?

Log in

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Boy Fiction?

I usually make it a policy not to comment on reviews, especially negative reviewers. When you put your art out there in the marketplace on public view, some are going to like and some are going to hate it. Comes with the territory. And like Superchicken always said, I knew the job was dangerous when I took it.

Normally, I would not even comment on something as spectacularly wrong-headed and condescending as the review of the HBO series GAME OF THRONES recenltly published in the NEW YORK TIMES. There have been dozens and dozens of reviews of the show coming out all over the place, in newspaper and magazines, on television and radio, and of course on the web. Most, I am pleased to say, have been very good, but of course there are some bad ones as well. C'est la vie.

((Okay, I will confess, it does cheese me when I come across a reviewer who simply hates all fantasy. I had hoped that kind of literary snobbism was extinct, or nearly so. Maybe not.))

But the startling assertion in the TIMES review that women could not possibly like fantasy unless a lot of graphic sex was added to it (??) has prompted me to break my "no comment" rule. At least to extent of this post.

I see this morning that legions of female fantasy readers and self-proclaimed "geek girls" and "scifi chicks" have risen up all over the internet to say all the things that I'm too polite and too busy to say. And a lot more besides. I'd link to their blogs and posts here, but it would take hours. Google will lead you to them, if you're interested. It would seem that so many outraged emails and posts poured into the TIMES that they had to shut down the comments section for the review.

I am not going to get into it myself, except to say
(1) if I am writing "boy fiction," who are all those boys with breasts who keep turning up by the hundreds at my signings and readings?
and
(2) thank you, geek girls! I love you all.

Comments

daedalus2309
Apr. 16th, 2011 08:00 pm (UTC)
Don't worry too much. As articles go, its pretty poorly written if you actually dissect it. The author establishes little about the actual series except that:
1)There are many characters.
2)Seasons are long.
3)There's sex in it.

She has a problem with all these things without really establishing why. The author seems to forget that Rome and the Sopranos both had pretty graphic sex scenes themselves and a pretty large cast of characters (not as large as GoT, but you see my point). The review is poorly written, don't take it personally.

The author is simply condescending, which is the greatest mistake a writer of this type can make. She is clearly writing an article she has no interest in. Don't worry, the article's 1.5 star rating from paying subscribers will earn her an angry word or two from her editor.

Profile

Spain
grrm
George R.R. Martin
George R. R. Martin

Latest Month

July 2015
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Tags

Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner