Monday, January 21, 2013

Review: The Duke Is Mine


The Duke Is Mine
The Duke Is Mine by Eloisa James

My rating: 3 of 5 stars



This book as a test case for me, to see if I really did like Eloisa James. The cover did nothing for me, and the cover copy wasn't interesting either. The fact that this was a retelling of "The Princess and the Pea" didn't do anything for me, either. I'd always disliked that story. According to James' afterward, there's apparently a pun in the story that I missed as a child and never considered as an adult. (With the pun, Andersen's story does improve.) Susan Palwick's version of the story, "The Real Princess," asks readers to question what "sinister motives" might lie behind a man's search for a woman so delicate that a pea beneath so many mattresses could bruise her. Once that story was in my head, I was never able to let it go, and I came to hate "The Princess and the Pea." (Palwick's story is collected in Ruby Slippers, Golden Tears.)

You can see I came to this story will all sorts of baggage. I used that baggage to determine if I liked James well enough to trust her with material that did not initially seem appealing. She did a wonderful job with it. James wove the fairy tale in and out of the story expertly, and she did it in such a way that it rarely felt forced. Her language was typically fun and engaging, mixing anachronisms like the phrase "wardrobe malfunction" in with references to contemporary fiction like The Castle of Otranto. Her heroine was expertly drawn. Olivia was in a difficult position, betrothed to a man that she could not love, but her honor forced her to accept her fate. When she has a real chance at love, rather than chasing it down, she tries to make everyone else happy. Her self sacrifice is almost absurd, but she's been trained all of her life to be a representative of the best sort of nobility. While her parents believe that the training has not stuck, they cannot see just how deeply it is ingrained in her.

I've now come to the conclusion that James is awesome. Not all of her books are five stars for me, but I can trust her to create heroines that I care about, to be playful with anachronisms and allusions, to be the sort of romance writer that I wholeheartedly enjoy.



View all my reviews

Tuesday, January 08, 2013

RAD

The university where I work is hosting yet another "Rape Aggression Defense" class. 

I am well and thoroughly sick of this shit.

Earlier tonight, I read a thoughtful blog post from Seanan McGuire where she explained why she will not write a scene where her characters are raped.  (Google the post--it's worth reading.)  I applaud her stance.  I'm sick of the rape that fills urban fantasy novels, as if the only way that a woman can be a strong character is because her body has been violated.  McGuire's post got me thinking about rape again, and the email from my university just made me even angrier.

I'm sick of this shit.

I hate the idea of rape defense classes because they put the burden of preventing rape on the victim.  You know what the leading cause of rape is?  It's not walking alone at night, failing to protect a drink at a party, or wearing a short skirt. 

The leading cause of rape is a rapist.

Instead of classes telling our young woman how to defend themselves, we should be teaching how to not rape.  That sounds silly, doesn't it?  How to not rape.  Part of the problem with hosting a class like this is that it acknowledges that anyone can be a rapist.  Women can be rapists, too, although that's not something that we really talk about too much.  It all depends on the definition of rape.  Just over a year ago, the FBI updated its definition of rape.  Now, the definition reads: “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”  As you can see, anyone can be a rapist--no penis required.  This new definition is not perfect, but it's a start.

Part of the problem with teaching how not to rape is that issue of consent.  The new FBI definition allows the states to establish what consent means as a matter of statute.  From a legal perspective, that's fine.  The problems occur outside of a courtroom, when rape is occurring.

Instead of teaching women how to defend themselves against strangers in the dark, we should be teaching everyone about consent, what it means, and how to respect it.  We should be teaching people to only  have sex with someone that says "YES!" enthusiastically.  Instead of "no means no," we should teach "yes means yes."  When someone is at all hesitant and not saying "YES!" that should be an absolute stop sign.  Not a yield.  Not a "well, let me convince you."  We need to teach people to seek out partners that say "yes."

If you want to play consent games, that's one thing.  However, that's something that you do with a partner after having established that both of you agree to the consent games (which, in and of itself, is a form of consent that can be revoked at any time).

That gets us back to the issue of rape again.  Part of the problem with rape is that it's a crime defined by the victim. Only s/he knows whether or not s/he consented.  Despite what some people want to believe, there are very very few false accusations of rape.  The problem is that a victim can perceive that s/he has been raped but it may not fit the legal definition of rape (bringing us back to that legal issue again) or the evidence may not be enough to convict someone in a court of law.  When the district attorneys choose not to press charges, that does not mean that rape did not occur.  It means that they don't think they could win in court.

Since rape is a victim-defined crime, it is entirely possible for someone to rape another person without realizing it.  That's where this idea of teaching people not to rape comes into play.  It's a way to make all of us--men and women--aware of our partner's (or partners') needs.  It's a way to make certain that everyone engaged in sexual activities is willing to do so and to cut down on regret.  (Regret and rape are not the same thing.  People often try to confuse them in order to lessen the legitimate emotional burden that comes with rape.  But that's another blog post.) 

It's time to stop telling victims that  they could have prevented the rape if only they'd done something differently or fought just a bit harder. 

That shit doesn't work.

It's time to talk to the potential rapists out there.  Which, honestly, can be any one of us.

Saturday, January 05, 2013

Review: The Bandit King


The Bandit King
The Bandit King by Lilith Saintcrow

My rating: 4 of 5 stars



I really liked this book despite having several reservations about it.

As the teaser at the back of [b:The Hedgewitch Queen|11287858|The Hedgewitch Queen (Romances of Arquitaine, #1 )|Lilith Saintcrow|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1319587813s/11287858.jpg|16215244] implied, this novel was entirely from Tristan's point of view. I don't want to get into spoilers, so I can't discuss the plot in any meaningful way.

What I can say is that this novel changed the way I thought about Tristan. After finishing it, I went back and did a quick reread of HQ, and I could see that he does display behavior that provides clues into his thoughts. However, in that book, Vianne is too innocent to read him, and since it's told in a tight first person format, her POV is all that we get. In BK, the situation is reversed, and we're stuck in Tristan's head. While I didn't find it a problem in the first book, this time, I had a a very difficult time with the restriction. It could be because I didn't like Tristan so well as I did Vianne, but I'm not certain. At the very least, I wanted to understand her thoughts.

This novel also forced me to question the nature of love and obsession. That's something that I tend to focus on in any romance, but it was strongly evident here. Just how much does Tristan love anyone? Why does he love Vianne?

I don't think the book really answers those questions, which is part of the reason why I think I like it so much. Despite understanding himself very well, and having few blind-spots when it comes to his understanding of the world, Tristan is not perfect. He is extremely flawed, and not everything is wrapped up in a bow at the end. That's a good thing.



View all my reviews