291 replies to this topic

[Grack21]

Myshkin, on 23 December 2011 - 01:20 AM, said:

First of all, did I misread the book?  Is Ringil a 14 year old just hitting puberty?  For some reason I thought he was an adult.

Secondly, that is exactly what I'm saying.  It's fun and funny to say that young men think about sex all the time.  It however is simply not true.  I recently turned 30, and thus am not far removed from the halcyon days of my hormonal youth.  When I was a teenager I thought about sex a lot.  I also thought about baseball a lot.  I thought about smoking weed and where I was gunna get the money to buy booze and smokes a lot.  When I was in my early to mid twenties I thought about sex a lot.  I also thought about work a lot (I even dreamed about it, fucking horrible job).  I thought about literature a lot.  I thought about my future a lot.  At no point in my life has the pursuit of sex dominated or defined me as a person.

And finally, I'm not saying that Ringil thought about sex all the time, nor am I saying that he was a particularly bad character; I'm saying that his sexuality seemed forced, and had little purpose other than shock value.

ah, I have't actually read TSR yet. All I'm saying is that young men who think about sex a lot do exist. Are there even some where that's all they think about? Sure. I know grown ups like that. Heck it doesn't have to be young men either, I've known women completely and totally obsessed with sex.

Hmmm, now I'm getting into sex addict territory. I must think more.

[nickg]

<p>

Datepalm, on 23 December 2011 - 01:28 AM, said:

I quite liked her (from God's War at least. I need to get around to reading Infidel but my brain has been on hiatus this week) but she might have been somewhat gratuitously bi-sexual, along with the rest of that society. It made sense as I was reading, I think, since it's convincingly evoked, but looking back....hmm, not sure. I guess the main thing I can toss at that book in terms of GLBT portrayal is that it does very little to engage with contemporary GLBT issues, nesting them into a wider theme of gender polarity and lack thereof instead. Which i'm not sure is a bad thing.

How about Jo Waltons Farthing for nonsensical gratuitous gayness?
minor

Spoiler

Everyone in a cosy country-house murder mystery turns out to just so happen to be bisexual? Complete with twee categorizations based on ancient greeks to give the 50's characters the relevant vocabulary?

Basically sums up my thoughts, only much more eloquently than I could manage. It might have been a tad gratuitous, but I don't think it went overboard. There is at least some reasoning and justification on why their culture is the way it is.Infidel is even better by the way

Edited by nickg, 23 December 2011 - 01:47 AM.

[Galactus]

Quote

He does a fairly okay job in making homosexuality shunned but not actively persecuted;

Someone actually pointed this out: Homosexuality has been illegal since the 1500's in Sweden. (before that it was only illegal to call someone a homosexual...) punishable by death. But the number of cases can be counted on your fingers, and many of them didn't go through with the death-sentence. It's fairly interesting considering we have hundreds, if not thousands, of cases of people being executed for beastiality...

[Nukelavee]

By integral to the plot, Shryke, I mean, is there any point to having numerous scenes revolving around fucking?  Or is it just a way to fill pages, or a cheap way to have a gay character?

Sure, young males think about sex a lot...but it would be pretty boring to write about that, or read it.  Or to take it seriously- there's a fine line between being edgy or real, and coming across like Jay and Silent Bob.

Like I said - Lynx, in Bad Voltage, is a fairly good LGBT character.  It's also a damn slick cyberpunk novel, if you can find it.  I mean, Jim Carrol, Coltrane, Johnny Rotten and Duchamp as plot devices?

[SkynJay]

Just started Spirit Gate by Kate Elliot.  Early scene had two men walking down a town's street, joking with each other.  One man looking at the young ladies, one at the young men.  Not sure if either are really main characters yet, as I think I have met twenty people in this book so far.  But a case of homosexuality just being, not being used in the story.  Probably wouldn't have thought about the scene at all if it were not for this thread.

[sologdin]

not thousands, of cases of people being executed for beastiality...

gah.  what, incidentally, are the animals whose interests are protected by these executions?

[Richard]

@ Myshkin

Quote

Whether or not Ringil's sexuality was conceived for its shock value is beside the point; I felt it was used for its shock value.

Dunno - maybe you're just easily shocked.

[Galactus]

sologdin, on 23 December 2011 - 12:00 PM, said:

not thousands, of cases of people being executed for beastiality...

gah.  what, incidentally, are the animals whose interests are protected by these executions?

It was a violation of God's Law.

It actually seems that most (if not all of course) of the cases were examples of sucidial crimes: Just killing yourself wasn't OK, since you'd end up in Hell, but if you committed a capital crime you'd be allowed to confess your sins and still be buried on hallowed ground.

There are similar cases of men being convicted for having sex with the Lady Of The Forests (a kind of fairy, sort of) by the way.

EDIT: The swedish legal system in the 1600's was... Weird to say the list, between the reformation and 1721 there was a huge gap in the law, since canonical law was out (that had regulated all sorts of things) and there was no equivalent secular law. As a stopgap measure they actually inserted pieces of the OT into the law books.

Which lead to the situation of a bunch of people being routinely sentenced to death for things like not showing respect to their parents and just as routinely having their sentences reduced or ignored by an appelate court.

Edited by Galactus, 23 December 2011 - 01:53 PM.

[Myshkin]

Richard, on 23 December 2011 - 01:27 PM, said:

@ Myshkin



Dunno - maybe you're just easily shocked.

I like to think I'm not, but you never know.  I usually end up overstating my point in these types of threads, so let me be clear: 1) It wasn't Ringil's character alone that lead me to the conclusion about shock value.  I think the excessive use of certain words was more indicative of shock for shock's sake in the novel.  People who know me on this board know that I'm no fucking prude, but to me the book read as if you had a quota of "fucks" to fill, and at times it felt like you would write a paragraph then go back and randomly insert the proper amount of fucks to total word count to meet the quota.  It's not "fuck" that bothered me, it was the way it interrupted the flow of the narrative.  And 2) I did actually like the book, enough so that I will read the sequel, I just had a few problems with it.

[Axiomatic]

You know, I used to think that Ringil's character was oversexed, but then I realized that no, he actually wasn't. What Morgan actually did was make him exactly as sexual as any of the heterosexual characters in his previous novels. Ringil has the same amount of sex per novel as Takeshi Kovacs, and we get the same, ah, kind of unromantic descriptions - euphemism-laden romance is just not in the cards. It's just that, since Kovacs is straight, nobody makes a big deal about it, because it's not considered remarkable for a straight male character to indulge in heterosex "onscreen", if you take my meaning.

People just not, tick off one of the wish fulfilment boxes on a list, and move on, satisfied.

Ringil, being gay, provokes a different reaction in the reader despite engaging in the same actions, described in very similar ways.

[kalbear]

I think I mentioned as much earlier. That's just Morgan's characters. It just didn't ring true to me, but none of his do.

That said, it felt extra forced here.

[polishgenius]

Myshkin, on 23 December 2011 - 04:44 PM, said:

I like to think I'm not, but you never know.  I usually end up overstating my point in these types of threads, so let me be clear: 1) It wasn't Ringil's character alone that lead me to the conclusion about shock value.  I think the excessive use of certain words was more indicative of shock for shock's sake in the novel.  People who know me on this board know that I'm no fucking prude, but to me the book read as if you had a quota of "fucks" to fill, and at times it felt like you would write a paragraph then go back and randomly insert the proper amount of fucks to total word count to meet the quota.  It's not "fuck" that bothered me, it was the way it interrupted the flow of the narrative.  And 2) I did actually like the book, enough so that I will read the sequel, I just had a few problems with it.

When it comes to the swearing, I don't think it's to do with deliberate overuse for shock value. I think we just use fuck a lot more more over this side of the pond when we get going. I've seen the same criticism of China Mieville (and I'm pretty sure other authors, though I can't think who off the top of my head) and it's only ever been from Americans and Canadians. I can honestly say I never noticed and neither did anyone else I know from the UK who read the books in question.

Mind you, I didn't notice that they swear excessively in Deadwood till someone pointed it out.


And yeah, I agree with Axiomatic and Kalbear. The sex and sexuality has always been OTT. I reread Altered Carbon fairly recently and blimey, Kovacs doesn't half spend a lot of time hiding a semi.

Edited by polishgenius, 23 December 2011 - 08:43 PM.

[nickg]

Excessive swearing doesn't bother me because I swear excessively its pointed out to me pretty often

[peterbound]

polishgenius, on 23 December 2011 - 08:40 PM, said:

When it comes to the swearing, I don't think it's to do with deliberate overuse for shock value. I think we just use fuck a lot more more over this side of the pond when we get going. I've seen the same criticism of China Mieville (and I'm pretty sure other authors, though I can't think who off the top of my head) and it's only ever been from Americans and Canadians. I can honestly say I never noticed and neither did anyone else I know from the UK who read the books in question.

Mind you, I didn't notice that they swear excessively in Deadwood till someone pointed it out.


And yeah, I agree with Axiomatic and Kalbear. The sex and sexuality has always been OTT. I reread Altered Carbon fairly recently and blimey, Kovacs doesn't half spend a lot of time hiding a semi.

Having lived on both sides of the 'pond' I can say with confidence that there is little difference in the use of fuck between the americans and brits.  You guys tend to say cunt a lot more though.

[nickg]

peterbound, on 23 December 2011 - 09:00 PM, said:

Having lived on both sides of the 'pond' I can say with confidence that there is little difference in the use of fuck between the americans and brits.  You guys tend to say cunt a lot more though.

Yeah, dont hear that one much. Tbh, I don't know the last time i used it. But i did just say fuck twice in the conversation i ust had with a coworker. We didnt talk for long eirher

[Myshkin]

polishgenius, on 23 December 2011 - 08:40 PM, said:

When it comes to the swearing, I don't think it's to do with deliberate overuse for shock value. I think we just use fuck a lot more more over this side of the pond when we get going. I've seen the same criticism of China Mieville (and I'm pretty sure other authors, though I can't think who off the top of my head) and it's only ever been from Americans and Canadians. I can honestly say I never noticed and neither did anyone else I know from the UK who read the books in question.

Mind you, I didn't notice that they swear excessively in Deadwood till someone pointed it out.

Just to be absolutely clear, I have no problem with swearing.  I swear a whole fucking bunch, my friends swear a bunch, I could give a shit about swearing.  I just thought it sounded forced in TSR, and made the prose somewhat choppy.  As for Mieville, I have plenty of problems with his writing, but swearing isn't one of them.

Now to illustrate I will rewrite this post in a style parodying TSR:

Just to be absolutely fucking clear, I have no fucking problem with fucking swearing.  I swear a whole fucking bunch, my fucking friends swear a fucking bunch, I could give a fucking shit about fucking swearing.  I just fucking thought it sounded fucking forced in TSR, and made the fucking prose somewhat fucking choppy.  As for fucking Mieville, I have plenty of fucking problems with his fucking writing, but fucking swearing isn't fucking one of them.

The point illustrated above was my problem with the swearing in TSR.

[Lexicon Devil]

Well fuck

[Myshkin]

Fuck indeed

[peterbound]

Fucking A.

[Shryke]

What the fuck are you fuckers fucking talking about?