Tam Lin, or...Once More, With Feeling

[flyingskull]

First, take a peek at my icon. That thing really existed, hundreds of millions year ago, in the Cambrian era. Which makes me wonder why Fantasy author never bother to go look at past reality for their beasties, but such is Fantasy, never let it be tainted with real things, no matter how definitely extinct. Anyway, they've found fossils of it and they've named it Anomalocaris which means Odd Crab which also means they didn't get it right the first time. It was a winged lobster with double grabbing shrimp-like appendages and a circular bone-crushing maw. I rather love it and I decided this one's name is Tam Lin. Why? Because he used to wreck havock, back in the old days when humans were not, and Tam Lin is a hell of a havock wrecker on writers.

Which elegant transition brings me to my

Why resurrect old tales of Magic and Otherness, Pamela, if you're going to write a Freshman Scandal bad romance?

I mean, I admit that the story of Tam Lin is a popular and lovely thing: after all it's got Evil Elves, which always pleases; it's got a Beautiful Young Man, which never hurts; it's got a Feisty Tenacious Heroine, which young gels everywhere can identify with; it's got a powerful storyline with suspense and romance, it's certainly got SEX! There are several version of the basic plot, but they are all about a Thomas (Tam's the Scot version of the name) who's too sexy and musical to be left in peace. Enter the Queen of Elfland and... voila! One sexy beauty in the hands of a pagan goddess gone to the bad. Enter young heroine who is not one to be set aside for immortal hussies, thankyouverymuch, so she grabs young Tam and the poor boy has never got a chance, has he? So between going to Hell, going to the Twilight or going to be married I don't know what to wish him, really. Anyway the story's Matriarchal and older than the current Patriarchy (which is why I presume the pregnancy is not always present and was pastede on yay! later) so the fact that the poor sod hasn't got a say in what happens to him - TAM *whingeing* "But I WANT to be celibate, you sodding harridans!" - is not very off-putting.

Pamela Dean takes this basic plot and rewrites it as a Young Girl Romance Series, I have NO idea why. The woman can write. She wrote the Secret Country Trilogy which is very very good. Then she ups and writes this interminable piece of drivel. I use interminable advisedly, though I freely admit it's not boring, not if you like college romance, American style, that is.

I was trying to give the plot, but really there's none that makes sense, given the book is Tam Lin by Pamela Dean and not My Life and Loves While at College by a Young Lady. As I said, four fifths of the book are about Janet's love story with Nicholas, an Elizabethan actor who's been seduced by the Queen of Elfland and is now, for reasons known only to an Elizabethan actor who worked with Shakespeare and got seduced by an immortal crumpet, an everlasting student at a minor American University. The only reason he would submit to such an everlasting boredom is that he spends his time screwing Young Girls Of Impeccable Reputation and Putting A Spoke In His So-Called Friend Tam Lin's Wheel of Being Rescued.

The Immortal Crumpet assumes the name of Professor Medeous (Ware the Punnish Names! She's supposed to recall Medea. Good grief! And what's Medea got to do with Tam Lin or anything except she was a witch? She also killed her babies, y'know? o very literate Dean!) and for quite incomprehensible reasons teaches Ancient Greek. Why Ancient Greek? Why not? What's Ancient Greek Literature got to do with Elves? Who happen to be a Gealic myth? Who cares? Am I the only one who got so thouroghly pissed off at Pamela Dean for her atrocious and pompous dissertation on Literature? That said - er... ranted - she's just hard as nails and also bi and that's it for the Queen of Elfland. This doesn't actually grate all that much because she's supposed to be a shadowy figure, a powerful force never quite seen as a person. But Ancient Greek Literature! And wouldn't you know our SuperHeroine would learn Ancient Greek in less than a term? HA!

That's more or less it. In the last fifth or sixth part Janet suddenly decides she wants to bonk Tam, she does, she gets preggers, she saves him, end of story. Can readers believe this second and WAY TOO LATE romance? NAH! There's a sort of retcon reference when one of her friends - but more about them later - says 'you wanted him for months' (not a precise quotation, I can't be arsed to re-read the thing) but, Pamela dear, it won't wash.

Not to say there aren't intimation of Eeriness and Mystery, 'cause there are. Actually the first time Janet goes to see Melinda Wolfe - yes, all names of professors are atrocious puns. *sigh* - we get a nice horror atmosphere which convinces us all who know the ballads or the story to think she's Elfland Queen, but alas, she's but an elfess and not even a lycanthrope, now I ask you, Wolfe!

There's a striving for normalcy which is odd in that the heroine seems to always have feelings, intimations and odd things happening, but she never once deviates from her chosen Young Girl Romance path. This is because the sodding story takes FOUR years to happen and if Spunky and Literate Janet were to sit and reflect on things with any kind of efficiency, said story would end in one term.

Now in DWJ's Fire and Hemlock which may not be one of her best book, but it sure as Death and Taxes is a profoundly disturbing and fascinating book, the whole thing takes what? Ten years. Yet you get told why and her Janet, who's actually named Polly, is made to forget by MAGIC! And MENACES! And TERROR! Also, as her Tam Lin has apparently set out to seduce her when she was ten, she HAS to be lots more grown up for the grand finale. Which is not really really happy as it shouldn't be. IMO, it's well worth a read AND a re-read.

Back to our poor Pamela. Now, Janet's friends: Molly. Molly is Zany! Molly wants to be a Marine Biologist, but with lots more literature and lots less science in it! Molly is Not Pretty, Nor Beautiful! Molly is an Optimist Who Has Always A Smile Ready! Molly Reads Fantasy and Sci-Fi and Children's Books! Molly has a Teddy Bear! Molly is Practical and also a Tower of Strength when she needs to be. Molly Smashes Bunkers With Her Field Hockey Stick (which, BTW, was a scene I really could have done without, because it's utterly pointless and tells me NOTHING about any of the three friends, excepts that the Author is trying too hard)! Molly gets the other Shakespearian actor, none other than the great Armin! Gosh, isn't Molly really super fab?

The sad thing is that no, Molly isn't any kind of super or fab, Molly is a poorly written character who fails to impinge on the reader in any way except as a mild irritation when the book goes on and on about her. The other one, Christina, somewhat randomly called Tina (Dear Pamela, a tip: you don't have to actually type the names of your character, there IS such a thing as a Remember Things Function in all the wordprocessors I know, it saves lots of time and aggro. Please remember to use it when you feel tempted to use nicknames because you can't be arsed to type the whole name. Thank you.) is a sort of placid cow, only not really, but yes, deeply down she IS a placid cow and all conventional and things. Her only reason for existing seems to be the one who Tam Lin is fucking for a lot of the book, though we MUST think he secretly lUUUUURVES Janet, and who gets to dump him for no apparent reason except he has to be dumped if he is to be saved by Janet, now, don't he? She's also Suddenly A Drama Queen For Reasons Of Plot. Still, it's the one I liked best, at least she's got Sense.

Janet is a rampant Mary Sue. 'Nuff said.

Tam Lin is Beautiful But In A Manly Way And Also Supposedly Kind Even Though He's Got Draco's Colours (I mean white blond hair, grey eyes and pale skin, not that he's green and silver, which I'd have preferred for reasons of originality). Actually he's... not. A cypher if I ever read one. A nothing. A name. On second thought, he's quite self-seving and a tad hysterical at times so maybe he's not only got Draco's colours, he's got a little of a Howlish personality as well. Or he would if he were. Anything.

To conclude a quote from Ellen Kushner's Thomas the Rhymer. the novel is divided into four parts each of which is in first person POV from respectively: Gavin, thomas the rhymer, Meg and Elspeth. Who are they? Read the book! This quote is from the Gavin section:

Then the dog at my feet, Tray it would be, son of old Belta that was, Tray goes stiff like he's heard something, though my ears caught nothing over the racket of wind and rain. "Soft, there, lad," I say, like you do to a dog that's spooking. "Easy lad. Silly hound, scared of a bit of weather."

See? STYLE and plenty of it. :-D

Well, methinks perchance me's ranted enow, good fellowes. Now to Shakespearian tragedy and love immortal...

Comments

[kestrelsparhawk.livejournal.com]

Not a full-blown rant, imo; just a review (a rant would be if youo belabored points and used capslock commentary. Maybe it's a definitional thing). You certainly earn your claims. And after quoting from Kushner, Thomas the Rhymer has suddenly gone from the bottom half of my list to the top half. Shoulda known...

[flyingskull.livejournal.com]

Thanks.

I can safely predict you'll love Kushner's Thomas the Rhymer. It's short, to the point, full of real people and written in an impeccable style that allows each protagonist her or his individual voice and mind.

I can't really see how it could fail to please. :-D

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

I just read up on Tam Lin. It sounds like an incredibly stupid story based on an idiotic, insipid legend. Thank you for the warning. :)

I mean, let me get this straight... Every woman who goes through this forest has to bugger Tam Lin. This Janet character does, then Tam Lin sends her on her merry way. She finds out that she's pregnant, tries to abort it. Tam Lin shows up and forbids her from doing so (you weren't sentimental about that sperm when you spilled it, buster! Bit late to start now! >_<). Then he tells her this sob story about how he's enslaved to the faeries and gets her to free him so that they can go off and live in marital bliss.

This is romantic? (*shakes head*) Sounds to me like Tam Lin objectifies women in a fairly horrendous way - they're things to play with for a while and then throw away, and if one gets pregnant from all that playing, then she's his property. Not only that, but none of it is his fault, apparently - oh no, he's a poor enslaved sensitive lad who needs a woman to go through horrible ordeals to save him.

Tam Lin needs to fucking get over himself, if you ask me.

Really, this would warn me never ever to listen to any recs from mistful again, had I not already decided to do so after she gave this absolute horror (http://community.livejournal.com/canon_sues/81143.html#cutid1) a glowing review. Honestly, I can't make heads nor tails out of it. She apparently likes to write the kind of thing I like to read, so how come she likes to read what I like to throw into the wall, stomp heavily on and then put on fire? Shouldn't she be writing about what she prefers reading about? 0_o

(*shifts uncomfortably*) Sorry for being so cranky, that story pressed all the wrong buttons with me.

On a brighter note, huzzah for Medea reference! :D I love Medea. She was cool as a hero, and then she was even cooler as a villain. And there is a certain primal logic to her. "Put me aside, would you? How dare you? I gave you children! And I can take them away too!" =]

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

Lord no! That's the myth - in the book, Thomas is a college student who, you know, is in a relationship with Janet and sleeping with him is her idea, and he does acknowledge she has a perfect right to get rid of the baby.

Um, dude, since you haven't - I think? - read either of the books (not that you should if they don't appeal to you) maybe total dismissal of my recs isn't entirely fair. (Total dismissal of them based on me hating on books you read and liked, or loving books you read and hated, or my general weakness of brain = entirely fair.)

I think perhaps I'd care more about the paucity of Tam Lin stuff if I knew Tam Lin as well as Jane seems to - I really don't know it, and from what I've gleaned of Fire and Hemlock, Tithe and Tam Lin (all based on it) I don't think I'd like the poem, since I've always liked the Tam Lin bits in each book least. What I loved was the description of an American college and the engagement with literature - and also the fact that Christina, someone who the heroine dislikes, is a good person. One sees far too little of that, usually heroines' opinions are secretly radars for evil.

That said, I apologise for leading you astray by recommending it, flyingskull, though I am rather pleased because you say you enjoy Pamela Dean otherwise and I haven't read any of her other stuff. So the rest must be better! *orders Secret Country and refuses to look at credit card bills head on*

[flyingskull.livejournal.com]

Hello, luv.

You see the thing is... To me it all started with the ballads, then I got the books because I like to see how different authors risolve the implications in the general story and also which ballad each of them follows and hence apparently prefers to the other version. I do things like that because I'm A) incurably curious; B) addicted to reading and C) a sadistic bitch. Don't you ever forget C) because it motivates me a lot.

DON'T EVER APOLOGISE for having personal tastes, writing spiffy funny reviews and naming titles and authors. I'm GLAD I bought the book, the alternative would have been dying of curiosity, luv. My problem with Dean's Tam Lin is that - IMO! IMO! - it's a sodding pretentious book which can't support half of what it spouts. BUT we agree about Christina, the only one with a modicum of Sense and Reality. My probbo is I can't stand Janet. But I've always have a probbo with arrogant!protagonists, so that's just me.

OTOH, her Secret Country trilogy is wonderful and lovely and I adore it. Which may mean you'll end up hating it and spitting on the books. If that happens accept MY apologies. I think it's rather natural that our taste should diverge at some point, we seem to have read the same books with the same slant and to like the same books and characters too most of the time, which could become scary a bit, wunnit? But, scary or not, it's the reason I buy books you recommend, ninety over a hundred I'm bound to like them. Except unicorns. I have a thing called Bored To Death By Unicorns, I don't know if it's chronic or it may be cured, but at the moment, incestuous or not, no unicorns for me thankyouverymuch.

I've always loved the Whimsey books and Gaudy Night is TEH BEST!YAY!!11 of them all. I don't have to tell you I love Woodehouse (we had a hug for Psmith together, remember?) My first and second names aren't Jane Austen for nothing... and so on. It's kind of nice to differ about a book every now and then.

Thanks for commenting on my rant and ehi! You can always diss The Secret country if you don't like them :P

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

Oh, totally. I remember having an epic fight with lasultrix over Sense and Sensibility - my mother couldn't believe we were talking books because I was hitting the wall to emphasise my points. And yet my love for both Las and Austen remains unimpaired.

I think every reader's going to go a different way on some books - I love to read book reviews to see how different a book was in someone else's mental landscape, so I am A-OK with your Tam Lin review and just as eager to read Secret Country on your recommendation - if I hate it, we can talk about that next!

Under no circumstances buy the incestuous unicorns! That was not a rec. Though Peter Beagle's the Last Unicorn, that would be a rec - but I've said too much. There is a great Unicorns vs Zombies war waging, and all must pick their own side.

[flyingskull.livejournal.com]

Epic fights are exactly my cup of tea in RL, I try not to epic too much on the net because of... y'know? sensibilities and suchlike, but I fear I'm not too good at Moderate.

I love to read book reviews to see how different a book was in someone else's mental landscape

Oh YEAH! Hear! Hear! Exploring someone else mental landscape fascinates me no end, I suppose because I find exploring past and present cultures so utterly intriguing. That and excessively extinct beasties from the dan of time, for reasons I can't quite comprehend. Possibly I'm a morbid bitch.

Unicorns vs zombies? Hmm... ZOMBIES!!! All the way. I like zombies and I think I may be allergic to unicorns... :P

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

Yes, I kind of assumed that the book wasn't quite as awful as the fairytale. But apparently, this Pamela Dean woman took a look at that story and thought, "this would make a really great novel. This would let me talk about things that really ought to be talked about." That makes me distrust her, and in extension any book she might write.

And this one has an unplanned pregnancy as a major aspect of the plot, and that almost always spells disaster (I have read one, count it, one book where I felt it was handled properly). Someone who thinks a stupid biological accident is something that's worth hanging a story on is someone who isn't interested in writing what I would consider character-driven stories - it's someone whose characters are going to be swept along in the predetermined plot. And I hate that sort of thing. It's not just boring, it's dehumanising.

And of course, this one has a pro-life discussion in it, and the last thing I want to read is page upon page with angst and "abortion is murder!" and the final decision (which I'm probably supposed to see as brave and mature, at that) that The Best Things In Life Are Unexpected and arrrrgggghhhh...

I'm sorry. I get worked up about this. It's my weak spot. Well, the weakest of my many weak spots...

But this is the rub, and this is why I'm getting more and more sceptical of your recs (it's not just these two books - that was just me being flippant). We have different priorities. When I read, I want to know what the characters are going to do. I want to know how their unique feelings and experiences will affect the outcome. I don't want them to just be swept along. That just makes me wonder why I'm reading about these spineless twerps who don't even have the guts to make an impact on their own lives.

I get, however, the impression that you are more interested in how the characters are feeling, irrespectively of how whether this will make them act differently. Correct me if I'm wrong?

If so, you can always team up on me with Jane. She keeps teasing me about about me seeing characters as nothing but vehicles for the plot and not caring about them as people. Which has, ahem, some truth to it, I guess... ^_^;;

Of course, what confuses me is that your own stories are always so character-driven. Oh, things happen that the characters don't control, but they try to deal with them according to their own personalities and resources, they don't just... let them happen. Which is exactly the way I want it to be in stories.

As far as City of Bones go, I did in fact read the first chapter. That one's availeble online. The book's not in stores around here, so I can't read any further without ordering and paying for it. So lacking further information, I'm going to assume (reasonably, I feel) that the writing is pretty much like that all the way through. Would I be right about that?

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

Well, like I said in the canon sues community (uh, by the way, I thank you very much for the compliment there! I beamed) I do not think the first chapter is the best part of the book by any means, but Cassie does have a very distinctive writing style - her description is very hyperbolic, like the antifreeze eyes (if I'm recalling correctly) and while that works just fine for me, since it doesn't work for you the book probably isn't for you.

Meandering off the subject into a discourse on liking things we don't write - extremely descriptive writing is something I hardly ever write unless I feel the plot has forced me into it, and which I like reading. I suck at writing it, and it bores me to write, but I do love reading it. I'm not sure of your feelings on descriptive writing, or whether you write it? But it just occurred to me that this is a huge stylistic gap between what I like reading and what I write. (So if and when I recommend Patricia McKillip, probably best to steer clear. The woman can describe an orange for five pages.)

I loathe pregnancy storylines, actually, and I wanted Janet to have an abortion. On the other hand, since abortion is illegal in my beautiful homeland and my mom's mixed up in illegal abortion clinics, pro-life discussions are things that happen to me so much they've become like white noise. I did appreciate that Janet considered an abortion and I figured she'd probably have had one if not for the fact she decided to save Thomas' life by using the fact she was pregnant, and then felt it would be kind of cheap to use the pregnancy and then terminate it. (I would have terminated it anyway, but I sort of understood Janet's thought process.) And I liked the fact that Janet's parents said 'even if you are pregnant, you don't have to marry the guy!' So I felt the storyline was handled well. (What is the book where you liked the pregnancy storyline?)

Still, I'm usually deeply turned off by said storylines in books - and I have to say the last part of Tam Lin was my least favourite of the book, though I enjoyed the college bits enough for it not to matter in the balance. That said, while I don't care for what I know of the Tam Lin legend (and I bow to Jane's superior knowledge and trust she'll enlighten us) and probably wouldn't search out books based on it, I didn't feel any lack of trust in any of the authors for choosing it. I just thought they saw something in it I didn't see, which happens to us all. (Explains differing book recs. ;)) That said, I vastly prefer Holly's and Diana Wynne Jones' other books, and I hope I will vastly prefer Pamela Dean's! Since if I do, I'll have found a new member of my favourite authors' list.

Now, onto a question you actually asked me and not a discursion on pregnancy and descriptive writing - I am very interested in how characters are feeling, but I agree that they should react to what they're feeling as well - otherwise what's the point? Their actions should come from what they're feeling, though maybe where we differ is that up to a point I don't mind if they are swept along by events. Sometimes people are, though their reactions to this - thrilled, overwhelmed, furious - should all be different and start to affect events as they move along. So if you have an instinctive aversion to the being-swept-along, maybe that's where we differ? But I can't think of any book I've recommended where the characters didn't try to deal in their own way with whatever was going on. Because, unlike descriptive writing, that's something I absolutely have to write and read.

Damn it, now I want to do more recs and explain myself better. (And also slide in a mention somewhere that I do really like George RR Martin, since apparently several people think I don't! Blasphemy!)

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

uh, by the way, I thank you very much for the compliment there! I beamed

No problem. It's true, after all. :)

I'm not sure of your feelings on descriptive writing, or whether you write it?

Well, the thing is, I don't have much of a visual imagination. Even the greatest descriptive prose fails to paint any vivid pictures in my head, so I tend to skim past it. And for the same reason, I can't write it - I just can't picture my scenes well enough to describe them. So I tend to make very basic descriptions, and then hope that the reader can fill in the blanks. =]

So if and when I recommend Patricia McKillip, probably best to steer clear. The woman can describe an orange for five pages.

Hrm. I am familiar with Ms McKillip. ^_^; I really like her characters and her worlds, but I've decided that I can't read her. The important stuff is hidden in too much descriptions, and like I said, my eyes tend to gloss over when I read description. =]

What is the book where you liked the pregnancy storyline?

Forbidden Knowledge by Stephen Donaldson. :) I think because I really got the feeling that it would work as a long-term solution to the heroine's situation, even if it made things more difficult in the short term. She has, at that point in the story, betrayed herself so badly that she can't manage to care about herself anymore, so she's just living from day to day, degrading herself as she goes. There used to be other people she cared about, but she's... kinda-sorta accidentally killed them all. ^_^; And she's too scarred to befriend anyone else and let them get close enough to her that they matter. But she realises (though not in so many words) that if she has the baby, there will be someone whom she has a biological imperative to care about - and because she'll be driven to save him, she can manage to save herself.

I mean, it's not just a pregnancy story, it's a redemption-through-pregnancy story, which I hate even more - but here it works. Because really, the heroine is in such an emotional and practical dead end that this isn't the easy way out, it's the only way out. And Donaldson goes through all the work of showing exactly how she got to that point.

(*takes a deep breath*) ... I apparently have a lot to say about Donaldson. ^_^;

it would be kind of cheap to use the pregnancy and then terminate it.

It does seem kind of like cheating, doesn't it? (*laughs*) I mean, not in a real situation, because in real life you have to be practical, but it would have made a rather odd story... =]

Yeah, okay. I still don't want to read it. But I'll admit that the story might not be as atrocious as I instinctively assumed it was. =]

and I bow to Jane's superior knowledge and trust she'll enlighten us

Yes, yes! :D She knows so many cool things, when she can just be convinced to share them. ;)

I just thought they saw something in it I didn't see, which happens to us all.

I, on the other hand, am an arrogant bastard. I assume that if I can't see something, it's not there. ;) (not that I can't understand other people liking things I don't - I can see the appeal without feeling the appeal, if you see what I mean...)

In this case, I can only assume that she liked the romance of the story, the dreamlike drifting-along of the characters, and she decided write a semi-realistic version of it. Fair enough, but that's not the kind of romance I like.

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

maybe where we differ is that up to a point I don't mind if they are swept along by events.

Yes, being swept along happens to all of us, and I'm okay with it happening in fiction also. But people (real and fictional) should try. They should do everything they can, until they can't do anything more.

Remind me. Have you read The Scar? I faintly recall commenting on someone's sentiment of it, but I'm not sure if it was you or someone else... ^_^; Well, either way, that book's got a heroine who, throughout the story, continously fails to accomplish anything - or at least to accomplish anything she likes. =] But she thinks, and she tries, and she does what she can. I like her. :)

But I can't think of any book I've recommended where the characters didn't try to deal in their own way with whatever was going on.

No... but you do tend to stress the emotional part, how attached you got to the characters, that sort of thing. And I distrust excessive emotion in books. I always feel like the author is trying to cram it down my throat. I like books that are a little more detached, that just describe what happens and why so that I can decide for myself how I feel about it.

(*shrugs*) Of course, the very best books are the ones that are very emotional but where you understand completely where all the emotions are coming from, so you can't really disapprove of them. :)

And also slide in a mention somewhere that I do really like George RR Martin, since apparently several people think I don't!

(*laughs*) No, no, I get that you like Martin. Comments like the one in canon_sues are mostly for making fun of myself, since apparently I get weirdly defensive to any criticism of the man. =]

Anyway, thanks for being so calm and reasonable, since someone's got to be and I wasn't up to the challenge... Meh, I feel like I've spent all week roaming the Internet and arguing with people. Maybe I should take next week off and be a Neutral Person from the Neutral Planet. =]

"What do you think about Christianity?"
"NO COMMENT."

"How do you feel about tax deductions to the disgustingly rich?"
"I HAVE NO FEELINGS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER."

"Have you heard that JK Rowling is being heralded as the greatest fantasy writer of our time?"
"THIS FILLS ME WITH A STRONG SENSE OF INDIFFERENCE."

It sounds lowly and restful, but somehow I'm not sure I can pull it off... =]

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

Heh, not a problem. I quite like disagreeing reasonably about things, though the person on my livejournal who decided to utter death wishes for Cassie made me blindly furious and so I spent several days off the net recovering my temper.

I know you know I like Martin, but a couple more people seem to think I dissed him - this makes me sad. I'll slip him into my review of Lies of Locke Lamora, maybe. I do think Lynch and Martin have a lot in common, or promise to as Lynch goes on.

I also have a terrible visual imagination. I even have a terrible visual memory - people comment that I want to be a writer and I don't notice anything. It's got to a point where whenever I see something I actually like looking at, I take notes on it so I can describe it in a book later. I think the reason I like descriptive writing - I didn't, once - is because I admire the amount of artistry it takes to engage me in the descriptive writing, an artistry of which I myself am incapable.

Oh, it's true that my main response to any book is emotional, that's probably what trips us up. I do have an intellectual response, but it takes me a while to tease it out of the emotional response it's all tangled up in. That said, there are some emotional scenes in books that leave me completely cold, or very amused. The less said on those scenes, the better.

I really liked the Scar, and I agree. Bella's an excellent example of a character who's swept along but obviously unique and trying to take a stand despite the relentless current. See! A book we agree on. And of course, from the start we knew we disagreed on JK Rowling... I look forward to clashes and calms in the future.

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

the person on my livejournal who decided to utter death wishes for Cassie made me blindly furious

That does seem... excessive. ^_^;;

The only author who I've ever wished dead is Terry Goodkind, and that's not because he's a talentless hack. It's because he's a scary, insane person who figures socialists should be tortured to death. Given who I voted for in the last election, I don't feel safe with that kind of people running loose, especially not when they're writers. Goodkind may live on the other side of the world, but what if someone in my neighbourhood gets inspired by his books and decides to put his philosophy into action? ^_^;

Oh, and we also seem to agree on The Lies of Locke Lamora (http://baeraad.livejournal.com/36070.html), it would seem. :) Wonderful book. And I see what you mean on the character death in the middle, it really came as a shock... though I of course maintain that it wasn't more shocking than any of Martin's, only as shocking. ;)

(I really liked that character too. So if Lynch wanted me to hate the Grey King and want him to die for the rest of the book, he succeeded. =])

I look forward to clashes and calms in the future.

Hear, hear. :)

Here I am, intruding like a very intruding thing

[flyingskull.livejournal.com]

First, thankee both for your largely mistaken assumption I know things. Of course I know some things, but then, so do you both.

Though I admit I know a fair bit about old myff and legends because I really am into cultures - prolly translates into mind-sets and mind-landscapes into today net-cognizant speak - and the Tam Lin thingy tells the story of a time when men ruled not and there was - GASP! - human sacrifice to keep the earth fertile and things. So Tam Lin is the Summer King, the Fertility King, the Disposable But Oh So Useful Phallus and happy to be. I mean, he'd have to have entered a contest of sort and won it just to be King of Life and shag like a rabid otter for six months after which he's have been offed in a particularly extemely bloody way and his blood - and bits - would have made the earth fertile. Which is right as blood and human bits are quite good fertilisers.

When Men got power they were rather 'orrified by said sacrifice thingy and retold the story as one of captivity and rather horror-noir ending. BUT WAIT! someone thought, what if we introduce a model of Modern Femininity - one who would not dance up to her elbows in blood - who saves said poor King of Love from a monstrous fate? Why not, let's hear it! The others said. And he sang and it worked well enough. I suspect the preggers bit was added much later to make all good Christian happy. I mean I have a bibliography on this, y'know? It's really not fumes of me deranged brain! :P

BUT the pregnancy bit really pissed me off no end. And I'm looking at you Daniel the Viking! You and your insufferable Donaldson The Catholic fixation! HUMPH! I can't abide with that miserable man and you know it! :P

Right, seriously. Well, it's easy enough to write a female who would kill all living things if she din't get big with sprog, innit? The whole sorry tale just tells me that that Stuck Up Bastard Breast Beating Donaldson is sexist as well as a Catholic fascist.

To talk of real things. I asked me mum about pregnancy and why in hell did she have us three and she told me that A) she wanted children but she ì0d have preferred two; B) she had two abortions while in her late teens and early twenties acuz the condom was faulty and she rilly rilly wasn't ready for children then and so wasn't me father and presumably the other would-have-been father; C) she decided to have me even if I was rather surplus to qualifications because... actually she said 'just because, don't be forever harping on about it Jane' - not that I'm complianing, mind you.

The best preggers story I ever read was by Reginald Hill. Pascoe's wife ultra-feminist, ultra-socialist Ellie has a hell of debate about letting it be born or not and her hubby, Pascoe the Cop, is also quite uncertain. The really good part of this is that is not at all the focus of the book - a whodunnit, mistful - but it's wonderfully human and also intelligent and civilised. They have the baby, Ellie's chuffed it's a girl and they are decent normal parents. THAT is a wonder in fiction.

I can't think of any pregnancy in Fantasy that did not piss me off to slavering rage except Magrat's and Sybil's. But then, Pterry is my love.

To intrude some more here's me tuppenny ha'pence: a really rounded character IMO is one whose mind-set, mental processes, culture, emotion and backstory we should know or be able to extrapolate as we read. I mean, that's what I like and demand and BTW, mistful, that's mostly how you write them, so cheers and huzzahs and no NO complaints on that. baeraad I know you hate me for not having sent you the betaed first part of chpt 1, but I was truly too busy. Am soing it now and it's too early for me to tell if you are as good as Maya at character creating, but nothing makes me think you aren't as well, so... we shall see won't we?

Sorry for the ramblings and spitting and intrudings but it's latish and I wanted to comment on all your comments at once. :-D

Re: Here I am, intruding like a very intruding thing

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

You're not intruding, for all sorts of reasons. :)

See, this is what I mean. You know cool stuff. =] And of course I know some interesting tidbits too, but I tend to tell people all about them at the slightest provocation. You just sort of hint at them. ;)

This being you, I'm guessing it's because you don't want to presume that people want to listen. Well, allow me to clarify - I always want to listen to mythological freakiness. :D And to sociological theories and historical oddities and whatever else you've got up your sleeve. Okay? =]

I can't abide with that miserable man and you know it! :P

:P Yes. I'm aware.

Well, it's easy enough to write a female who would kill all living things if she din't get big with sprog, innit?

I am very sorry to disagree with you, but no, it isn't. Not if you want it to make sense on a character level. And as evidence I'd like to point to every other writer I've ever read who tried to do this, and who made me throw the book down in disgust.

I mean, look up there at the start of this thread! See how completely hysterical this whole issue makes me! ^_^; And Donaldson still managed to make me accept that in this case, it made sense. Wouldn't you say that that means something, even if it just means something about what I will and won't accept in a story?

The whole sorry tale just tells me that that Stuck Up Bastard Breast Beating Donaldson is sexist as well as a Catholic fascist.

(*WAILS IN DESPAIR*) But he ISN'T A CATHOLIC! I draw a reversed pentacle over my heart and hope to die! Please believe me! ^_^;;;;

As for sexist... what about his female characters who got redeemed all on their own, no pregnancy necessary? What about his female characters who are apparently committed bachelorettes and who didn't need redemption in the first place? That's a big part of the reason why I accept this kind of thing from him - I know that he doesn't use a plot device like this for lack of anything better, he uses it as one possible device. Once. In between lots of other ones. That, in the world of me, means he's entitled. :)

To talk of real things...

Yeah, my mom had an abortion when she was young, too. I... note with some surprise that I say this with a certain amount of filial pride. ^_^; But, yeah. I've got a mother who has the guts to be in charge of her own body. I'm proud of that. :)

she decided to have me even if I was rather surplus to qualifications because... actually she said 'just because, don't be forever harping on about it Jane'

Given that your mom considers birthpains to be "orgasmic," I'm not sure I want to know why... ;)

Me being a smartass aside... =] I would guess it had something to do with there being a big difference between having a kid when you don't have any, and having another kid when you already have two. :)

Re: Here I am, intruding like a very intruding thing

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

The best preggers story I ever read was by Reginald Hill...

Okay, first of all I'll say that Reginald Hill is one heck of an author. He made me like a romantic subplot. This is an accomplishment. Perhaps he is also capable of making me like a "will I or won't I?" pregnancy subplot. I can't know without reading that book.

But having that said... I would consider that kind of thing, with a big discussion and all, worse than the character being some twit who just goes along with it (or who does it because it's her only chance, like Donaldson's Morn Hyland). Because it's cheating. Fictional characters don't have abortions. Okay, this has less to do with any conservative bias on authors and more on the fact that if an author doesn't want his character to have a baby, he can just make sure she doesn't get pregnant in the first place, but still, there you have it.

So the whole discussion thing... to me, that's just covering your authorly ass. It's establishing your liberal credibility. You've already decided that this character's gonna breed. Fine, she's your character. But stop pretending that there's any doubt what she's going to do. You want to pretend there's doubt? Show me some characters having huge discussions, and then coming down on the side of abortions. Then you can show me some characters coming down on the side of carrying to term. That's fine. That's life - given a choice, people go different ways. But you can't just tell me the choice is there, you're damn well going to have to show me.

I'm sorry. I'm bitter about these things. Told you I hate pregnancy plots. :(

I can't think of any pregnancy in Fantasy that did not piss me off to slavering rage except Magrat's and Sybil's.

Magrat's I agree with. That was just treated as, well, she's gotten married, it's going to happen. Sybil's I'm not so sure about... there was still that big revelation moment, which didn't come as much of a surprise to me. I still do consider The Fifth Elephant to be one of the weaker DW books, you know. ;) But yes, Pratchett deals with everything in such a matter-of-fact way that makes it easy to accept.

baeraad I know you hate me for not having sent you the betaed first part of chpt 1, but I was truly too busy.

I could never hate you. :) No matter how hot and bothered I get in my defence of my favourite authors. Hopefully you won't hate me for getting that way, either. ^_^;

Am soing it now and it's too early for me to tell if you are as good as Maya at character creating, but nothing makes me think you aren't as well, so... we shall see won't we?

(*looks a bit nervous*) As good? Eh. Let's put it this way - I think I'd enter my characters in a competition against hers and not feel ashamed, but I'd be very surprised if I won.

and another late and quick one

[flyingskull.livejournal.com]

Re: R: Hill's pregger background happening. My fault for not having explained. It's not a pro-choice/pro-life thingy. Ellie, having married Pascoe because he's a cop (she'd have loved and lived with him in a marriageless state otherwise, but cops on the fast lane to promotions are better married than living in sin), has no probbos with children in themselves - okay, one child. She's capable of using conraception - but with the fact that hubby won't be a very present father to said children and she's teaching at uni so mummy too won't be there 24/7 and said children would suffer because of parental absence.

Not a huge ethics thing, more a practical probbo married working people have. As I said it was very background to the investigation going on at the time. What I liked was the matter-of-fact approach to the thing. 'We want children, but is it fair to them as we won't change our life?' sort of thing.

Get as much hot and bothered as you like, luv. As you noted in a previous comment, I'm not much for half-measures either. :-D

Re: and another late and quick one

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

Ahhhhh, I see. Yeah, that does sound kind of interesting. Also very cerebral and matter-of-fact, which seems to fit Hill. :)

In fact, that's partly true about Brittish literature in general, isn't it? All the English authors I've read have kept very calm about what they were writing, even when they were writing about people getting horrible massacred. =]

Re: and another late and quick one

[flyingskull.livejournal.com]

All the English authors I've read have kept very calm about what they were writing,

Are they? Methinks not, luv. Actually methinks that under the surface civility and decency of their writing - talking about the best of course - there's an undercurrent of VERY strong emotion, the stronger for being kept under the text. Intense passion, anger, fury even, hatred... and, of course, also love and JUSTICE crying out. I love it when it's all in the subtext because very few author can sustain it in the text for a whole book, y'know?

A critic once defined Austen's books as 'regulated hatred'. I heart that definition and not only for Austen. Think Pterry. Think Diana Wynne Jones, think Hill... :-D

Re: and another late and quick one

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

Really? Well, if you say so I believe you, but... Austen, regulated hatred? I admit that her characters are very complex and that there are almost certainly subtleties there that I haven't noticed, but, uh... where do you find regulated hatred, exactly? ^_^;

Hill? But he's so cerebral. So's DWJ.

The only one I can understand is Pratchett, who does appear to feel extremely strongly about everything he writes about, but who nevertheless keeps it very lowkey. It's sort of like being on a ship in the middle of the ocean - after a while, you don't think about the sea, but it's still all around you and it affects you at every turn. :)

I guess that might be because Pratchett is the one I've got a lot of experience with and if I knew the other ones better, I might see the same thing in them? =]

And yes, I agree about subtext. Good authors don't need to tell you what to feel. They know you'll feel it anyway. =]

Re: and another late and quick one

[flyingskull.livejournal.com]

I think I've partially replied about Austen in my reply to your reply to my post. :-D BUT... well, she clearly HATES some of her characters, they are monsters. I mean it's quite easy to make a Sauron, y'know? Evil bugger with HUGE powers and all that. But try and live as a son with Mrs Bennet. Imagine it, I dare you! And not just now, nonono, try and live with that in the past when children could be turned out of the house naked without a reason and have to survive with nothing - no money, no family, no psychological support... Or imagine it as if you were a son of such a person in a poor country or the poor parts of our oh so civilised countries. Or... No, I take it back. That kind of abuse goes on and on and on everywhere. Austen makes Mrs Bennet comic, but it's a comic monster written in the blackest humour. I could go on and on, but I'll spare you. I know you have the brains and imagination to apply it to several of her characters who STIFLE people to death. What Austen wrote is claustrophobic novels.

Same goes for both Hill and DWJ, I think you're confusing intellect with atarassia (absence of all feelings). I know it's a Brit cliché: sitff upper lip and never show what you feel, but, in a sense, it's true of the best Brit lit - yea, even unto Shakespeare - write intelligently and let all the rage, love, pain, joy and things swim underneath.

Re: and another late and quick one

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

Hmm... I take it this is in fact the commonly accepted view? Hmm. Seems a bit iffy to me. I mean, yes, objectively these things are horrible, but did Austen seem them as horrible?

(*shrugs*) But if you say so. Not like I've studied these books that deeply. :)

I can certainly think of a couple of characters that would be fairly nightmarish if taken seriously. Catherine du Burgh comes to mind... =]

I do see what you mean about subtext. Like I said, I suspect the reason why I can see passion in Discworld books is because I'm so used to them - I can read between the lines. On the other hand, I've read one book by Hill and, eh... three books by DWJ that I can remember. With them, I'm still reduced to reading literally. =]

[flyingskull.livejournal.com]

Well, you see, Tam Lin is a myff recounting the story of the Summer King in matriarchal times, but as seen by the patriarchs which means that Tam's destiny is seen as horrible and he has to be saved from the BAD matriarch by a GOOD sub woman. This thing utterly changes the story and also its implications. Poor Tam can't come out of it as a decent person because we never see him make the choice for or against the Immortal Crumpet who is certainly NOT Medea.

YOU should write the story from Tam's POV, y'know? All nice worldbuilding and power issues and this gentle artist caught in a war between the matriarchy and the patriarchy and he able to see the good and the bad in both of them and why should he choose a side, can't he just be an artist and sing of both sides? Also maybe he don't want to be saved which is why he transforms so hysterically in the good father's daughter's arms. Who knows? It could be great. Certainly interesting to have a male POV written by a man who has no particular fixation on sex as such. Hmmm? :p

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

This thing utterly changes the story and also its implications.

Well, what are the original implications? Talk down to me, please. ^_^; I only found out about the legend by looking it up on Wikepedia when I was trying to find out what the heck you were talking about, and that article wasn't especially in-depth.

Poor Tam can't come out of it as a decent person because we never see him make the choice for or against the Immortal Crumpet who is certainly NOT Medea.

Well, the thing is, I don't see anyone making a choice. Tam Lin follows the rules of his imprisonment (or so he claims - I still don't trust that guy ;) ), Janet gets ordered around by just about everyone, and the Faerie Queen is an evil fairytale villain and acts like evil fairytale villains do. Everyone just... drifts along.

YOU should write the story from Tam's POV, y'know?

... for some reason, now I have a slightly amusing image of a Tam Lin who's feeling very put upon and got sick and tired of sex hundreds of years ago, but he's still got to keep seducing stupid peasant girls in the faint hope that one of them will get knocked up and free him. "Aw, damn, another day of singing sappy love songs to some twit of a girl to try to get into her pants. Those are almost as bad as the days when I have to sing ballads to the Faerie Queen to keep her from beheading me. What I wouldn't give for just one day when I could sit down on my own and work on some interesting tune for once!" =]

Certainly interesting to have a male POV written by a man who has no particular fixation on sex as such. Hmmm? :p

Trying not to have a fixation, is more like it. But thanks for that vote of confidence. ;)

[flyingskull.livejournal.com]

About Tam Lin myth, later so I can reply to mistful as well.

for some reason, now I have a slightly amusing image of a Tam Lin who's feeling very put upon and got sick and tired of sex hundreds of years ago

See? SEE? You really should write that as a shortie, maybe. You got the basic mindset perfectly! :-D


Trying not to have a fixation, is more like it. But thanks for that vote of confidence. ;)

Look, you're a young male Viking with normal hormones, I'd say. 'Trying' is above and beyond the call of duty so you richly deserve the vote of confidence. :-D

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

... damn. Now I've got this scene in my head...

TAM LIN: (*appears in a puff of smoke*) "Nononononono! Put that potion down!"

JANET: "YOU again?"

TAM LIN: "Please put it down? No aborting the seed of my loins, okay?"

JANET: "You have some nerve! You totally took advantage of me, you were gone before I woke up, and now you show up telling me what to do? I can't believe you!"

TAM LIN: "Yes, I'm painfully aware of all that, actually, but... keep the baby?"

JANET: "Why?"

TAM LIN: "Uhmmmmmmm... 'Life - what a wonderful choice'?"

JANET: "Try again."

TAM LIN: "... I'm enslaved by the Faerie Queen and she'll only free me if a woman who carries my child goes through her trials."

JANET: "What for?"

TAM LIN: "That's just it! I DON'T KNOW! She just pulls these rules out of her ass, and we all have to obey them or we get beheaded! Last century, she decreed that instead of saying 'hello,' the polite way to greet someone was to hit him with a mace! I've got a shoulder that still gives me trouble in cold weather! I can't live like this anymore! PLEASE help me! PLEEEEAAAAAASE!"

JANET: "Why should I help you? You're pathetic."

TAM LIN: "To be honest, I was kind of hoping that all those pregnancy hormones had gotten your maternal instinct up and running and that being pathetic would thus work in my favour."

JANET: "Still holding the potion. What does that tell you about my maternal instinct?"

TAM LIN: "Damn. Uhm, but wait! If you do this, you're still going to have to marry some guy and have babies eventually. I mean, you can't live with your parents forever, and this being the sixth century, career choices for women are a bit limited. So why not pick me? At least I'm pretty."

JANET: "Yeah, but can you work?"

TAM LIN: "I can sing. My voice was exceptional to begin with, and I've honed it for the last several centuries."

JANET: "Great, but that's not going to get the fields plowed."

TAM LIN: "But that's just it. We won't need fields. Do you realise what the King - what any King in the whole world - would pay me to sing at his court? You'd never have to work a day in your life."

JANET: "... hmm."

TAM LIN: "Ah-HAH! You're considering it, aren't you?"

... okay, you got me. There is actually some temptation in me to write that story. (*laughs*) =]

'Trying' is above and beyond the call of duty so you richly deserve the vote of confidence. :-D

Aw, thanks. :D I have to admit that I'm somewhat proud that there isn't any romantic subplot in my novel. Tianna has a boyfriend at the start that she sees very little of in the course of the story, and she breaks up with him in the end. There is some love (and lust) going on in the background, but all things considered, my characters find a lot of other things to occupy their time. =]