![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ironymaidennegativity and criticism keep popping up. i remember that when my brother was on the school board, one of the things that they were trying to strengthen in the curriculum was critical thinking. so often i find myself primed to find flaws, as if life was an adversary's proof. i resist being the detached observer, but deconstruction is the unfortunate side effect of modern education.
I got some books out of the fancy new library. i finally picked up The Crystal City and confirmed my fear...Card has lost me. i haven't been able to get into it. i think i've traced it to the apparent abandonment of folk magic and American mythology for Alvin's familial power struggles. meh to that.
i've torn through the monumental Palomar Love & Rockets collection (well, not like there was a lot of text, but it's a mighty big comic book). i liked it (thanks, M&C), but it returns me to the problem that reading those stories in tiny installments would drive me mad.
after reading a bit in Legends II, i decided to look into Outlander, which i had mysteriously never heard of before. every copy was out of the library, and since we were killing some time at Barnes and Noble between engagements last week, i decided to buy some books.
i didn't know Outlander because it comes from the Romance section, which i pass through less often than the one with all the bibles. it's hard for me to explain. i love to read sex scenes, and i certainly revel in exotic locales. i find things that are stereotypically girly distasteful. romance novels, and their more upscale cousins (like the Ya Yas or Bridget Jones) are the pink of my literary world...like requiring an escort to the toilet, or lipstick for buying groceries, or Orlando Bloom lust.
well, i read it all, relatively slowly for me, but still under a week. and i really enjoyed it, but i remain disturbed by the issues/implications/POV. first, it's a time travel story, and by the hoary device of the circle of stones on a major holiday. and of course, she leaves her bookish professor husband and gets thrown together with Mr Hot Highlander. oh, and there is also her husband's ancestor, who looks just-like-him-only-in-perfect-shape-with-long-hair BUT EVIL. so she ends up married to Jamie the Hot Highlander totally guilt free because she's stuck and she isn't married to someone else for 200 years. and there's a deal of random peril, a Loch Ness monster, witchcraft, and even some BDSM man on man action with Jamie and the evil husband doppleganger. plus there was a lot of violent, crockery throwing arguments leading to sex. and wild animal attacks. i wasn't happy with a recurring theme of anal rape and evil homosexuals running under it all.
i find myself deconstructing the elements of the story and wondering if the PhD author planned it that way. i think the only fantasy she didn't hit was a three-way with the two husbands. i was certainly propelled along, and found myself puzzling about what i would do in said situations. i like to think that i would be a bit more upset about losing husband #1 and focused on getting back home, but being surrounded by men clad in traditional plaid is kind of a wet dream. with lice and fleas. what Gabaldon does do well, is to articulate the complexity of relationships, and provide motivation for the villains that moves us. the pleasures of starry skies, hard work, hot baths, and family are familiar, sweet, but never cloying.
sometimes i think that i've lost something in being unable to enjoy art at face value. but i also feel the wonder of understanding when work is beyond good, when i can be rocked not just by the gestalt, but by the craft behind it. i haven't felt it just lately, but i'm ready.
I got some books out of the fancy new library. i finally picked up The Crystal City and confirmed my fear...Card has lost me. i haven't been able to get into it. i think i've traced it to the apparent abandonment of folk magic and American mythology for Alvin's familial power struggles. meh to that.
i've torn through the monumental Palomar Love & Rockets collection (well, not like there was a lot of text, but it's a mighty big comic book). i liked it (thanks, M&C), but it returns me to the problem that reading those stories in tiny installments would drive me mad.
after reading a bit in Legends II, i decided to look into Outlander, which i had mysteriously never heard of before. every copy was out of the library, and since we were killing some time at Barnes and Noble between engagements last week, i decided to buy some books.
i didn't know Outlander because it comes from the Romance section, which i pass through less often than the one with all the bibles. it's hard for me to explain. i love to read sex scenes, and i certainly revel in exotic locales. i find things that are stereotypically girly distasteful. romance novels, and their more upscale cousins (like the Ya Yas or Bridget Jones) are the pink of my literary world...like requiring an escort to the toilet, or lipstick for buying groceries, or Orlando Bloom lust.
well, i read it all, relatively slowly for me, but still under a week. and i really enjoyed it, but i remain disturbed by the issues/implications/POV. first, it's a time travel story, and by the hoary device of the circle of stones on a major holiday. and of course, she leaves her bookish professor husband and gets thrown together with Mr Hot Highlander. oh, and there is also her husband's ancestor, who looks just-like-him-only-in-perfect-shape-with-long-hair BUT EVIL. so she ends up married to Jamie the Hot Highlander totally guilt free because she's stuck and she isn't married to someone else for 200 years. and there's a deal of random peril, a Loch Ness monster, witchcraft, and even some BDSM man on man action with Jamie and the evil husband doppleganger. plus there was a lot of violent, crockery throwing arguments leading to sex. and wild animal attacks. i wasn't happy with a recurring theme of anal rape and evil homosexuals running under it all.
i find myself deconstructing the elements of the story and wondering if the PhD author planned it that way. i think the only fantasy she didn't hit was a three-way with the two husbands. i was certainly propelled along, and found myself puzzling about what i would do in said situations. i like to think that i would be a bit more upset about losing husband #1 and focused on getting back home, but being surrounded by men clad in traditional plaid is kind of a wet dream. with lice and fleas. what Gabaldon does do well, is to articulate the complexity of relationships, and provide motivation for the villains that moves us. the pleasures of starry skies, hard work, hot baths, and family are familiar, sweet, but never cloying.
sometimes i think that i've lost something in being unable to enjoy art at face value. but i also feel the wonder of understanding when work is beyond good, when i can be rocked not just by the gestalt, but by the craft behind it. i haven't felt it just lately, but i'm ready.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-06-04 06:26 am (UTC)Outlander
Date: 2004-06-05 08:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-04 07:49 am (UTC)Also, at least in my limited experience, you can recover from a period of acute critical reading and just enjoy the potboilers again. Of course, usually you need something to distract you from the genre. For instance, the mysteries of Arturo Perez-Reverte transcend the American thrillers to which they owe so much in part because he executes them very well but also because you experience them through the filter of a foreign culture. That's not to say you won't sometimes groan at a heavy-handed instance of foreshadowing or a stereotypical character, but gosh, they're well done. You and C should read The Club Dumas or The Fencing Master. I'm about to lend the latter to another film friend, but I can put the former in the bag for tomorrow, if you like.
more books to read
Date: 2004-06-05 08:49 am (UTC)