CURSE THE DARK review

[lagilman]

from the ever-timely Chronicle:

"Gilman adds touches of quirky humor to the mix, which lightens the tone and makes the characters more believable and engaging. If you enjoy Charlaine Harris and the Anita Blake stories by Laurell Hamilton, you should like this series as well."


I am of mixed minds of this review. On the one hand, it's positive, and true, and whatnot. But it also carries that whiff of "if you must read that dreck, I guess you'll enjoy this dreck, too."

I have no shame in writing fun, commercial genre fiction. It takes people out of their occasionally painful or boring or otherwise not-wanting-to-be-there-right-now lives and lets them be Somewhere Else for the length of the story. If what I have to say in the undercurrents of that story carries through, sticks like a burr, and raises questions where before there had been none, hey, all th'much better. But be damned if I'm going to apologize for being an entertainer*. Especially to a genre-industry magazine!

Bah. I am "quirky...believable and engaging." So there.



*worse, an apparently, by their own admission, successful entertainer

Comments

[debg.livejournal.com]

Wait, wait, which Chronicle is this?

[burger-eater.livejournal.com]

I am honestly unsure what the reviewer thinks books *should* be, but I seek out and buy books for their entertainment value. There are other factors, sure, but "Is this going to be a page-turner?" is first and foremost.

I don't even have a painful/boring/whatever life (well, at the moment I do--Barney is singing a song about looking both ways before crossing the street). I just like fun stories.

Congrats on your review anyway. It names the virtue in your work. Even if the reviewer doesn't exactly exalt that virtue, their readers should recognize it.

[lagilman]

The skiffy Chronicle. Not the "real" one. *grin* Or so I'm presuming, since it was forwarded on to me by someone else in the field.

[debg.livejournal.com]

Huh. I think I'd just highlight the "quirky and engaging" bit. Has the absolute merit of being true.

I'm STILL trying to find someone, anyone, who can hook me up with my damned Booklist review.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

But it also carries that whiff of "if you must read that dreck, I guess you'll enjoy this dreck, too."

I disagree, sez the reviewer. There are plenty of times when I say "if you like X, you'll probably like this" because it's simply true. (I do keep waiting for someone to ding me on the fact that I'm often comparing books to TV shows, but that's another post.) The comparison is to get current readers/watchers to open their minds about a book they might not know about. Odds are exceptionally good that a sizable chunk of Chronicle readers like either Harris or Hamilton; he's practically ordered them to check you out.

On the other hand, odds are exceptionally bad that they'd have an anti-SF/F reviewer for an SF/F mag - (why, when everyone's a critic?) And there are ways of calling a genre and a book drek even in a tiny review, but I'm not seeing them here.

Unless, of course, you just resent being compared to Hamilton's Marysue That Ate Manhattan, which is a reasonable position to take.

[lagilman]

odds are exceptionally bad that they'd have an anti-SF/F reviewer for an SF/F mag


Actually, there is much odd self-hatred in the SF community, especially among the critics. And it's often directed exactly at commercial "girl cootie" fantasy (although I'm not sure this series qualified as girl cootie stuff, despite being a Luna title...).

Locus, especially, has been accused of that bias. There are valid arguments on both sides of the accusation/defense.

[rantmaster.livejournal.com]

I highly disagree with this synopsis.

I've never read Hamilton, but I have trusted friends who do, and they've decribed recent Anita Blake words as 'a whole chockful of fantasy porn with a smidgen of plot thrown in'. But Wren Valere is 'A whole chockful of nummy, delicious, engaging plot, with one particularly steamy sex scene thrown in'.

I know that your work is supposed to be a mix of romance and sci-fi, but I gotta say, it's a better mix than I've seen before. So don't let the reviewer get you down. Hell, if it gets you readers, can't help but be good, yeah?

[girasole.livejournal.com]

Maybe I can. I review for Booklist. What do you need?

[debg.livejournal.com]

WOOT! Suri, you don't mind, I hope? Slight tiny hijack for a desperate agent stablemate?

The 15 September Booklist, page 35: they reviewed my about to be released novel, "Matty Groves". NONE of my local libraries have it, and I'm putting together a PR package and I waaaaaaaaaaaaant it! Thankyouthankyou.

(returning suri to her regularly scheduled cool journal)

[neadods.livejournal.com]

I still don't see this review as a cootie one, though.

[girasole.livejournal.com]

Damn! I don't have it yet, either. Your libraries don't have it because perhaps it hasn't shipped yet? I will get it off to you as soon as I see it.
Will try to find an email for you ....

[girasole.livejournal.com]

For some review media, we are specifically asked to add a note that reads "if you like X, you will like Y." It's part of Readers Advisory in LibraryLand.

[debg.livejournal.com]

It's maddening. If I go to Booklist's online site, it lets me search. It then obligingly gives me the list of reviews, including that one.

But no livelink, damn it.

My email is sf_deb at yahoo dot com. MANY thanks!

[lagilman]

Hrmm. Except that it seems to be the entirety of the review, which was got my hackles up.

Anyone out there have an actual copy of Chronicle on-hand?

[lagilman]

I'm just kicking myself for not thinking of asking her in the first place...

[neadods.livejournal.com]

I hadn't looked at it that way - from that lens, yeah, you've got a point; it's less about YOUR book and more about pegging it into a generic hole.

[moschus.livejournal.com]

Amen.

My own genre novel BLOODANGEL (Roc) comes out within days, and I'm encountering the odd 'literary' friend who implies that I sold out in some way and now that I've 'broken in' perhaps I can possibly consider writing more 'substantial' fiction. (Because publishing works like that. Right.)

Thing is, the literary novel I wrote before this one was the book I wrote because -- fresh from academia -- I thought I ought to; if anything, I sold out with that one, even though my agent at the time could not sell it, and rightfully so.

*This* book is completely, honestly me, and I'm damn proud of it, and excited to be working in this genre that I should have been in all along.

[dianora2.livejournal.com]

Well, this is a magazine whose main reviewer reviews media tie-in novels after confessing he's never seen/played/experienced the media in question. Take the quotable stuff and ignore the rest.

[djonn]

It occurs to me that the reviewer may be thinking of the early Anita Blakes, before the descent into -- what was the term I heard at BEA? -- ah, yes, "romantica". I liked the early Blakes, too (reviewed the first for Dragon, back in the day), but stopped reading them after they began the spiral in That Direction.

Harris I haven't read, but have had one or two friends recommend at me.

[eeknight.livejournal.com]

Scans fine to me. Maybe a finer distinction between early Anita/later Anita could have been drawn, because you've got way more story than steam, but I'd have been thrilled with a review like this.

[lagilman]

The first four times I was compared to them (at least once by the same magazine) I was thrilled. And I'm still quite happy with the ka-ching! factor. But after a while it's like 'dude, talk about the good stuff you say in passing that you liked, not just the 'like other things on the market' line. Because then we're back to my original mixed reaction.

Is that being petty and whiny of me? Probably. Tough noogies, as my sister used to say. :-p

[eeknight.livejournal.com]

Do any of the reviews mention your magical schema? I think that's the coolest part of the series, because current's really useful in a lot of circumstances, unable to help at all in others, and hooked into Wren's mental state. Plus it's got a techno vibe.

[kateelliott.livejournal.com]

Wow. I so agree with this comment, and you phrased it in a particularly effective way ('odd self-hatred'). I think Luna titles have automatic girl cooties, btw, whatever the content of the individual series.

Had I worlds enough and time I would start and maintain a literary blog that discussed and reviewed all that commercial fantasy (a number of whose writers post here and elsewhere on lj) that is so often ignored or dismissed.

[lagilman]

Do any of the reviews mention your magical schema?

Only in passing, and only a few of them. Which always surprised me, as I thought it was kind of neat, myself. Well, I would, wouldn't I?