Wednesday reading
Dec. 14th, 2022 05:22 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kindkitJust finished: Jordan L. Hawk's Unhallowed and Unseen, which are m/m paranormal romances. I've read a bunch of Hawk's Whyborne and Griffin books, though not the whole series as I recall, but someone recently recommended his work to me when I mentioned looking for sff about queer men, preferably by queer men. (The last time I read Hawk was before he had come out as a trans man.)
I was wondering if the newer books would be noticeably different than what Hawk wrote before his transition, but they're not, really. Which is to say they're fine, well-plotted stories that play around in a Lovecraftian universe while directly opposing both Lovecraft's politics and his nihilism. I enjoyed the first one well enough to buy and immediately read the second, and I enjoyed the second well enough to plan on buying the third. They're occasionally a bit gory for my taste, but otherwise fun.
And yet. What I always feel frustrated by whenever I read romance is, of all things, the lack of deep characterization. Even K J Charles, the best writer of male/male romance I know of, tends to produce very same-y characters in whom some blatant trauma (abuse, usually, or internalized queerphobia, or some kind of abandonment trauma) substitutes for depth. These characters don't have real flaws or even irritating quirks, they're just misunderstood woobies. They don't have thoughts or feelings that aren't plot-related. They don't have hobbies or favorite foods or an old pair of shoes they wear long past the point of being worn out. Oftentimes it's not even clear why they love the person they love; it's just destiny/authorial fiat. As a result, the stories read like a prose-ified scripts that needs actors to come along to bring nuance and complexity. (I wonder whether this is a result of starting out--as many m/m romance writers in particular did--in fanfic and not being able to move past its conventions.)
Anyway, it frustrates me. Surely romance, of all genres, is the place to have a great big wallow in characterization? I know there are length conventions and the necessity of a plot--and to be honest, what I like best about both Hawk and Charles is the plots--but surely self-published writers in particular could break some of those conventions and try new things?
Currently reading: Still plugging away at Moby Dick. I'm not yet to the point where I gave up last time. The good news is, I'm finding Ahab less intolerable this time through, so maybe I'll make it. I spent probably an hour on Wikipedia last night looking up whale facts, which I think Melville would be pleased by.
What I'm reading next: Last week I had all kinds of plans to read some really depressing horror, but I'm finding that I want something light to contrast with Moby Dick. Maybe I'll finally finish the Whyborne & Griffin series.
I was wondering if the newer books would be noticeably different than what Hawk wrote before his transition, but they're not, really. Which is to say they're fine, well-plotted stories that play around in a Lovecraftian universe while directly opposing both Lovecraft's politics and his nihilism. I enjoyed the first one well enough to buy and immediately read the second, and I enjoyed the second well enough to plan on buying the third. They're occasionally a bit gory for my taste, but otherwise fun.
And yet. What I always feel frustrated by whenever I read romance is, of all things, the lack of deep characterization. Even K J Charles, the best writer of male/male romance I know of, tends to produce very same-y characters in whom some blatant trauma (abuse, usually, or internalized queerphobia, or some kind of abandonment trauma) substitutes for depth. These characters don't have real flaws or even irritating quirks, they're just misunderstood woobies. They don't have thoughts or feelings that aren't plot-related. They don't have hobbies or favorite foods or an old pair of shoes they wear long past the point of being worn out. Oftentimes it's not even clear why they love the person they love; it's just destiny/authorial fiat. As a result, the stories read like a prose-ified scripts that needs actors to come along to bring nuance and complexity. (I wonder whether this is a result of starting out--as many m/m romance writers in particular did--in fanfic and not being able to move past its conventions.)
Anyway, it frustrates me. Surely romance, of all genres, is the place to have a great big wallow in characterization? I know there are length conventions and the necessity of a plot--and to be honest, what I like best about both Hawk and Charles is the plots--but surely self-published writers in particular could break some of those conventions and try new things?
Currently reading: Still plugging away at Moby Dick. I'm not yet to the point where I gave up last time. The good news is, I'm finding Ahab less intolerable this time through, so maybe I'll make it. I spent probably an hour on Wikipedia last night looking up whale facts, which I think Melville would be pleased by.
What I'm reading next: Last week I had all kinds of plans to read some really depressing horror, but I'm finding that I want something light to contrast with Moby Dick. Maybe I'll finally finish the Whyborne & Griffin series.
