2 Transgressions Reviews

[erastes]

I found this review of Transgressions yesterday in The Stranger, Seattle

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/is-that-a-bellows-in-your-tunic/Content?oid=1634459

I found it very funny, actually. It's a shame that the "straight women for straight women" has lingered on, because the publishers dropped this from their promotion immediately realising their mistake (and especially that one of the next flush of books is written by a gay man..)

It also has the best, and funniest explanation for the English Civil War I've ever seen in my life. *guffaw*

I suppose the thing is, that here in gay romance land we forget that we are a tiny corner of fiction-world in general, and that even people - like the author of this review - who have heard of slash fiction haven't yet experienced much gay romance, if any.  We are such a tight-knit community, everyone knows everyone else just about that we are surprised when others haven't heard of it.  And yet they haven't - if I asked my next door neighbour if she knew about gay romance, she'd definitely say no!

And there's another really nice write up in The Sacramento News and Review

http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/content?oid=1002345

I like the way they point out that the adventure is as important as the romance, I know that's what Alex and I were aiming at.

If I have any complaint it's being called a "middle-aged straight woman"  *cries*  I don't have a straight bone in my body!

And "fairly accurate" history.  FAIRLY accurate??? *gives up*

only joking, though - it's wonderful to get this level of publicity!

Comments

[aigooism.livejournal.com]

*grins* The English Civil War comment is made of many wins. It certainly simplifies the matter at best!

ETA: The more I read the first review, the more I'm just puzzling over it's trying to say. From what I can read, it sounds like the reviewer . . . didn't exactly find the whole genre their cup of tea, which is okay since not everyone will float on the same ship. But if that's the case, and if you can't appreciate the genre, why bother write the review? It's like asking me to write a review about, oh, I don't know books on Scientology, which I have no interest and no knowledge in! But then again, that's me.

[queeredfiction.livejournal.com]

I read that review. I thought it was entertaining at times but clearly indicative of a reviewer given smoething they couldn't quite make head or tails out of. The second review isn't opening for me at the moment, will try again later. :)

[angelabenedetti.livejournal.com]

I got the impression that the first reviewer was extremely uncomfortable with the whole idea (maybe it was an assignment and not something she chose to write about?) and that, while she didn't want to openly pan it, neither was she comfortable having people think she was into it. It's like, "Hey, isn't this weird? It's kinda interesting but I'm totally not into it! Really! See me snark and wax sarcastic! Mockety-mock! See?! Not my thing at all, everyone gets that, right? Right??" [eyeroll]

I'll grant you that at this point, any publicity is probably good, but I found that write-up in particular actually offensive. YMMV.

The second one was definitely better. A couple of clunkers, sure, but generally a positive treatment without the snark-fest of the first.

Angie

[tammylee.livejournal.com]

w00t for exposure!
Even if there is fail in it.

[erastes.livejournal.com]

It is a little offensive to the genre - but to be honest some of the critique is well-placed - Transgressions is a little purple in spots (it was a lot more but the editor toned it down to a light lavender) and there are weeping cocks (although not on every page)!

You do find this mockity mock style all over the place, and some "well known" romance reviewers have made their name on it. I don't like it, mainly because it gives the impression that the reviewer thinks that THEIR writing is actually more important than anything they are reviewing. You'd see it a lot in fandom, the snarkers always had huge flists - look at Fandom Wank, for example!

But still, my experience has been that even with a mocking review, it will garner more sales than expected because someone will always say "oo - actually that sounds right up my street!"

[erastes.livejournal.com]

Thanks! :)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

The second review is pretty image heavy so that might be the problem.

:)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

"No you didn't, Cromwell..."

*guffaw* I love it!

[chris-smith-atr.livejournal.com]

RICKETS! YAY! (AND CONGRATS)

[kittymay.livejournal.com]

Yeah. You straight person, you ; )) *sneers theatrically*

Congrats on the good reviews. Well deserved.

[sleveen.livejournal.com]

when Oliver Cromwell was all, "Parliament! Blah blah blah!"

ROTFL!!!! But an odd review, that first one...not sure if she (?) liked it or hated it...

OTOH, it's fabutastic that you are getting reviewed so far and wide! HUZZAH! :)

[crawling-angel.livejournal.com]

HandybendyErastes! (Can't remember where HandybendyGhandi is from...eyes has cooooooold *sneeze* and ma head hurtz *pout*)

Weeees for reviews. \o/

[antychan.livejournal.com]

I don't like it, mainly because it gives the impression that the reviewer thinks that THEIR writing is actually more important than anything they are reviewing.

Let me share this great quote with you (by the genius Unknown): "Critics are like eunuchs - they know how to do something but they're unable to."

Whenever I review something, I try to do it from the POV of a pleased or displeased reader or audience member and try to be of service to other people so they can decide if something is for them. What gets on my nerves is when the critic suggests they could do it better...why are you a critic instead of a creator? Why are you looking at this stuff when you despise it so?

Having said that: Would you be interested in doing a guest review for my site? Maybe of "The Merchant of Venice"? XD

[erastes.livejournal.com]

Ooo - yes, I'd love to do a review! I'll have to rewatch the film though...

[erastes.livejournal.com]

*gives you medication*

[erastes.livejournal.com]

I'm pleased to see the reviews trickling in, the publisher sent out hundreds of copies!

:)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

I know. it's almost an insult!

:)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

Bendy me!

[sleveen.livejournal.com]

That is brilliant - I think it's fantastic that you are getting reviewed all over the place. I hope it continues and that it snowballs! :)

[lilian-cho.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't put anything past nerd-women who go to conventions and rub magical wizard staffs on each others' lady areas.

AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

I think...she doesn't like it(?) but she's trying to say something positive about it? Or alternately, she sekkritly likes it but does all sorts of hand-waves to indicate that she doesn't =P

Eh. I think it's just The Stranger style to be all over the place.


The second review's really nice =)

[falconer007.livejournal.com]

I'm with aigooism. While I'm thinking that a good story should be able to go beyond the "genre" and the "community" so that other people not familiar with them can appreciate it one some level or other, if the subject matter makes you uncomfortable (as the reviewer said in the very first paragraph), then why bother reading and reviewing it at all?

Gay dudes make her uncomfortable, and yet she's reading a book that's clearly advertised as a M/M Romance. Like, (weeping cocks aside) when she's talking about writing sex in a so-called "unsexy way", she mentions that the entrance is also an exit (the horror!). Well, if that's unsexy to you, you shouldn't be reading a gay romance. Duh!

[alex-beecroft.livejournal.com]

The first one is odd, but funny. It reads like she's utterly bemused - and it really isn't her thing - but she's willing to believe it might be the thing of other people :) Kind of "bizarre, but I'm intrigued". I wouldn't be surprised if she suddenly had the urge to read it again in a week or so, and then started looking out for more. But even if she doesn't, if that article was my first ever encounter with the idea of m/m fiction, I'd still be going "whoa, I don't know what she's on, but that sounds great to me!"

[mzcalypso.livejournal.com]

Well, The Stranger has Dan Savage, and then it's got that wanky little beyotch.

Bet she tried to write m/m and couldn't find a publisher.

[antychan.livejournal.com]

Ohh, awesome! I think we talked here (http://erastes.livejournal.com/286398.html) for the first time, so that was the movie that popped into my head. But any other is fine, too...basically, I've decided to accept guest reviews. And since I know you can write, I'd be thrilled if you wanted to do one. =)