291 replies to this topic

[Datepalm]

Seli, on 21 December 2011 - 05:00 PM, said:

Who are the genre writers that do well at depicting LGBT characters, and use them properly as well? The examples I can think of right now of can mostly use personal experience. Caitlín Kiernan (Red Tree, Silk), Hal Duncan (Vellum, which as far as I can remember has characters as sexualized as TSR). edit: Poppy Z. Brite (also in the genre works?)

I quite enjoyed Geoff Rymans Lust, which is squarely about a gay man's sex/love life, but I don't think was A Novel About A Gay Person. The main character sexuality was vastly important in his life, both as a personal quality and as being a member of a community, but it wasn't his single defining trait or something.

SkynJay, on 21 December 2011 - 05:03 PM, said:

And a character I would like to here some thoughts on is Ruby from the last Cherie Priest novel.  Done well or just thrown in?

Ah. Ruby. I've been wanting to talk about that.

Spoiler

I thought it was gratuitous, the 'reveal' coming at the very end and having absoloutely no consequences. If she'd just been presented as a transsexual from the beginning/middle of the book, and thats it - no plot purpose, no particular character arc, etc - i'd be totally onboard as just a case of historical realism. But after reading a whole book where theres no indication that she's not a woman, the big reveal - with no purpose except to reveal that this person is a transsexual, woah! - at the very end felt cheap. As the matter stands, I actually haven't read a book with a transsexual character - i've read about a chapter.

[Verboten]

Seli to answer your question I cannot think of many gay characters done right off the top of my head. Perhaps I've not read enough books with gay characters in them. Okay I'm a comic book geek so I'm going to say Renee Montoya, Kate Kane, Midnighter and Apollo (The only writers who ever worked on the Authority are Warren Ellis and Dan Abnett THE END) are the best generally speaking. Geoff Ryman is really good at writing gay characters, as is Ursula K. Le Guin (who is awesome) and Cathrynne Valente is not well known but is still very very good at gay characters as well, especially lesbians. I'll try and think of more.

[Myshkin]

Verboten, on 21 December 2011 - 04:25 PM, said:

My problem's with the Steel Remains without any spoilers? Mainly the way that Ringil constantly mentions that HE'S GAY and SUCKS COCKS every other page. Straight people don't sit around thinking about their sexuality all of the time and once I got somewhat comfortable with who I am I don't either. It's a part of me and it will always be there. Mentioning it all of th time seems like a cheap way to tell the readers he's gay instead of showing it and it seems like someone trying to oversell it to makes themselves seem open-minded (you have no idea how annoying it is to be constantly reassured that someone who obviously is uncomfortable around doesn't CARE about your sexuality or how refreshing it is to meet those people who genuinely don't think or act like it matters) and quite frankly seems a bit ridiculous. I love the fact that a gay male character even exists at all but the execution leaves something to be desired.

This.  It felt to me like Morgan was using Ringil's sexuality for nothing more than supposed shock value.  And it wasn't limited to character sexuality; it seemed that the entire novel was built around shock value.  You could see the hand of the author while reading (never a good thing).  I could just envision Morgan typing away, thinking "oh yeah, this will sure shock my sheltered readers!".  It seems to me that this is just the type of author Morgan is (though I've only read the one novel and a few articles by him).  As a reader I'm actually kind of insulted that Morgan would think I could be fooled into believing shock value equals important themes.

[SkynJay]

Datepalm, on 21 December 2011 - 05:25 PM, said:

Ah. Ruby. I've been wanting to talk about that.

Spoiler

I thought it was gratuitous, the 'reveal' coming at the very end and having absoloutely no consequences. If she'd just been presented as a transsexual from the beginning/middle of the book, and thats it - no plot purpose, no particular character arc, etc - i'd be totally onboard as just a case of historical realism. But after reading a whole book where theres no indication that she's not a woman, the big reveal - with no purpose except to reveal that this person is a transsexual, woah! - at the very end felt cheap. As the matter stands, I actually haven't read a book with a transsexual character - i've read about a chapter.

So more of a Dumbledore type thing?  I think that is fair.  On one hand we have a competent character who (George Carlin, prepare to start spinning in that grave) "happens to be ......"  On the other, who cares, nothing to do with the story.  I kind of wonder if Priest had more in mind, and ended up with an Afterword and not much else.

[TerraPrime]

Storm Constantine is not bad, though she does fall victim, at times, to wanting to turn the gay male characters effeminate. But her wraeththu series was a pretty interesting examination of gender roles.

Surprisingly, Gabaldon's spin-off short stories featuring Lord John Gray are also quite readable. It actually was what redeems her, in my eyes, after the debacle that is "Outlander," which featured not 1, but 2, villains who're gay and who like to rape men and boys.

LeGuin goes without saying.

Diane Duane also produced some good stuff, in both her Doors trilogy and in her "So you want to be a wizard" series.

If you want your gay characters more on the moping and cliche side, you can always go for "The Last Herald Mage" Mercedes Lackey.

I looked but I can't find it, but I used to have a list of novels that actually feature lesbian characters in a positive way. Argh. Lost it in between computer transfers, it seems.

[Seli]

Datepalm, on 21 December 2011 - 05:25 PM, said:

I quite enjoyed Geoff Rymans Lust, which is squarely about a gay man's sex/love life, but I don't think was A Novel About A Gay Person. The main character sexuality was vastly important in his life, both as a personal quality and as being a member of a community, but it wasn't his single defining trait or something.

...

Which is arguably the best way to actually handle sexuality.

[Grack21]

Ok.

Don;t know fi I was modded or the internet ate it.

I'll tone it down.

I do not like Monette's writing. Her portrayals of LGBT seems to be there purely for...not shock value nesecarry...but they are not used well, IMO.

[kalbear]

Verboten covered my view pretty well. I got the external dialog. I didn't get the constant thinking about fucking all the time. It felt forced and plastic.

I thought Ellis did great with midnighter and Apollo. I thought Clive barker did well several times. I was mostly okay with mieville. I thought cnaiur was decently done too; he at least isn't thinking of fucking or sucking dick every three seconds.

[Contrarius]

Kalbear, on 21 December 2011 - 07:51 PM, said:

Verboten covered my view pretty well. I got the external dialog. I didn't get the constant thinking about fucking all the time. It felt forced and plastic.

So.....you accuse Morgan of being anti-LGBT, just because you think his character is too horny?

[kalbear]

Actually, since I know you love being pedantic, I asked if stating that I think he's not pro lgbt and telling others to avoid him was censorship.

I never stated that I thought he was anything.

Doesn't that make you happy?

For the record, having a gay main character who only thinks about killing and fucking is a bit close to the rampant gay horny stereotype, but at the end of the day it's not too horrible. I just thought TSR wasn't that great of a book and that it's not worth reading.

Now, is that more or less censorship?

[kalbear]

If you like you can phrase it like this, contrarius: I don't think rkm SHOULD write any more fantasy novels because they aren't very good. I think rkm SHOULD stick with kovacks novels because at least they're more entertaining. I don't think he SHOULD write more gay characters because he writes with zero subtlety or understanding.

Censorship?

[Contrarius]

Kalbear, on 21 December 2011 - 08:17 PM, said:

Actually, since I know you love being pedantic, I asked if stating that I think he's not pro lgbt and telling others to avoid him was censorship.

Nope.

What you said was: "Similarly, the comments by Richard Morgan have made me fairly unlikely to buy more of his books, and I'll recommend to other friends of mine that he writes things that are not very LGBT friendly (or are outright hostile) and tend to be pretty sexist in tone, and the money should be spent elsewhere."

How is TSR either hostile to the LGBT community, or sexist?

Quote

For the record, having a gay main character who only thinks about killing and fucking is a bit close to the rampant gay horny stereotype

We get depictions of straight horny killing machines all the time. Why should a gay guy be treated any differently?

(edited 'cause I forgot to respond to the second comment!)

Edited by Contrarius, 21 December 2011 - 09:15 PM.

[Shryke]

TerraPrime, on 21 December 2011 - 05:44 PM, said:

Diane Duane also produced some good stuff, in both her Doors trilogy and in her "So you want to be a wizard" series.

Wait, who turned out gay in that series?


Also, I liked Cnauir. Poor crazy son of a bitch.

[kalbear]

Actually, contarius, both were compound hypotheticals made clear in the next paragraph.

Just so we are clear.

Market forces had at least one bashing, iirc. All of the kovacks novels have no hint of gayness unless it's hot lesbianism. He's definitely more sexist than homosexual bashing, but the comment was made largely tongue in cheek. If you like I'll just make the exact same comment about OSC who has openly bashed gays in his writings as the same thing.  Would that be censorship? Or is censorship only critical of things you enjoy?

Also, way to dodge more direct questions! I'll now assume that if you don't actually answer something it's because you agree with whatever I choose to think you agree P with. For instance, it's only censorship if you don't agree with the criticism and only when they use the second
Person genitive tense. Ok? Good .

[Sci-2]

Quote

Also, I liked Cnauir. Poor crazy son of a bitch.

Yeah, I liked Cnauir as well. I think he was a character that served as a powerful narrative vehicle through examination of patriarchy and masculinity. In some ways he reminded me of Omar from the Wire, though Omar had a more direct RL setting and was not as volatile though possibly just as embedded in a psychological chain of violence.

ETA: I've been curious about the reality of being gay in the inner city, and how Omar's experiences reflected that. I remember a lesbian couple while I was an Americorps member in Southeast DC, and for the most part it seemed people just left them alone.

Edited by sciborg2, 21 December 2011 - 10:10 PM.

[Shryke]

sciborg2, on 21 December 2011 - 10:08 PM, said:

Yeah, I liked Cnauir as well. I think he was a character that served as a powerful narrative vehicle through examination of patriarchy and masculinity. In some ways he reminded me of Omar from the Wire, though Omar had a more direct RL setting and was not as volatile though possibly just as embedded in a psychological chain of violence.

ETA: I've been curious about the reality of being gay in the inner city, and how Omar's experiences reflected that. I remember a lesbian couple while I was an Americorps member in Southeast DC, and for the most part it seemed people just left them alone.

It would be interesting to know.

I could see the anti-gay slurs thrown his way being more a result of them hating him for robbing them and the gay angle was just a convenient line of attack.

[Twelve Angry Nonmen]

Omar was the coolest man who ever did live.

[Sci-2]

Quote

I could see the anti-gay slurs thrown his way being more a result of them hating him for robbing them and the gay angle was just a convenient line of attack.

I think that was part of it, but I think there was an issue in that Omar was a known homosexual and thus supposed to be less manly than they were. Note Avon and Marlo had this problem with him, that him stealing from them made them less masculine.

Stringer and Prop Joe, who were possibly if not definitely homophobic, but also less invested in the macho-man trope, were more concerned about money.

[Shryke]

sciborg2, on 22 December 2011 - 12:12 AM, said:

I think that was part of it, but I think there was an issue in that Omar was a known homosexual and thus supposed to be less manly than they were. Note Avon and Marlo had this problem with him, that him stealing from them made them less masculine.

Stringer and Prop Joe, who were possibly if not definitely homophobic, but also less invested in the macho-man trope, were more concerned about money.

Good point. I hadn't considered the macho-nature of the culture in question.

[kalbear]

Omar was a great, great character and a really great representation of what  a homosexual character can be. It just is one small facet of who he is; it defines him about as much as his addiction to smoking defines him. It does affect his life, but not ridiculously so. It is neither overt nor covert.

Put it another way: the description above of Omar ("

Omar was the coolest man who ever did live. ") requires zero knowledge of him being gay and has nothing to do with him being gay. And that's about as great of a view of a LGBT character as can be, I think.