reading (etc) Wednesday

[kindkit]

I've been in a bit of a reading lull since finishing Simon Jimenez's The Vanished Birds. I have his latest novel The Spear Cuts Through Water and I'm looking forward to reading it, but . . . not right now.

Yesterday I bought Katie Daysh's Leeward and have just barely started it. It's an age-of-sail m/m romance, with both men being British Navy officers, so I could hardly not buy it once I knew it existed. The author has clearly done her research, or at least attentively read the Hornblower and Aubrey & Maturin novels, which is good. And yet . . . I don't think I'm going to love it.

Some possibly spoilery stuff under the cut, much of which is hearsay based on a review I read; mostly we learn that I am not the ideal audience for genre romance

The very first scene happens at the Battle of the Nile; we get the explosion of L'Orient, near enough to our hero Captain Hiram Nightingale's ship to kill his lover (? . . . clearly something was between them, but as of right now its exact nature is unstated) and give Nightingale A Trauma. It is a truth universally acknowledged that every protagonist of a male/male romance novel must have A Trauma. I am very tired of it.

The Trauma is the first annoying thing. Second is that goddamn name, which just feels off for an English gentleman in this time period. (I could be wrong and will accept correction. Nevertheless, I would believe Hiram Nightingale as a Union officer in the American civil war more readily.)

Third is something I only know from the review. Nightingale is married to a woman, but Daysh takes pains to assure the reader that this is a mariage blanc and that Nightingale's wife has no interest in a sexual or romantic relationship with him.

Fourth, again from the review: Nightingale's eventual new love interest is his first lieutenant. Apparently Daysh manages to arrange events so that it's absolutely 100% clear to the reader that the power imbalance doesn't mean there are any ethical issues around consent, or practical issues around naval discipline. How she does this, I don't yet know.

Points 3 and 4 annoy me because I am every bit as tired of mandatorily morally pure queer romances as I am of the hero's defining, sympathy-inducing, dickishness-exempting trauma. I recognize that romance is meant to be a fun genre, and people don't necessarily want moral ambiguity or discomfort. But . . . I do. Especially in a historical romance, I don't want to gloss over the reality that many, many queer men and women acceded to the (Western) cultural expectation that they would marry and have children. In a lot of cases, they saw absolutely nothing wrong with that expectation, and no particular conflict between getting married and fulfilling their own desires on the side. (Obviously this was easier for men than for women.) Also, even now, some gay and lesbian folks get heterosexually married for a variety of reasons--from "my religion demands it" to "trying to be ex-gay" to "thinking about that political career" to "didn't really know they were queer"--and end up either having affairs or getting divorced, or both. And they hurt, and their partners hurt, and it sucks, but it doesn't make them irredeemably immoral people who are unworthy to be part of a love story.

Homophobia makes queer lives messy sometimes. Also, queer people are people, and people are messy sometimes. I would like us to be allowed to be messy in our* stories. (*"Our" is a bit complicated here. I don't know if the author is queer, but she's not a man, so it's not ownvoices. A term I hate but we need, I think.) Messy queer characters should get to have happy endings, too.

As for point 4: we're in a cultural place right now where a lot of folks are hyper-aware of every potential sexual abuse of power. Mostly I think this is a good thing! (Though I could do without the nonsense of "a 30 year old dating a 23 year old is abuse!!" and similar.) And I think there are ways of avoiding abuse-of-power situations in historical stories without giving the characters anachronistically modern concerns. But a writer making her hero's love interest his direct military subordinate, and then saying "but it's okay because of x, y, and z" is trying to have the tasty, tasty power-imbalance cake and eat it too. Maybe Daysh handles it well; I don't know yet. But I am skeptical in advance. (Full, and perhaps unnecessary if you remember the kind of fic I've written, disclosure: I like power-imbalance relationships. I've written 57 varieties of master/servant and teacher-ish/student-ish fic. I'm interested in how people navigate around that, how they create balance in the relationship despite it, or don't, and in what ways that matters. I'm not really interested in making the power difference vanish in a puff of exceptional circumstances.)

Yeah, that was a lot of complaining about a book I've barely started. I'm still going to try to approach it with an open mind, and I'll report back what I think once I've finished it.


On other cultural fronts, I've similarly been in full Bartleby "I would prefer not to" mode. The 50 New Things in 2023 project has stalled because it was starting to feel like a chore, and I don't want to add more chores to my life. I haven't been writing, though I am probably going to sign up for a Rare Pair exchange (delphi, this is your fault) and perhaps get an unrelated bingo card as well, so that may change.

What I have done is start watching Taskmaster, because Thingswithwings kept talking about it on Twitter. This is a British comedy show where a group of comedians compete to see who can accomplish ridiculous tasks the best (the definition of "best" is often fastest, but may include with the most panache, the most effective rules-lawyering, the most stylish cheating, and the most pleasing flattery of Greg Davies, the host and sole judge whose word is law).

The same group of comedians sticks around for the entire 5-6 episode season, so much depends on the chemistry of the group. I loved S1, but I'm now on S2 and not liking anyone very much. Also, the show is leaning hard into the kinky dom/sub energy of the premise; I had thought from the tweets that it was accidental, but it's clearly scripted and thus not as much fun. Still, for the moment I plan to keep watching. My brain continues not to want TV or film fiction apart from Our Flag Means Death (speaking of messy queer characters, and also, new season when?), but I can handle this deeply silly, pointless romp.


And finally, with Pride month upon us in the US, I have acquired this shirt in purple, bringing my total of queer t-shirts to 2. The other is this one, whose message is, I realize, contradicted by the new shirt. But I would absolutely have bought the new shirt in black if it had been available in black. I guess they're taking that "visibility" thing literally. By the way, purchase of any of the Point of Pride shirts at the first link benefits their work providing gender-affirming clothing and other help; the shirt at the second link was designed by a trans person and benefits him, but only if you buy from Teepublic; at any other site it's a copycat.

Comments

[sovay]

Nevertheless, I would believe Hiram Nightingale as a Union officer in the American civil war more readily.

It's the Hiram.

Co-signing the messiness of historical romances, or narratives in general, really.

I really like your combination of T-shirts.

[kindkit]

It's definitely the Hiram. "Nightingale" I could accept with an ordinary first name (with an unusual first name, it veers too much into "you know my character is special because he has a special name"). But Hiram, no. Hiram is a mid-19th century American.

In re: messiness, I do like a fairly happy ending. But I wish I could find queer stories that include well-developed love stories but are in some other genre than romance. The constraints of genre romance get on my nerves.

I really like your combination of T-shirts.

Thanks! I'm planning to wear the visibility one tomorrow, unless I lose my nerve and decide I'm not feeling up to quite that much visibility.

[sovay]

(with an unusual first name, it veers too much into "you know my character is special because he has a special name").

I do accept that more readily from the nineteenth than some other centuries! Earlier this evening I was reminded that one of Lovecraft's grandfathers was named Whipple Van Buren Phillips, which you would not be allowed to make up.

But I wish I could find queer stories that include well-developed love stories but are in some other genre than romance. The constraints of genre romance get on my nerves.

Do you have better luck with litfic or does that just substitute different problems?

(fixing Hiram being a time traveller from the 29th century)

(I wish to note that I adore this edit.)

[kindkit]

Whipple Van Buren Phillips, which you would not be allowed to make up

History abounds in delightfully ridiculous names. In my experience, the difference with weird romance novel names is that they're supposed to be beautiful. I guess that's the one thing I can say for Hiram Nightingale is that it's not the male equivalent of Starry Nightwind Moonflower.

Do you have better luck with litfic or does that just substitute different problems?

Different problems. Although I don't read enough litfic to really be fair to it. But for a long time it seems like queer men were (understandably) writing AIDS stories, or pre-AIDS stories that were all sex and drugs and oppression and loneliness. Which is important but not really a fun read.

And having written that out, I fear that what I'm wanting is the gay man's middlebrow novel. Which is embarrassing.

(I'll still take an embarrassing middlebrow novel over ever, ever reading Dale Peck again.)

[sovay]

I guess that's the one thing I can say for Hiram Nightingale is that it's not the male equivalent of Starry Nightwind Moonflower.

It's true. Yikes.

And having written that out, I fear that what I'm wanting is the gay man's middlebrow novel. Which is embarrassing.

I don't know what's so middlebrow about wanting to read a novel with a convincing romance that isn't based around mandatory sympathetic trauma and no moral awkwardness whatever! I have this thing with category romance where I get a recommendation and read about three in a row and then I burn out on the conventions and have to take several years to recover.

(I'll still take an embarrassing middlebrow novel over ever, ever reading Dale Peck again.)

(I have not read Dale Peck and will consider myself to have dodged a bullet.)

[marginalia]

The advice I was given for Taskmaster was watch S1, & then watch whatever season has someone you already enjoy, which has worked for me. (I've only watched a bit though because I was afraid of running out of it and also I like to deny myself joy.)

Thanks so much for the Point of Pride info. Actually for both of those links - I'm now chuckling that the other shirts at the second link include a Bartleby one.

[kindkit]

That's good advice about Taskmaster! Although I would worry about missing someone I didn't know I would love (like Frank Skinner in S1). I might try watching the first episode of every series to see how the chemistry feels.

a Bartleby one

I want a Bartleby shirt, but I'd be tempted to wear it to work.

[marginalia]

Oh for sure! That's part of the joy of it, these great people I'd never encountered. I mostly appreciated the permission to jump around.

Same, so I should probably not get it either!

[sparkythegeek]

I sent the black shirt to a friend of mine the other day when I saw an ad on Instagram. It is definitely "her." Haha.

[kindkit]

It's a popular shirt, so I suspect there are a lot of us.

I also perennially wish that the trans flag did not feature ugly pastel baby colors. I am not a baby. I am a grumpy-ass full grown man.

[lilliburlero]

I think Hiram is a bit of a Tiffany problem - I agree with you that it doesn't feel quite right, but it obviously rang true for Trollope as a medieval surname, given Hiram's Hospital in the Barsetshire novels (Trollope is a bit off with names, though, isn't he? he goes crudely nominatively determinist at really odd points, Mr Quiverfull). And given the 18th/19th century convention of giving sons their mother's maiden name as a first name, maybe that kind of works?

I totally agree about modern queer media trying to magic away the uncomfortable parts of queer historical lives in the interests of a very presentist idea of ethics, though. I want to see people work through the problems and sometimes fail. That doesn't seem incompatible with romance, broadly understood.

[kindkit]

Ah, I hadn't thought of it as possibly a surname. I will head-canon it that way until the novel says otherwise. My reading's pretty bogged down anyway, so maybe I'll just head-canon it that way forever.

a very presentist idea of ethics

Presentist and, I think, something else that I can't quite pin down. Very very stern, unwilling to admit that a decent person (and especially a decent man--it's often highly gendered) can ever even smudge the crisp edge of morality. Very "How dare he start a new relationship while separated from his wife, he should have waited until the divorce was final" sort of thing. I mean, I can see that it's a reaction against men having gotten away with every damn thing for a very long time, but it still irritates me.

[vilakins]

I've watched more of Taskmaster, but didn't like the (scripted) insults levelled at Alex Horne, and especially not the stupid high-pitched voice in which Greg says, "It's Little Alex Horne!" That just started randomly, no discernable reason, but it's so annoying. I was also repelled by Greg's ageism, with his making tasteless jokes about the older competitors. We decided to cut to the latest season and the ageism seems to have gone, but not the insults. I much prefer our version for being friendlier, though the competitors are much more foul-mouthed and explicit instead of clever with it.

But the shirt comes in 'storm' which looks like charcoal, not far off black - on my screen anyway. Your black and white one is great.

[kindkit]

Huh, weird. I'm glad that hasn't started yet in the episodes I'm watching. Do you think that, in context, it's supposed to be Greg being awful? He is scripted to be pretty awful, I think.

"Storm" is actually a dark, heathered purple. That's the one I bought--the other purple was much too purple for me. I was hoping it would turn out to be gray, because it looked quite gray on my screen too, but, no.

[vilakins]

He's certainly scripted to be awful. The insults where he introduces Alex started as a bit funny but now they're pretty nasty. Alex doesn't reply, just does the prize task. Apparently they're good friends in RL but I wouldn't want him as a friend; a contestant used to flat with him and he told stories about her.

The stormy purple sounds nice; it's dark enough to work well.