevBB on November 2, 2009 - 9:26 pm
Quote
Wow, that’s… encouraging? Weird, but somewhat reassuring, I guess. o.O (And I still think it has something to do with that other superlibrarian url. They’re just too close.)
Anyway, I lost your email when my computer crashed so could you please stop by my blog and leave a comment with your email address so I can at least email comments on posts back to you. That’s what’s really frustrating about not being able to get to the blog itself.
Now, I’m done, too.
#31 by SonomaLass on November 3, 2009 - 12:47 am
Quote
What Sherry said. Turning a secondary character into a primary character must be really difficult, all the more if he’s that “uber brother” figure (nice term!). I agree that Balogh managed it with Wulfric, and I mostly think Eloisa James managed it in her most recent series.
Glad you book mugged your stylist! My stylist book mugged me — I was a few minutes early and reading a book at her place a couple of years ago, and when she asked me about it, we had one of THOSE conversations. Now we trade book recommendations and even books occasionally.
I agree that some of these kerfuffles (yep, that’s a Scots word, definitely) are the same old song, different verse, and they get tiring to follow, because some people seem to have more energy than sense when it comes to expressing themselves or reaction to someone else’s words. I got worn down and gave up pretty early on most of these. I do think, though, that there are important ideas at the heart of many of the most recent tense discussions — I’ve been thinking about them, if not commenting, and I hope others are doing the same.
#32 by Meri on November 3, 2009 - 2:36 am
Quote
I was a frequent AAR poster but eventually lost interest and don’t participate there very often these days. Many of the more interesting people left the forum, I feel the forum is not moderated very well and the anti-blog stuff is tiring, especially as it’s usually accompanied by self-congratulatory “we’re so much better here! We allow disagreement” type statements (try disagreeing with that, BTW). AAR was the first romance website I found and in many ways it’s still a great resource. But I do find some of the management decisions baffling (scrapping the ATBF columns, the insular nature of AAR, the focus of the reviews), and to be honest, the atmosphere created by some of the more frequent posters on the forum means it’s just not a fun place to go.
Personally, if any of the blogs I read offered forums in addition to the other content, I’d be thrilled, and would probably leave AAR for good. Commenting on threads is great, and obviously can lead to very interesting discussions, but forums really complement this and allow the readers to bring up topics of interest that may not be related to the blog content. I know it’s a hassle but some blogs do offer this (my favorite food blog, Chocolate & Zucchini, has had forums for several years now). Since some of my favorite romance bloggers are represented here, I’ll take the opportunity to ask – any chance of this happening on your blog/website?
Also, everyone beat me to pointing out that Slightly Dangerous is fantastic, so I’ll just add my vote there.
#33 by Janine on November 3, 2009 - 2:37 am
Quote
Mary Jo Putney in her Fallen Angels series (which was instrumental in setting the related book series trend IMO). Michael’s books, Shattered Rainbows, was originally intended to be the last in the series and Putney set him up for this book beautifully and then delivered fully on the promise of this character. He was even better in his own book than in the earlier ones.
Of course, the series proved so popular that Putney then added two other books, River of Fire and One Perfect Rose, about characters who hadn’t appeared in most of the earlier books, but Michael was the built up character and Shattered Rainbows remains my favorite in the series (and my second favorite among her books).
The other “sort of” counterexample is Wulfric’s book, Slightly Dangerous, in Balogh’s Slightly series. I say “sort of” because my personal favorite book in the series was the first, Slightly Married (Aidan’s story), but Slightly Dangerous is most people’s favorite and a darned good book (my second fave in the series, out of six books). Wulfric was the mystery-shrouded head of the family and Balogh really did justice to him in this book.
#34 by Janine on November 3, 2009 - 3:20 am
Quote
At Dear Author we tried to set up a forum a couple of years ago, but most of the posters abandoned it after a couple of weeks. After a while, almost all the posts came from spammers, and since I kept having to delete these, I eventually begged Jane to close the place.
#35 by Marianne McA on November 3, 2009 - 4:01 am
Quote
Thanks jmc. *happy dances*
Jessica, I should apologise for using your blog as my personal ‘Ask Jeeves’ service. Sorry, that was rude.
As I said last time the AAR thing was mentioned, I like AAR, and post there all the time.
I think the AAR v. blogs things is your quintessential internet storm-in-a-teacup stuff. A couple of people who post there don’t like blogs. So what?
#36 by BevBB on November 3, 2009 - 8:19 am
Quote
I’ve been following that discussion on AAR in lurk mode so I do know what’s been said in it. If I honestly thought (felt?) that it was only a couple of people who post there that didn’t like blogs the point would be well taken.
However, I don’t believe anyone truly believes that’s the case. For one thing I’ve been around AAR and its forum for a long, long time. I’ve seen the comments about blogs and blogging. They are many and varied and most of them aren’t positive. Put it this way, show me glowing comments by longtime regulars at AAR about other sites – who don’t have their own sites off of AAR.
See that’s the kicker.
As to the forums thing, one of the reasons that the forum on AAR works so well is that it has been a relatively closed community for so long. For a long time, it was one of the only places for romance readers to go, the rules for the forum were strict and kept that way. This was good for keeping the forum strong and active.
There are other active forums in the community that basically exist for the same reason, if different focuses. You just have to look for them. And be willing to participate and follow their rules.
With forums, it’s always about the admins and how they do things.
#37 by Marianne McA on November 3, 2009 - 10:38 am
Quote
Here’s a thread that has lots of AAR regulars talking about whether they visit other sites or blogs.
(I don’t blog – I can’t know whether the other people who commented blog or not. )
http://www.likesbooks.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=4731&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=smart+bitches&start=0
My perception would be that the thread is, broadly speaking, positive towards other sites and blogs.
Would you read it differently?
(I don’t know why ‘Smart Bitches’ is whited out in my reply: I promise my sensibilities aren’t that tender.)
#38 by Carolyn Crane on November 3, 2009 - 10:41 am
Quote
@Marianne McA:
Did you say that ask Jeeves thing about your question about the cartoon? It seems like a good question to me. We should ask Meljean – it must still be up at her blog somewhere, so she’d know, or at least have a copy of it to put up. Perhaps I will investigate! Because now I sort of want to put up that cartoon on my monitor. I will report back. Somewhat, but not very, soon.
#39 by RStewie on November 3, 2009 - 12:47 pm
Quote
RE the Acheron Effect: I thought Linda Howard did well with her John Medina character in All the Queen’s Men. I, too, worry about Michael’s story in the Guardian series, although the lead-ins to it are beyond promising–I’m currently re-reading (on ebook…where is Demon Angel???) her series, and I am all aflutter (literally…my stomach is all knotty) whenever I think about where she’s taking her series. I could go on all day…
So far as DA’s unusually deep topics lately, I like it. I like that it’s not just about industry, but about the culture and psychology of the genre, as well. In particular, because of the myth that women (and men) that read Romance are dull-witted SAHM’s who eat bon-bons and cloak their “pr0n” habit in reading Romance novels. Some of us are SAHM’s and I DO love bon-bons, but a lot of us are professional women who have active lives and like intelligent discourse, as well as a hot romance featuring a hero with wings and women that kick ass (outside the board room…I’ve got that covered, TYVM).
#40 by Carolyn Crane on November 3, 2009 - 12:53 pm
Quote
Meljean provided a link to that cartoon –
http://xkcd.com/386/
Oh look, so it’s already there. Oops.
#41 by BevBB on November 3, 2009 - 1:25 pm
Quote
@Marianne McA:
I thought I remembered the thread you were talking about but just to make sure I went back and read through it again. What I see is a mixture positive and negative comments which is pretty typical of a long standing fairly tight community. Of even more interest is that most of the negative comments directed at other sites could probably have been used to describe AAR at one time or another – that other sites are clannish for one, that other sites deal in controversial topics for another – yet AAR is considered to be always courteous and respectful of opinions.
That’s typical fandom thought processes in action.
Seriously, I could go to any number of fandom forums on any number of topics/properties and literally lift similar comments from them. Simply replace names and places and you’d never know the difference.
So, yes and no. Yes, I see the positives but I also see the negatives and the bigger picture they make.
#42 by Marianne McA on November 3, 2009 - 5:38 pm
Quote
But that’s exactly what I see when I read the original thread Jessica linked to – a mixture of positive and negative comments which are pretty typical for that type of discussion.
I’ve huge respect for Jessica and Maili and Wendy and yourself, so if you all feel there’s an obvious anti-blog agenda on the boards, perhaps I’m missing something.
I just, seriously, don’t see it. It just looks like normal social interaction to me – yes, some people grouse about DA, some people grouse about Brockmann, some people grouse about historical accuracy, some people grouse about the use of ‘peak’ for ‘pique’.
Equally some people link to DA, fangirl Brockmann (that’d be me, pretty much), swear they enjoy wallpaper historicals – though I don’t think anyone has defended the use of ‘peak’ as yet.
It’s all just background noise, and not, the way I see it, cause for concern.
But I appreciate that others feel differently.
#43 by Marianne McA on November 3, 2009 - 5:42 pm
Quote
@ Carolyn.
Thanks for taking the time to look. I really appreciate it.
Marianne
#44 by Kaetrin on November 3, 2009 - 8:57 pm
Quote
See I really really loved Devilish. Am I the only one?
Rothgar is my favourite Jo Beverley character and I could eat him up with a spoon. I don’t know if it’s significant that I started at book 4 in the series, read book 5 (Devilish) and then went back and read all 5 in correct order. I found that I enjoyed Devilish even more after reading the 1st 3 books as well – I thought his character was richly drawn and Diana was perfect for him.
Clearly I’m in a minority but in my humble opinion, Devilish was the delicious top layer and the icing on a wonderful layered cake.
Just sayin’….
#45 by BevBB on November 3, 2009 - 8:59 pm
Quote
Actually, I’m not sure I’d call it an agenda so much as normal fan behavior, which was what I was trying to say before. If one really looks at the comments, there are people who say they only visit AAR, some who are venturing out to many other sites and then those who appear to notice other sites/blogs solely to critique their bad points and compare AAR favorably.
That last is the diehard fandom mentality, but again, it’s clearly not the thinking or behavior of every commentor there. Once it’s recognized for what it is, though, is it honestly a concious agenda or simply cheerleading for the fandom?
Because that’s what fans do. They root for the home team.
It’s usually only a problem when their territorial and protective tendencies are challenges by competing fandoms, though… that’s when the wars tend to start in earnest.
#46 by heidenkind on November 4, 2009 - 12:53 am
Quote
Ho-hum. Just another day in Romancelandia.
My stylist is usually the one who book mugs me. The last time I went, she convinced me I really needed to read The Pillars of the Earth (which she just happened to have in the salon–coincidence????). And the time before that, I was talking to some random person while waiting, and she gave me Katherine by Anya Seton. I was like, “I heard that’s a good book,” and she goes, “Oh, do you want it?” I have strange book experiences there.
#47 by Rebecca on November 4, 2009 - 9:04 am
Quote
@heidenkind:
Out of curiosity– did you read The Pillars of the Earth?
This is a book that has been recommended to me for, oh 5 years or more, but I’ve never started it. I have it. (My father might have given it to me one Christmas but I’m dawdling). Generally, the recommendation goes along the lines of: “You like medieval history? Have you read The Pillars of the Earth?” I don’t know why I’m so hesitant. Maybe because there’s so many romance novels I’d like to read?
.
Jessica- I understand the hair situation. I changed my hair style a few years ago, and that was only because I was growing out red dyed hair and refused to cut it short. There was a fun time when I looked very “futuristic” I’m told–my hair was half red, half brown. I eventually received “the cut no one has been able to duplicate.” I went to a stylist my best friend loved, told him to do whatever he wanted, but make it easy to care for and keep it long. It was perfect. No one has ever been able to replicate it, and how I’ve tried.
#48 by heidenkind on November 4, 2009 - 1:24 pm
Quote
@Rebecca: Haha! With me it was, “You like art history, you should read Pillars of the Earth.” Argh. *headwall*
Anyway, I haven’t read it yet, no. That is a loooooong book. I have heard a lot of good things about it, but like you anything non-romance is usually a hard sell for me.
#49 by Jessica on November 4, 2009 - 2:50 pm
Quote
@Marianne McA: I am sorry I missed this exchange, but I wanted to say that I appreciate the AAR blog and the reviews and other things the AAR site offers. I just mentioned AAR because it was one of the list of kerfuffles that had happened in recent times. I agree with Bev’s take as to the boards issue. FWIW.
I have not read Pillars of the Earth, and I would be lying if I said it was even in my TBB pile.