For those who don’t know, to quote his bio: “Ryan Field is a fiction writer who has worked in publishing for almost twenty years. He has worked as an assistant editor and editor for magazines and non-fiction publishers. And aside from writing over eighty-four distinct published works, his short stories have been published in anthologies and collections by Alyson Books and Cleis Press.”

One of the most valid criticisms levelled at male writers in the m/m romance genre is about their inferior “craft”. Let’s be brutally honest here, some just don’t write as smoothly as the majority of good female writers. So for starters, that is one thing Ryan does well. His writing flows beautifully. This allows you to focus on the plot and the characters.

I’d heard of Ryan for ages, but never read any of his books, because I’d been put off by criticisms like “Oh, they’re just rip-offs of classic romances and not as good as the original.” So, for all those reviewers out there who try to protest that readers aren’t put off by your comments, think again!

Silly me! Now I have a hefty chunk of reading to “catch up!”

When I finally read “Four Gay Weddings and a Funeral” (FGWAAF), I was very pleasantly surprised. Perhaps because a) I hadn’t seen the original and b) I started to understand what Ryan was doing. So, I posed a number of questions which Ryan was kind enough to answer.

AB: As a writer, your “specialty” seems to be writing gay versions of m/f romance classics. Do you do these scene by scene and translate/equate that to what would be equivalent in the gay world? Or, am I reading too much into it?

RF: I actually see it as more of an overall picture, rather than scene by scene. And some things from the original story don’t work with m/m, so I had to change a lot. Sometimes, what I find works, is to take the opposite of what’s happening in the movie and put it into the m/m book. As in FGWAAF, I hated the movie and the weird love story. I wanted to just shake them both and say “grow up”" This is why I added a new character, changed the ending totally, and gave it my own twist. For me, the original was too boring and too sappy. So, when people say the books were rip-offs, they most likely haven’t read the books in full, to grasp what I’ve done. I change each and every storyline. It’s only the basic formula from which I draw the ideas. And it’s really my publisher who insists on using titles similar to the movies. If I had my way, I wouldn’t do it. But this is something that seems to be working and the publisher is right, so I let the publisher do what they want. The collaboration works.

I’d also like to mention  “My Fair Laddie”  wasn’t based at all on the play/movie. And I’ve been slammed by that over and over by “some” anonymous reviewers,  “My Fair Laddie” was based on the classic “Pygmalion,” which most of these people/reviewers have never even heard of. It’s been remade by me, and tons and tons of others over the years. The basic storyline is classic: wealthy older man/woman, takes in poor uneducated man/woman, and transforms them into a well-polished socialite. Again, the reviews and things you read don’t even know about this, which is sad on a large scale...that people are so uneducated about classics. I love the classic storyline. I wish I could redo it and write it all over again in a completely different way sometimes.

AB: Personally, I think you have every right to do this. It’s a form of appropriation as I see it. Saying these sorts of romantic dreams are not the sole prerogative of females, but this is the gay man's slant on it.

RF: There are no such things as totally original storylines...at least I don’t believe there are in romance of any kind. It’s the same basic seven to ten storylines in each book/movie that's always being remade. Here's one link that touches on the subject. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=210539

The other huge reason I started doing these quasi movie tie-in books was also because gay men like me, and the tons of others who read my books, have never had things like this to read before in the mainstream. There was nothing for us to identify with in mainstream movies/love stories at all. The only books and movies we saw, until recently, were depressing, downtrodden, “arty” things that only touched certain fringes of the gay community and revolved around suicide, depression, and dark subjects. I’m sort of making up for all the things I always wanted to see and read, but no one would take seriously.

AB: Can we go back to something you said above: “And some things from the original story don't work with m/m, so I had to change a lot.” I’d like to revisit that if I may. One of the fascinating aspects for me are these places where you can’t just change the sex of the participants, you have to change the scenario as the two aren’t interchangeable.

Take for example in FGWAAF, the straight husband coming onto gay guys. (I’m not talking so much about couples who swing, but “straight” guys who cheat on their wives, but feel it’s okay because it’s “only” with a guy). Do gay guys just see it as an example of Kinsey’s sliding scale at work? Do they feel demeaned because these guys have totally no respect for them? Or are some gay guys just so desperate for cock that they’ll take anything?

RF: It really depends on the individual gay guy. I personally would never even consider anyone married. I think it is demeaning to me, and some guys are just too bold and don’t care. I actually took that part from my own experience. I’ve never been to a wedding where I didn’t get hit on by a married guy. Sometimes old, sometimes younger. But for me, it’s just ick. For other gay guys, they would love it. In this case, like straight people, gays are just as diverse.

AB: So Neil’s comment here: “Neil despised infidelity of any kind. He’d had more than enough chances to cheat with married men, gay or straight, and he’d always turned and walked away—with pride, and not an ounce of remorse.” is you. But then later you have this:“With gay marriage being so new to gay men, it hadn’t occurred to him that cheating only counted now when someone was, in fact, legally married. Neil wondered if this was how the straights looked at it. He had to ask Portia or Thai. That would be an interesting question to ask on Facebook.

RF: Well, it's something I agree with, but I wouldn't say it was me. It would be impossible to remove myself completely from my characters in any book. And, I'm trying to write modern romances, and I don't think readers want to read about infidelity in a flighty, carefree way. Infidelity is so common these days in real life, I think romance readers want the escape from that sort of thing...Yes, the second part of this question would be interesting to ask on social media. I honestly don't know the answer to this. But I'm sure there would be a variety of comments and replies.

AB: There’s also some interesting and informative facts about the reality of being HIV positive. I remember reading your blog about it back in April: http://ryan-field.blogspot.com/2011/04/hiv-condoms-and-what-so-many-dont.html So I'm glad you brought things you said in that blog into your story.

RF: Thanks...the hard part about m/m romance is that it’s still romance, and it’s escapism, and it’s all about happy endings. So I try not to get too heavy in my books. I like to touch on subjects I think are important, like HIV and people living with HIV, though. There's not enough information out there, and I'm always astounded that people don't know all the facts. Most people don't know that HIV is considered a chronic illness now, not a death sentence. However, I don't think people read romance to get into heavy topics. I save those things for the blog and go into more details. 

AB: Okay, now we’ve got all that out of the way, and I can see where you’re coming from, I’d like to get down to some specifics. If I were to ask you what point you’re making in FGWAAF, not the plot or description of characters what would you say?

RF: In this case, with this book, I would say the main point is that sometimes we are all blinded by what we think true, passionate love is. And we ignore the real aspects of love by chasing a dream or a fantasy, when we had it right there in front of us all the time and never knew it. This is the ultimate dream/fantasy. 

AB: Neil comments at one stage that a character “plays the gay card” and how much it annoys him. Is this something that resonates with you also?

RF: Oh yes (smile). I see this happen sometimes and it makes me cringe. I don't want to be treated differently because I'm gay...or for that matter, treated better and given free passes. Most LGBT people only want to be treated the same as everyone else. But I have seen some capitalize on their sexual orientation and get away with it.

AB: See, I find a lot of Neil’s observations on life fascinating and wonder how much are they your little digs on life, the Universe and everything in it. Here’s another one: “There were no limits to what some gay guys would do for a buck.”Anything further to add, or does that say it all?

RF: I have seen gay men lay on the camp and effeminate mannerisms on purpose...for the sake of entertainment. And many times it's because these people profit financially from this kind of exploitation. It's insulting to those of us who don't live or act this way.

AB: I know the reader should never equate the character with the writer but some things inevitably creep in. Neil’s love for rap music?..... “They did the toast as a staged rap song, which took almost as long as the rap vows they’d sung for the ceremony. Neil applauded when they finished.” Sarcasm much? Or am I being too bitchy!

RF: I absolutely love rap music and can't get enough of it. I *despise* Broadway and show tunes. If you want to torture me, sit me down, tie me up, and force me to listen to Jerry Herman songs (or the TV show Glee). Show tunes make me gag. Piano bar sing-alongs make me heave. If I could choose to come back in another lifetime, I would come back as a rapper. So this, I will admit, was taken from my love for rap music. And the only thing I wanted to show was that we (gay men) don't all like Broadway music...or the music those kind folks who write movies like Sex and the Citywould have you all believe we like.  

AB: A lot of your writing is little snippets of things I get the feeling you’ve seen or experienced, am I right? Here’s another one: “Poor Kevin had to pry Larson away from Blaine. The two of them started to sob on each other’s shoulders. If Kevin hadn’t pulled them apart, they would have continued to hug and cry for the rest of the afternoon.” In this case, the college buddies had slagged the guy off all the way to the wedding and then when faced with evidence of his happiness (however bizarre) found their cynicism disappearing. Do you find a lot of gay guys wear this cynicism as a brittle veneer to protect a mushy interior?

RF: This is one of those "it depends" answers. I wish I could pinpoint it. If anything, I've seen straight people do the same thing at weddings (smile). I think it's human nature, especially when people are so wealthy it's almost disgusting. So it's hard to really answer this one exactly. It worked with the characters this time. I didn't want them to come off as being too vicious...even though it would have worked both ways.  

AB: Again I know we shouldn’t be gleaning facts of life from romance novels, but this statement also resonated: “Gay relationships are complicated sometimes. It’s never been about the sex for us.” This is one factor I feel a lot of females miss, and I have only started to understand after corresponding with gay male writers. A few have, or are in relationships with guys who are their best buddies (in some cases almost carbon copies of who they are). I sometimes wonder if finding someone “just like them” is reassurance that they are “okay” and from this springboard they are able to go out and have (casual) sexual relationships with other men. Most hetero people have had this “reassurance” from one of their parents when growing up, but by always feeling “different” gay guys have felt lost until they find someone to have this basic relationship with. To outsiders looking in, this is seen as promiscuity and unfaithfulness where, if they understood the true relationship of the “couple” in the first place, the rest would make more sense. I’m possibly not making a lot of sense myself here, but can you see what I’m getting at?

RF: I know exactly where you're going with this. Again, this really does depend on the individuals. I know many long term gay male couples who have been in relationships for a long time and the sex dwindles and yet they remain together. Some do, in fact, have arrangements where they can go out and fool around. But not all do this. There doesn't seem to be a set standard. I also think this happens with straight couples over a period of time, too. This is why they hit 40 and have a mid-life crisis. It's the strong couples that survive, gay or straight.

AB: You seem to draw a lot of your life experiences when writing or real people you’ve met and I’m correct in saying this?

RF: I take bits and pieces from everyone I've known. And then I put them together and form something new. But sometimes you can't write about all you know...people wouldn't believe it. So you have to make up it totally, which I do often. Besides, making it up is more than half the fun. I'd be too bored writing about people I know and I wouldn't want to do it. 

AB: A couple of things get repeated quite often in your books: bad driving, guys whose legs bow slightly at the knees, the hand to the chest/throat/mouth yet I rarely see other writers using them. Is there any reason why you use these?

RF: I know a lot of gay men who are attracted to guys with slightly bowed legs...maybe it's the cowboy fantasy. And the hand to chest/throat/mouth is just a way to show how a character is feeling...or a way to express an emotion without actually getting into it. If you observe actors on stage or in film, they do it often. A character says, "You're an idiot." The other character presses his palm to his chest to show shock; that's he's been insulted, instead of actually saying "He was insulted." "He clenched his fists," shows anger instead of saying, "He was angry." Bad driving creates conflict and humor at the same time. I'm always looking for something that will do this. And, a lot of my books involve road trips and cars. 

AB: One statement: “He said he could depend on Warren and he never had to worry about anything when he was with him.” And later the same character says: “I’m marrying for security and companionship. I need stability. I need to know what to expect next.” Is this a lot of what gay men are looking for? Not so much a sugar Daddy but someone they can trust? And they will forgo some of the other aspects for this?

RF: In the book, I wanted him to be more sensitive than a true gold digger, but that's really what he was. Neil just didn't want to face it because he was in love with the "image" of him and he couldn't see clearly. And in real life, there are certain younger gay men looking for sugar daddies, just like this character. I even know a few. But most gay men aren't looking for this, especially these days when more and more younger gay men are coming to terms with who they are. They are looking for the same things straight people are looking for: love, security, companionship, and happiness...family. They are hoping to find it in marriage, in a traditional sense, just like everyone else. If I had a choice between a rich sugar daddy and going short of a buck for someone I loved, I'd choose the love over the sugar daddy any day. I think most gay men would agree.

AB: One aspect that rang true for me was that Neil’s brain was often saying one thing but his body (cock) was pointing in the other direction (literally): “Just because they had an arrangement didn’t mean Neil had to adhere to it or agree with it morally. But he’d just kicked off his shoes and his pants.” Should gay guys get the guilts in these circumstances or is it the expectations of a hetero nuclear society with its different needs and standards kicking in when it shouldn’t? In other words, in the gay community, is their growing pressure to be monogamous and labelling guys who sleep around as “sluts”. The original trend when the laws changed was for a lot of free sex. AIDS put a damper on that. Assuming everyone takes precautions (another topic of conversation) is there a need for gay guys to be monogamous?

RF: This depends, too. Gay or straight, everyone has a different guilt level, so to speak. I've met straight women who can cheat on their husbands and look you right in the eye and deny it completely. This varies from person to person. In the book, I wanted Neil to feel something.

AB: the concept of “romance” is important in FGWAAF. Especially when one character, is described as: Evidently, Tom wasn’t the romantic, sentimental type. And later this In its own peculiar way, Neil thought it was romantic. It wasn’t by any means the kind of tender romance he’d once craved from a lover... But at this point, Neil decided to settle for what he could get. and also this priceless bit: “I love your ass so much.” Neil laughed. He wiped a few beads of sweat from Tom’s forehead and kissed him. “And I love your dick just as much.” A common criticism by female reviewers is the lack of “romance” in male-written m/m romance, but Neil (and Tristan in Gay Pride and Prejudice) actually seem to prefer this rough and ready non-romantic approach. Do you expect to get flak from some reviewers?

RF: Romance can be as complicated as it can be simple, and I don't like anyone to define what it is to me. I also think that straight couples joke around this way all the time. It's just that sometimes it's a bit too realistic for readers who are looking for more traditional romance. They'd rather have it less graphic. And I can understand this, and I never fault a reader for getting upset about it. But I try to diversify. In my story, "Strawberries and Cream at the Plaza," there's hardly any sex and most of it is along the lines of classic romance. It depends on the book and the story.  

I don’t get freaked by bad ratings and reviews. Sometimes they work just the opposite. I would rather have ten bad reviews and ten great reviews, than twenty mediocre reviews. I know that sounds backward, but nothing kills a book more than “meh” reviews. To get a bad review, it means you had to piss someone off, and you had to spark an emotion of some kind. That’s better than not "touching" them at all.

I also receive hundreds of e-mails from readers that don't post reviews or make ratings or online comments. Erotica, and erotic romance is a discreet genre and the majority of readers never make public comments at all. It's a nice little secret erotic authors know, and we respect the discretion of our readers. They trust us.

AB: The scene mentioned above concludes with this statement: When the experimenting with other guys was over, they agreed to be monogamous. Is this something you think readers should expect/allow gay guys to do? It was interesting reading (in a private FB group) about how a gay guy had sex with a straight guy and years later talked to him about it. Turned out he enjoyed the experience but related much better with his wife as a person. He never regretted “experimenting” and actually found it invaluable when his son admitted he was gay. Is there a place for “experimentation” even with committed couples as a reassurance/reminder that what they have is special? Neil describes this episode as “sordid at best”. I suppose I’m just wondering why you included it?

RF: I tend to think all relationships are complicated in this sense. And what happens in the bedroom is different for everyone. In the book, they experiment this way because they are getting to know each other and building something even though they may or may not know it. In other words, they weren't taking themselves seriously at this point, at least not Neil. He thought he was only having fun and games. 

AB: Given your sweet innocent outer shell (judging by your photos) can you relate to this or is there a “type” like this? Maybe he’d been a dirty little fucker all along and it just hadn’t occurred to him until now.

RF: Ha! I'm laughing because I think we can all relate to this. I know I have at certain times in my life thought about this. I've always been more conservative than outrageous. I'm still wondering, though. 

AB: Okay, and now to my continued study of Gayology 101, the mechanics: He’d once been with a guy who had so much trouble coming he usually lied about it and pulled out before Neil had a chance to examine the condom. Neil had learned straight men weren’t the only ones who often suffered anguish of fake orgasms with their female partners, especially when there was a condom involved. Gay men could be just as tricky.

RF: This happens for a variety of reasons. And I have heard stories from gay friends where this has happened to them. Sometimes the guy isn't into the other guy and he wants to be polite so he fakes it. Sometimes the guy is just tired and has other things on his mind that night so he fakes it. And sometimes he's just not in the mood but doesn't want to hurt the other guy's feelings. It's not always personal, yet people tend to take it that way. I would imagine it's the same way with straight couples. This "image" about men being horny all the time is highly overrated on TV sitcoms like "Raymond."    

AB: And can you expand on this? Is it accepting it hard and dry or does emotional comfortableness allow for easy entry” They’d reached that point in their relationship where Neil knew how to take him without needing any foreplay.

RF: It's a combination of physical and emotional. People get used to each others’ bodies and they know what to expect, which is a nice point to reach in a relationship. It's also easier when you're with someone you love and know than it is with someone you don't. I once had a friend who couldn't bottom unless he felt something special for a guy.  

AB: (His) dick had a slight upward curve, which hit one of the most sensitive spots inside Neil’s body. Is this the prostate or are there other “sensitive spots”?

RF: It's usually the prostate, but there are, indeed, other spots. Depends on the person...and the connection between the two people.

AB: And another aspect interests me (if you have time, even a link would be fine) namely, the political aspect: Neil wasn’t about to go into a long explanation about same-sex marriage on a federal level. I assume it’s things like inheritance taxes etc that “Gay Pride and Prejudice” deals with. So the ability to “get married” is only one aspect I gather.

RF: It's very important to same sex couples, especially as they get older together, to have the same rights and legal protections as straight couples. It is about romance and love and all those good things, but it's also about cold hard facts of life and legal issues like owning property, businesses, etc... There are many links that get into this. But I haven't found one yet that actually spells it all out in one place. The American dream is different for gay couples who aren't allowed to legally marry, especially if they own property together. Inheritance taxes can wipe them out.

AB: If you ever read my reviews (and my book “Mardi Gras”) you’ll realise how interested I am in the whole concept of how the changing laws and society in place when gay guys first realize they are gay have had a profound effect on their attitudes and their ability to relate to gays from different generations. So I found this bit interesting: But when it came to gay weddings Tom did a turnaround that left Neil speechless. To me, there is a difference in attitude between those who came out pre-legalisation (still angry and bitter – resigned – the optimist who has been stepped on too many times), then you have those who came out during the AIDS era (fearful). Those that came out after, but prior to HIV becoming deemed “chronic rather than a death sentence” (cynical) to today’s generation (idealistic and not very sympathetic to those coming before) I know these are broad brush statements, but do you see generational differences?

RF: I see certain generational differences. But for the most part I think it really depends on the people. I know some older couples who think very differently than other older couples. I think this is just another example of we're all very different, which is important in breaking down the stereotypes.  

AB: Apart from the characters at the core of the story, the tale of Craig and Luke really stood out for me. I loved this bit: The minute he walked into my classroom as a college freshman, a bright white light flashed before my eyes for a split second and I knew I had to get to know him better. I really loved the twist in this (I mean, I didn’t it was very sad) but I love the way you avoided the cliché. You had me in tears, not easy when it comes to books.

RF: I actually took that from a real life experience I had once. I met someone, I saw a flash of what I can only describe as a bright white light, and I did get to know him better. I think we all experience this at least once...I hope so anyway. It's a great feeling, even though it doesn't last.  

AB: You’ve been very patient, so far, many thanks. Before we finish off, I’d like to touch briefly on your other writing. The first book of yours I ever read was “You Missed a Spot, Big Guy” which is pure erotica. No romance. Books written more for guys than gals. Do you think readers in general understand that writers slant their books to what publisher’s loyal reader base like and expect?

RF: I try to explain this on my blog whenever something new is released, so readers understand. I try to put it in the blurbs, too. I'm always telling readers that when they are shopping for books please check out author blogs and web sites. Most authors I know explain what they are doing in detail on their web sites. We really do care about giving readers all the information. And I'm always asking people to e-mail me if they have a question about buying a book or story I wrote. Many do this. I once had a woman e-mail me just to find out the ending of a book so she'd know whether or not she wanted to buy it. She didn't like the ending, didn't buy that book, but went on to buy others. I'd rather see a happy customer not buy something than a disgruntled customer. 

AB: To wrap up. Neil didn’t see the same “white light”. Just standing next to Andre was an emotional roller coaster.... Oh, he was sick and tired of the drama, most of which he’d created on his own. The question for the reader then, is this settling? Or being realistic? To me, FGWAAF is a great exploration of what it means to commit, who to choose to commit to, and the perils and pratfalls that can occur along the way. I think readers of both sexes will relate to many parts of the story. It’s not even unusual to have these doubts at the altar. Relationships are tricky things at the best of times. There is no “Mr Right” and “Mr Wrong”. So who do you choose? The one who chooses you for who you are in reality?

RF: I wanted Neil to see that he came very close to losing true love because he was more focused on a dream. It wasn't settling, not in this case. And I agree, readers of both sexes can identify with this. I know I've been there myself.

AB: So, to get back to the original “rip off” accusation. I prefer to see Ryan’s “Covers of Classics” as first and foremost romantic love stories from a genuine gay male perspective, often with that twist and occasional stark reminder of how their world differs from ours. Sure there is diversity and you can’t make generalisations, however I found the insight into different standards/morals/codes of behaviour/fantasies and fears of gay men fascinating.

RF: Thanks, this is what I've been trying to do. It's not always easy because I don't want to get on a soap box and preach. And, even though the gay community is different, we are all individuals and it's hard to give definitive answers. There are times I honestly don't even know when I am giving stark reminders.

AB: Thanks again to Ryan for being so willing to answer my questions. Knowing what he’s trying to achieve and why sure makes me appreciate his writing just that much more in both this series as well as others not directly related to existing books, eg “Hot Italian Lover” and his less romantic books published by lyd. Check out my reviews if you want to know more, or better still read his books for yourself!

http://ryan-field.blogspot.com/ 
2 Comments
 
 
Gay Pride and PrejudiceGay Pride and Prejudice by Ryan Field
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

So far, of all the remakes I enjoyed this one the most. Mainly, because Ryan does such a good job of translating the pride and prejudices to the gay community.

Don't expect a scene by scene remake. This takes the aspects that are at the core of Jane Austen's book: the cutting observations about people and society and what people of that ilk are proud and prejudiced about but putting them into a modern gay context. So, we're not getting dry 1800 social observations of character but 2010 characterisations from a gay POV. They're none the less apt.

This means that the characters will be different. Tristan is no Eliza Bennett, but he shares some of her qualities, her honesty and her embarrassment at the behavior of her relatives, and most of all in being opinionated. Likewise Miller is no Mr Darcy, but he also is bound by the strictures of his parents and background.

In this case the prejudices and pride are linked up with new vs old money, gays vs straights, old queens vs new age gay.
I want you to stick with our own kind, and I don't want you screwing around with all these straights.

There's also the more normal kind of pride:
Ellen's face gleamed with pride; she gazed at her big strong straight son with love and affection.

I love that the alternate love interest is a stud ex-serviceman just back from Iraq.

The parallel works really well in this case, as the whole topic of marriage is at the core of the original. Who should marry who and why and again in this case, all Tristan wants to do is get married.

“As I got older and legalized same-sex marriage became an issue within the lgbt community, I started to realize I deserved to fall in love and get married just as much as heterosexual couples deserved it. I made a decision a long time ago I wouldn't settle for less. Call it pride, call it being stubborn. But I won't settle for less.”

In this case "Mr Darcy" is still not exactly pro marriage. He just wants to fuck.

There are some priceless bits eg when one main character comes up with this:
“Do you want to suck my dick?” Miller asked. He adjusted his position and spread his legs wider.
Tristan smiled. He had a feeling Miller was trying to shock him on purpose. “That's not very romantic,” Tristan said.
“You haven't sucked my dick yet, so you don't really know that for sure. It might be the most romantic thing that's ever happened to you.”

And later, the other MC says this:
Though Tristan would have laughed at clichéd expressions like dripping dick or weeping cock in public, and he would have frowned if anyone had used these awful, trite, clichés in ordinary conversation, when he had one right in front of him it was a different story.
you have to smile!

Ryan has the equivalent faux pas down pat. The comments about the price of things, never done by someone who really is "old money". And I loved this bit:
And Clint had been giving him fashion tips. Eldridge hadn't worn a bow tie, a crew neck sweater draped over his shoulders, or a pair of pink plaid slacks in weeks.


But Ryan doesn't neglect sharing real facts to educate people about factors affecting the LGBT community. In this case:
“There are many older gay couples who have been together for years. Just like straight married couples, they own property together. When one of them passes away, the surviving partner is forced to pay inheritance taxes on their own property. It runs into thousands and it wipes them out.”

He also doesn't pull his punches on a couple of occasions about hypocrisy.

Ryan Field's "Covers of Classics" can be a bit hit or miss, but to me, "Gay Pride and Prejudice", does exactly what he has set out to do.



View all my reviews
Add Comment
 
 
Rebirth (The Eternal Dungeon, #1)Rebirth by Dusk Peterson
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

There are a few stories around that were born as online sagas and for various reasons never went the traditional route of publishing. "Special Forces" is one, "The Administration" is another. “Eternal Dungeon” ranks right up there with them.

The 400,000 word epic is obtainable from Smashwords: http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/27251.

The stories that make up "Rebirth", the first volume about "The Eternal Dungeon" are dark, but that’s because they explore serious themes. Themes of good and evil, guilt and repentance, redemption and renewal. Love is at the core of the stories and while there is some sex, it’s a very small component and vital to the plot.

Each of the chapters except the last are primarily told through the eyes of the two main characters, Elsdon Taylor and Layle Smith. Rebirth 6 is told completely by a totally new character, giving a whole new twist on the scene.

The following quote from the POV of Layle's former master isn’t the story by any means, but illustrates some of the concepts covered.

"The master's first acquaintance with his prisoner had come through the arrest records, and what he read there confirmed his long-held belief that the torturers of the Eternal Dungeon were fools. Their hope in prisoners' rebirth seemed to be based on the belief that prisoners' evil nature was shaped by the people around them: that if the prisoners met the right people, their natures could be shaped back to their original goodness.

The master considered this theory to be muck. In his experience, most people who did evil had been evil from the day they were born. This boy was a clear example. His early childhood had been no harder than that of many other children, and his time in the band had been, by the witness of the children and of those who had seen the boy during those years, a relatively pleasant period. There was no reason the boy should have turned to criminal torture – unless he was a boy born to do evil until someone stopped him by strangling him.....

It seems to me," he said slowly, "that your friends are looking at the matter from the wrong side round. The question isn't whether the evil men of this world should receive punishment. The question is what happens to the hearts of men who decide to inflict such punishment on their own, in time of anger. It's quite possible, you know, to become as evil as the wickedness you're punishing."

On the surface, a reader might expect tales of torture and abuse, pain and suffering, whereas in fact the specifics covering these are rarely entered into. If you fear reading them because the physical manifestation of torture doesn't appeal, you'll miss a truly great read.

The Eternal Dungeon is in essence the story of psychology. It's a story about the mind, not the body. It's a story about madness and sanity. It's the story about love given unreservedly to one who feels undeserving of that love. It's a story about sacrifice on every level.

And if you're still worried, there is a HFN at the end.

Just an update that "Eternal Dungeon" came second in Elisa's Rainbow Awards 2011 in the Best Setting Development and won (in a tie) Best Gay Fantasy!

View all my reviews
Add Comment
 
 
In light of all the kerfuffle about books in the genre not being authentic. Here's one that is. I'm not sure how Patric is these days. I hope he is as well as can be expected. His lively input is certainly missed.
TimelessTimeless by Patric Michael
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I bought and read Timeless after chatting to Patric Michael in Bethwylde's Yahoo Group. I'd never heard of him or "Timeless" before, so I was curious to see what it would be like.

The story starts with what could, for some, be a Spoiler but which the author told me later he sees more as a "hook". We learn straight up that Nate and Andy kiss.

Given that the next few pages were devoted to showing that Andy is straight, I was flumoxed by why the author would start the story that way. Once I got past this reaction, I started to see "Timeless" for what it was, a tale of two men, one who had acknowledged his homosexuality from an early age and another who went to great pains to prove he was straight.

They have ups and downs in their professional lives, each has lovers of varying degrees of closeness, but all the time they circle around each other as if connected by a long piece of string.

Timeless is a tale of friendship as much as it a tale of love. Andy and Nate might not have been lovers during all those years before they kissed, but they were still there for each other when it counted.
"Played. Was that it? Was I just tired of the casual dates that punctuated my social life to that point? I wasn't sure, but it felt right. I suddenly wished for Andy. Longed for him with an intensity that made my stomach cramp from the sheer weight of it. Andy would tease me, make me laugh, keep me from thinking. I wanted to wrap his vitality around me like a blanket and simply hide beneath the cover of our long friendship.", [Patric Michael, Timeless:]
It was a story about real life, real characters. If I was Nate, I'm not sure I could have excused Andy when he finally came out of the closet after wasting so many years when he'd been seemingly hopelessly in love with him, but obviously life's like that and there's a lesson to be learned there.

I also found it hard to believe that Nate wouldn't have sensed Andy's homosexuality, so I contacted the author and posed some of these questions to see just how realistic these scenarios would be, and he assured me he'd seen or experienced similar. Apparently guys are very capable of hiding their nature away if they fear recognition.

In which case, this story steps up above the rank of the usual m/m romance and actually becomes a study of human relationships. Of how people's needs and urges change over time. How difficult it was and possibly still is for some men to acknowledge their sexuality.

These concepts aren't belaboured, on the contrary, I found their inclusion made "Timeless" different from the majority of the m/m romances on the market and they made up for the little niggle I had with the opening spoiler.

"Timeless" is worth reading for the insight it gives into male bonding and male relationships as well as for the sweet romance it portrays.

Postscript: Now that more people have read this book, I'm interested to see that some of the younger males who read it, didn't like it because (I suspect) they didn't agree with the lifestyle choices the characters made. One reviewer going so far as to express dissatisfaction with slutty behavior. Now, note by "lifestyle" I'm not referring to whether or not they are gay, but the type of life they lead. I feel this behavior reflects the era of the man writing the story. When he "came out" / grew up, homosexuality was not as accepted as it was today.

This tended to create a different attitude to sex and monogamy. The latter was unheard of between gay males, or if couples did exist, they were the exception rather than the rule. Men, therefore, being treated as outcasts often went that one step further, pushing the boundaries and being hedonistic, because you were damned if you did and and damned if you didn't.

Hopefully, gay men when reading books by writers who lived in the generations before theirs, won't judge behavior on today's standards. Instead they should take the opportunity to learn what it was like and be thankful that times have changed.

So, while the behavior of the protagonists may not be "Timeless" their hopes and desires are.

View all my reviews
Add Comment
 
 
Plus OnesPlus Ones by Hank Edwards
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

To start out, I have to admit I'm not a big fan of weddings, especially the five figure extravaganzas that seem to be the norm these days, so a book that features a number of the darn things might be one you would think I'd avoid. However, a book by one of my favorite authors about gay weddings is different. Not because the colors are brighter or the guests are sexier, but purely because until recently, for many men, getting married has been an impossible dream.

This subtext of the political and cultural importance of the occasion runs lightly in the background of Hank's tale about two men who sincerely want their HEA. They want the white picket fence, the shared pet/s, the certainty of knowing they have someone to share the rest of their life with.

In real life, many men have found this future and even more are looking for it. This book is about the latter. The sheer number of the false starts they make along the way is quite believable given tales I've heard from gay men today.

Using at times, hilarious and at other times, pounding sex we see the two men weave their way around the metaphorical dance floor like one of those progressive dances where they meet up by chance only to swing away with a new partner.

This isn't a case of the big misunderstanding that could easily be solved if only they talked. To have a misunderstanding you have to have a relationship that can be threatened in the first place. This is more two men both burned by love, not daring to act on gut feelings while the object of their affection seems involved with someone else.

I really enjoyed the story. I enjoyed the insight into the wistfulness, despair and the insecurities often covered up by sarcasm and flippancy that I would imagine is quite common in gay men and their relationships. Often being too scared to commit for fear of being made vulnerable to hurt as they have been so many times before.

The weddings that take place in the background, particularly that of their friends Alden and John act as a beacon of hope for the men in the book and probably reflects the situation in real life as does the bigotry and hatred that still threatens from the outside.

I once asked the noted writing guru, Debra Dixon, how to introduce conflict into humorous romance as any book without conflict is boring. Her immediate response was embarassment. Hank uses this deliberately to portray his slightly clutzy hero Evan. This sort of character easily creeps into a reader's affection.

The object of his lust, Paul, without having any of these audience grabbing attributes comes across as more aloof, but that's okay. Two people the same wouldn't work and Paul's slight off-handedness is more a product of his being betrayed on more than one occasion by people he gives or nearly gives his heart to. He recognises his faults in a very telling scene towards the end, when his boss, John, asks him to be his best man.

Hank has also done a wonderful job of portraying his secondary characters, the unforgettable Miggy and the pathetic Meryl. Even Jeremy and Adam in a few short words take on a life of their own.

"Plus Ones" has everything readers are demanding in m/m romance. There is romance, emotional involvement and lots of hot sex. Sure, for most of the book the sex is with other people, but the quality of the sex with different partners was never the problem, it is the people they are having the sex with. The little things that turn them off like the high pitched voices or weird kinks and psychological problems. To me, this is a realistic view of the world of gay men dating even if possibly concentrated and embellished for our amusement.

I have been a fan of Hank's writing for a while now, but I think "Plus Ones" is a step above the rest. There is still the light humor he does so well, but underneath that is this testament to marriage and what it means to so many gay men.

View all my reviews
Add Comment
 
 
Twice-Caught (Tarin's World, #2)Twice-Caught by Syd McGinley
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

What a great follow up to "Out of the Woods"!

Any book told from the point of view of a protagonist who is not privy to all the facts but relies on his inherent common sense will create a skewed view of the world he inhabits. So it continues to be with Tarin.

Underlying the continuing charming story about Twice Caught and Beak-Face there is a depiction of a society where one sector is kept ignorant, and kept in their place even though they are cherished. This makes an interesting parallel with our own world (in different parts and at different times) if you translate "boys" to "women". Not that I'm suggesting that is the point of the story, but the problems that can occur when one sector is artificially kept down definitely resonates.

Yes, the men are harsh, paternalistic and at times stupid but not intentionally so. Over time, the changes that are already happening - thanks to Tarin's catalytic arrival in their midst - will continue to improve the way they think and operate. You can see the officers beginning to see flaws in the way they opertae already. So, unlike some reviewers, I don't "hate" the men. Most of their mistakes and faults stem from ignorance.

But are they the oppressors? Or is it the Mothers who deliberately keep them in a state of borderline survival, forcing them to co-operate and find their own solutions?

Bad-Egg Jadon was an over the top villain (again seen through the eyes of one very biased boy) so it will be interesting to see what sort of character will provide the conflict should there be a further book in the series.

I see lots of potential for future stories both for our hero and other characters. Especially now Tarin has gypsy status. I, for one, would love to learn more about his world and how it came to be as devastated as it is. Anyway, I'm sure he'll have to find a cow, even if it's only so he can eat truly great pizza.

While you read, take the time to unravel all the different references to our culture in the books, songs, nursery rhymes, stories, terms. That's half the fun.

Once again, Syd has delivered with a book that satisfies on so many levels. A heart-warming love story, a fascinating world, an interesting look at the ways society operates along with so many distinct and interesting characters.

The book is also a great example of what can be done with limited viewpoint. We don't have to be in every character's heads to work out what they're like. Not that Tarin tells us outright, once again, the clues are there in what he sees and hears, it's up to the reader, using a more experienced view of life to interpret the clues and detect the real nature of the character.

"Twice Caught" caught me. Once I started reading, I couldn't put it down and when I finally did, my biggest reaction was relief and satisfaction that Syd hadn't let me down.

(What is even better is that, unlike with "Out of the Woods", I didn't notice and typo's!)



View all my reviews
Add Comment
 
 
The first book of Jane Davitt’s that I read was “Bound and Determined”. I loved that, so I bought “Drawing Closer” and “Wild Raspberries”. That led me to “Wintergreen”.

I make it a practice to email authors when I really enjoy their work. Call me a crazy fangirl, whatever! I like to tell author's what really works for me. As well as being a great story teller, Jane’s writing style is very fluid. The sort of thing that possibly escapes most reader’s notice, but as a freelance editor as well as a fledgling author, I appreciate well written prose when I see it. So another congrats are in order to Jane (and/or her editor *grins*). This is from the email I sent about a year ago:

Can I just say “Wintergreen” has to be one of the best "sequel" books I’ve read. To me, the anticipation of a couple getting together in the first place is what makes a romance, so sequels often don’t cut it. However, the way you handled the story and the knowledge from the get-go that the pairing would have its difficulties was fantastic. The conflict didn’t feel manufactured and the resolution was well done. I’m not a fan of external conflict being brought in just to create tension in a story. However, in this case, the action in book two had almost been foreshadowed in book one. The tension and conflict still centred around the characters’ past and personalities, with the action being the vehicle to carry that forward.

So, I sent the above to Jane and a discussion followed which I’m blogging here with her permission.  Firstly, her response:

JD: Thank you so much for taking the time to write to me; it’s much appreciated!

I’m so glad Wintergreen worked for you. I loved Dan and Tyler and I wanted to do a sequel and see just how they were getting on a few months down the road. I think there were a lot of pointers in Wild Raspberries that it wasn’t going to be easy to them, yes; just too much dragging at them from the past.

I like to think that now they finally made it on their journey :-)

AB: I’m glad you're not tempted to drag it out further with another book. So many authors do.

JD: I don’t think I could really get into it; one book is usually enough, though Alexa and I did do a trilogy together and enjoyed it.

AB: Though, the next time it would be interesting to be a “fly on the wall” when Tyler gets to retirement age and Dan is at his peak (ie in his thirties). Transitions in relationships are a great source of conflict.

JD: They are! But they’re only, what 14 years apart? When Tyler’s 65, Dan would be 51 :-) ; not that far apart maybe? So, if they last that long, I don’t see it being an issue because they’d have adjusted to it by then.

AB: I’m interested in your collaborative process with Alexa. Do you do it character by character i.e. in role-play or are there elements each adds?

JD: We usually write a character each and tag back and forward, sometimes a paragraph, sometimes more. And we’re not possessive; we often borrow each other’s characters for a few lines. I wouldn’t write:

Would you like a cup of coffee, X

and then send it to her; I'd use her character to answer and pass it over when it got to somewhere more interesting.

With each book, we've become less attached to a single character; in our most recent one, “Room at the Top”, though we each dreamed up a character, when we came to write, we would write long tags, using each other's characters freely until it got to the point where they were jointly owned, really. It made the writing go much faster and the story flow better, I think.

Because, I also collaborate with other writers in an online soap "Redemption Reef", I followed up this question with a couple of other to clarify matters:

AB: I gather you each take a particular character then and write the next scene from that viewpoint by yourself, is that correct? But, that would mean you would have to have some idea about what each of your characters is going to do in that scene, so you must have plotted something out. How much pre-plotting do you do when you're co-writing?

JD: We don't do a whole scene on our own; sometimes it's a paragraph, sometimes even a line.  It's totally dependent on the story. We alternate POVs so if the chapter's from 'my' character's POV, maybe I'd handle anything that added something new to what we know about him or write a particularly emotional bit, but the more we write together, the more the lines blur. We used to add notes, 'hope it's okay, I borrowed your character for a few lines' but we don't now, we just do it and we're way faster and the voice is more consistent, I feel. Think of us as being parents to each character; one of us gave birth to him but we bring him up together :-)

Plotting we do outside the story via email. We'll sketch it out roughly, with a few highlights to include, get started, try to incorporate the highlights -- sometimes the story shifts direction and they don't work -- and plot in more detail as we write. It's a very fluid, easy process. Mostly, the story tells itself.

AB: If you each "own" a character. Which ones are yours and which are Alexa's?

JD: See above :-) To start with, we have a character each and swap their bios, maybe include a photo so that we get a mental image. But once we start writing, these days it's all a melting pot. This is a snippet from Room at the Top, written from Jay's POV (Jay was my character, Austin was Alexa's and we shared Liam). From memory, I'll try and divide it as we wrote it, but honestly, it's hard to remember because we have such a close joint voice so I can't swear who wrote which :-). I'm in italics. So you can see that we're both writing both of them.

“It’s not—” Jay took a deep breath and abandoned the argument before it began. “I’ll be good.”

“If you are, I’ll buy you something special,” Austin said. “It’ll be like Christmas. Really late Christmas.”

“Or really early.” Jay didn’t care either way. He loved Christmas, and the most recent one he’d spent with Austin had been as close to perfect as he could have wished for. They’d had an amazing tree and piles of presents, and Christmas breakfast had consisted of the two of them snuggled on the couch in their almost identical new bathrobes, sipping hot chocolate and eating fresh cinnamon rolls. The apartment had smelled like cinnamon for days. “Too bad there won’t be candy canes.”

“Yeah, I think those are a seasonal thing. Have a good afternoon, okay?”

“Love you.”

“Love you two.”

“Love you three,” Jay said. If he’d heard anyone else say that, he’d have rolled his eyes at the sap overload, but when it was between them, it felt like a joke only they got.

He tucked his phone away and left a scatter of bread crumbs for the ants.

Did they even eat bread? Maybe he’d look it up when he got back to the library. He was going through Dewey numbers in his head as he crossed the road, but he made it to the other side, so he must’ve looked both ways.
end of chapter

Hope that helps!

AB: Why do you collaborate?

JD: Alexa and I both started off writing fanfic (still do!) and worked together on several fics in the Buffy fandom years ago. We enjoyed it so we decided to try co-writing a novel. At that point we’d both had solo novels published. I find it fun, because you get to read at the same time as writing. I once collaborated on a fic with three other people and we posted a new chapter daily for eight months, each taking turns to write it, and we were as much fans of the fic as writers of it. I find that there’s no writer’s block when you’re collaborating; if you’re stuck, you do a short tag and your partner digs you out and then you return the favor. It gives it a very organic feel, especially in the sex scenes; you’re not controlling events and it’s looser, more natural.

AB: Do you find it difficult to write by yourself?

JD: No, not at all. I'm pretty prolific :-) I do find it’s much faster to collaborate, though. Solo, I aim for 1000-2000 words a day; with Alexa, we can knock off 5,000 a day easily.

AB: Do you have other things you’ve written that you are looking for publishers for? Or are you flat out writing for your current publishers?

JD: I have four publishers, Torquere and Ellora’s Cave for my solo novels, Loose Id for the books with Alexa and Total-e-Bound for short stories (it just sort of happened that way) and no, everything I write is usually at their request so I don’t have anything hanging around. I aim for a solo novel and a co-written one a year plus a few shorts.

Recently Jane responded again when I reviewed her book “Hourglass” at Goodreads which also appears in m,y previous blog post.

JD: That is such a great review; thank you! I don’t just mean it’s good because you liked the book either; I love that you really took the time to detail your feelings and responses to the story as you read it. It was so interesting to see the book through your eyes that way.

Emboldened, I asked her some more questions which she was kind enough to answer:

AB:. When you set out to write “Hourglass” did the concepts about the structure come first or did they grow with the story? In other words, was the “how” you were going to write the story always there from the start?

JD: It was, yes. I had the idea of the TV show first and then I decided it'd be fun to not just refer to it in the book, but to plot it out in detail. From there, I got the idea of starting each chapter with a snippet of script or a show-related article. They were masses of fun to write and of course, I could use them to echo something going on in the ‘real’ story (though in some ways, both sets of characters felt equally real by the end).

AB: What prompted that decision? Did something else inspire you?

JD: Nothing in particular. I guess as a fan myself, I know just how it feels when a show is cancelled so I drew on that, and I own many scripts of shows, which I love reading. They came in handy as templates so that the scripts were as authentic as I could make them.

AB:. How much of what I interpreted as being deliberate was, or am I reading into it much more than you did consciously?

JD: Sometimes, I’ll write something and people will read more into than I consciously intended, but with Hourglass I was very deliberately setting up echoes between the actors and the characters they played and structuring it in quite a complex way. It was like someone sitting between mirrors and seeing endless reflections of themselves. There was a story within a story within a story.

AB: Would you ever write something so untraditional again (not necessarily using the same methods but other more deliberate devices)?

JD: If an idea comes to me that would fit that format, sure, why not?

AB: How did Torquere receive the story?

JD: I don’t recall any issues at all. I sent it in; my editor, Vincent Diamond, liked it, and we worked together to polish it up.

AB: Do you have an editor there who encouraged that style or was it more of a case of “Well you’re a well-respected author of the genre so people will forgive you for your untraditional story telling style?”

JD: I work with different editors there but I’m sure whoever edited it would have been supportive. To be honest, it never occurred to me that it WAS all that untraditional or out there. I thought the concept with the chapter headings telling a parallel story was interesting but I’m sure it's been done before (what hasn’t? :-)). Ben introducing and ending it, well, I liked Ben and I didn’t see why the story had to be solely about Ash and Lee; there seemed room in the story for him. They were actors; they needed to be directed, if that makes sense.

AB: Do you regret that m/m romance particularly is becoming formulaic?

JD: I read a fair bit of it now that I have an e-reader, and I don’t know if it is or it isn’t really. The genre of romance itself does have a framework that readers like because it’s reassuring and that goes for m/f, m/m, or f/f romances. I definitely like stories to push the boundaries, but I’d be pouting if there was an unhappy ending so maybe I don’t want them pushed too far!

AB: What would you like to see more of in the genre?

JD: Nothing comes to mind. There’s a huge variety of settings and heat levels as it is, plus crossovers with SF, horror, mystery and such. I think it’s a vibrant, growing genre, especially with the surge of interest in e-books and I’m proud to be part of its growth.

AB: Any other comments you’d like to make on reviewers, readers and your future writing plans?

JD: I’m currently writing a solo novel for Torquere that’s my first novel not set in a contemporary setting. It’s a pre-industrial fantasy world, no magic, no dragons, but definitely not our world, with a theatrical background. An actor sees a young man fresh from the country in trouble and steps in to help him only to find he's unable to walk away once his good deed's done. I’m having a lot of fun (in a vaguely Hourglass way!) in having the actor quote from plays that I invented, and coming up with dozens of titles.

And to reviewers and readers alike, I have only one thing to say which is : thank you! Thank you for reading and for being interested enough to comment. It’s much appreciated.

"Room at the Top", Jane's most recent collaboration with Alexa is now available from LooseID.

A big thank you to Jane for so patiently answering my questions. I do enjoy knowing more about the why and how they write.
Add Comment
 
 
HourglassHourglass by Jane Davitt
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Have you ever picked up a book, started reading it and gone WTF? Hourglass did that for me.
I bought it purely because I love Jane Davitt's writing (possibly the ones she writes by herself more than the ones with Alexa). I didn't read the blurb first and found Ben - the guy whose POV the first chapter is written in - frankly obnoxious. Then Samantha his daughter arrived on the scene....
Now, I'm not one to stop reading because of unlikeable characters and have even rated books higher if the author can sell me a story where the main protagonists are less than perfect (Bad Company), but when I first picked up "Hourglass", it didn't grab me.
Maybe I wasn't in the mood.
I left it in my Mobipocket reader library along with all my other unread stories. Over the next few weeks, other purchases came and went as I read through them quickly, but still Hourglass remained. The weird thing was that my reader for some reason uses one cover as a default, so out of, say, thirty books, half may have one illustration. Every time I opened my reader the multiple images of an hourglass grabbed my attention. It was almost as if the book was yelling at me to read the damn thing.
Finally, I succumbed and am bloody glad I did.
There are only a couple of writers whose work resonates with me as being "original". Other readers may not see them that way, but something in their books or their characters jumps out as "different" and enjoyable, mainly because of that difference. Syd McGinley's Dr Fell and Jay Lygon "Chaos Magic" books fall firmly into that category. Interestingly they are also published by Torquere Press.
At this point of writing, I'm half way through Hourglass and dreading that Kate Mc's review of (Brilliant first half, shame about the rest) remark is correct.
So far so good. Now that I have the hang of what is going on, I'm enjoying the structure. The characters and their romance is one level, but the underlying circumstances with the real life parallels to shows like Torchwood and the little digs at the movie industry and the workers in it are worth reading for their own sake.
Ben is growing on me and even the presence of the daughter is not an eye-rolling diversion.
In fact, seeing the couple from Ben's POV adds another dimension to the story. The cynical onlooker. A device that Take My Picture could have used (see my review).

Reading on......
Part of the "problem" people have with the book is the amount of "telling" versus "showing" there is, particularly bits from Ben's POV where we gets lines like this:
The read-through a week earlier had been a disaster. Morden and Simons had sat as far apart as was humanly possible at a round table and said their lines to each other with an icy politeness that robbed them of meaning, or a bored mumble. Sure, no one expected a cold reading to be Oscar-material, but the tension had been palpable. The only time they'd behaved like professionals was when the script called for them to talk to someone else. For those scenes, they'd taken their heads out of their asses and actually given him something resembling a glimmer of hope that this movie would be halfway watchable.
Now, in most m/m romances you would get this scene "shown", but then it would have to be in one of the character's heads, so it would have been uneven as neither would ever admit to themselves they were being pig-headed. So, by telling it from Ben's perspective, we are able to picture the scene ourselves simply because we already know the characters so well. Sure, we're not spoon-fed with it by seeing it in detail, but I can still picture everything that happens.
Perhaps that's why I'm enjoying the book so much. There is freedom for me to fill in the gaps.
Which reminds me of one of my current peeves. There is a growing fashion in romance writing for everything to be shown (and I'm not just talking graphic sex scenes, but that's one symptom of it). I think it's great if we get a good balance between the two forms of writing. Used intelligently in the appropriate place and then read patiently, a good tell can be just, if not more rewarding.

Anyway reading on......
By now, Ben's really growing on me.
"Son, the writers put a palomino in that scene," Ben said with his friendliest, scariest smile. "If you want to be the one to tell them that you couldn't get them what they wanted, if you want to be the one to destroy their artistic vision, just trample it to the ground, then go right ahead. They're in that little room beside the men's john."
"The broom cupboard?"
"Is that what they're calling the writers' room these days?" Ben inquired innocently. "Like the green room or something?"
"No, I think it's actually a --"
"Go away," Ben said softly, with emphasis, tiring of the game.
Pity he's straight!

Two-thirds of the way through now. Still OK, still making sense. Logical relationship progression. Not too fast, not too slow.
Fucking each other once, no matter whether the earth moved or not, is not going to magically atone for ten years of having their lives fucked up. Some criticisms have been levelled at the tired old trope of the big misunderstanding being used, but that was only one aspect of their problem. They admit themselves that they weren't ready for a relationship at that stage, society was less accepting of celebrities being gay and an element of professional jealousy prevailed.
I think another reason I'm enjoying Hourglass is that the author treats her readers as people with intelligence. A rare occurrence. Take this bit for example:
If this was a movie, the script would call for him to splash water on his face, stare at his reflection in the mirror, maybe punch a wall. Ash didn't want to do any of those things, which just went to show how artificial scripts were. He sat on the toilet, with the seat down, and stared at the floor, a spotless white tile, subtly patterned with swirls and with an iridescent gleam.
I can really relate to that.

Reading on.... Ooh, something unexpected happens. This must be the spoiler that Kate deleted. Hm, not too sure what I think of this development. I can see where the author is coming from, though, making a pretty heavy statement about the right of celebrities to live their lives in peace, without papparazi or the public thinking they own them, just because they see them regularly on their little rectangular boxes in their living rooms.

Reading on....
Dramatic, but hey, the whole incident parallels the television series they starred in which almost demanded something of this magnitude. In a way, their real life resembles a movie script (more of that later).
Also, I may have commented somewhere that reading half a good book and putting it down because the rest is no good is more rewarding than reading the whole of one mediocre book. Whle this may be true, the sentiment doesn't apply in this case.
There's nothing "wrong" with the last half of Hourglass. For starters, if you did stop, you'd miss the snarky scene between Ash and Ben at the swimming pool.
Lately I've noticed that too many authors just churn out book after book, filled with repetitive chunks of their own writing or are derivative of other people's work, complete with plots you could fill in after reading the first chapter, so it's good to discover that Jane has in a number of instances deliberately skipped the clichéd turn of events, eg people recognising someone when the obvious plot move would be not to.
And as for the show vs tell debate... the point is that that the author has some great "shown" scenes in the book. But they're kept for the important sections.
At no stage did I think these two guys were chicks with dicks. At no time did their angsting, or their dialogue feel anything but right for the character.
I like it when one hero can say to the other:
"You're just one tangled mess of hang-ups and issues, you know that?"
and the remark is uttered affectionately, naturally. The sort of dialogue two men would have.
Sure, Lee's statement above about Ash was a spot on and accurate assessment of his faults. But that didn't stop him loving him, or as he so succinctly puts it later:
Let me know when you've stopped emoting and I'll finish the foreplay and get to your favorite bit."

There was a word or two here and there I would have tweaked to an alternative that might fit better. But, hey, that's me, over-refining the text until it's almost too slick to be real.
And the sex?
Despite what Lee says above, the foreplay for the last, very satisfying scene was the best part of it. All "shown" beautifully, dahlings.
I loved the laugh-out-loud bits of dialogue (and there are lots of those). This is a feel good, smiley book if you let it be.
Lee laughed. That was Ash all over. If he was issued a halo in heaven, he'd probably ask if it made his ears look big. "You make bed head look good, trust me."
Even the ending of the original television series is sigh-worthy.
Now for the final zinger. “Why did the author start and finish the book through the eyes of Ben?” My best explanation is that this makes the love story between Ash and Lee feel like just that, a story boxed up and presented to the reader by Ben, the producer. Although we quickly switch into feeling it is their story, we get pulled back out often enough to give the impression that we’re watching this love affair unfurl on television - complete with interruptions - while segments of the TV series, magazine articles, horoscopes, action told from another point of view are slotted in, much like television commercials.
Whether or not you think, as a reader, this is a good thing or not remains to be seen. At least in this case those “breaks in the viewing” are relevant and act almost like a Greek chorus, commenting indirectly on what’s just happened or about to happen. Removed but pertinent.
To sum up. If you’re reading m/m romances to get a quick sexual titillation, then maybe this isn’t for you. (The sex/romance is there. I can point out the page numbers if you like!) If you’re looking for your standard boy meets boy, they have a bit of conflict but get together in the end, well that’s also there but that’s not all that’s there. If you’re looking for a story about two men in love presented in a way that suits that love, then that’s there in spades.
If you’re sick of the same old, same old and despair of the standard of m/m romances, then give “Hourglass” a burl, but first lose the expectations, lose the preconceptions about how m/m romances should be written. Love the characters for who they are, enjoy watching them connect and discover that there is a relationship beyond the sex. Savor the carefully crafted touches that make this book stand out far above the crowd.
It could have been written as a straight gay romance, but by “wrapping” up a simple love story and presenting it in a box, interleaved with sheets of “tissue paper” Jane has given me, at least, an unforgettable ride of a read.
Or, in this case, in the words of Samantha who by now I liked nearly as much as her Dad:
"That was just perfect," she declared.

5.5 stars rounding down to 5.


View all my reviews
Add Comment
 
 
Chainmale: 3SM--A Unique View of Leather CultureChainmale: 3SM--A Unique View of Leather Culture by Don Bastian
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I've often wondered what makes a good Dominant. Are they just sadistic control freaks? Most BDSM m/m books that delve into the psychology and not just the mechanics are told from the perspective of the sub, with a few notable exceptions like Syd McGinley's Dr Fell series.

Hence, when I discovered that there was a non-fiction book written by a well known Dom in the Leather scene I was intrigued and then ultimately satisfied. "Chainmale" is written as a stream of consciousness and in it I found the answers to a lot of my questions. It's a book that you have to stop and think about as sometimes just two paragraphs may contain a whole strand of thought which needs consideration.

As many readers don't have access to a Kindle, I'm including some quotes to give you an idea of the sorts of things I'm talking about that put the whole thing into perspective. There is a hard copy version, and you can get Kindle as a free download to your PC.
(The Dungeon Master)becomes director, psychologist, props manager, and scriptwriter, all in one. This fully rounded individual enables the bottom to explore a full range of experiences, emotions, and fears with total support and confidence. Mentor and student. And maybe that is why I feel that my education as a Top is never complete. There is always some applicable piece of information cropping up to spark new approaches and explanation
.....
The fact that I actually cared about my bottom's well-being and acknowledged it drew various negative responses from the audience. To some, I became 'too-real', meaning that my ability to 'feel' got in the way of their fantasy. Some wanted truly sadistic scenes in which the bottom viewed the Top as an uncaring power figure. A valid point too. These fantasies are needed by some and, I admit, there are times when I enjoy them also.
.....
A "mean, tough, cream-puff" is a rough exterior with a marshmallow center and a great analogy of most Leatherfolk in my opinion. I have never met more passionate and caring people in my life.
I could provide a safe and trustworthy place to explore their fantasies, within the confines of their submission. A place to let go knowing they might trip but I would catch their fall.
.....
I value a bottom who is creative, spontaneous, and objective. I do not wish a doormat. After all, someone who can think for themselves also pushes my creativity and limits. It is the respect shown me as a Top that carries weight and has the most value emotionally, in or out of the playroom.
It is the respect shown me as a Top that carries weight and has the most value emotionally, in or out of the playroom. Not time out, but just a toned down period that allows readjustment or re-evaluation of the contractual needs.
....
For example, a weekend of intense bondage and the ability to play for a lengthy period, for me, requires tremendous focus.
....
Even through clenched teeth, a difference can be intimated just by volume. The exception to this being if the bottom displays a "this-is-a-test" attitude to discover what it takes to make a Top abandon the scene. The 'you-couldn't-get-a-response-so-I-win' attitude that some bottoms exhibit. Well, they usually get a response from the Top they were not expecting. Translate that anyway you wish. I have two words for pushy bottoms - duct tape.
Some of the boys I have played with repetitively use this tactic to see what my limits are. Well, boys, it’s not nice to test Daddy's patience. And to be fair, if I am not getting the responses I expect, maybe our needs just aren't meshing. Mood swings and expectations are influenced by many factors both before and during a scene. The trick is to know when it is not working and call it off rather than perform a mercy-fuck just to save face.
There are times when the bottom just puts out and shuts-up, especially if Daddy is in the mood to mete out some long-remembered act of retribution. "Forgive but never forget" is my motto, and it comes in very handy.

Then the classic story he describes when he comes home unexpectedly and finds his boy curled up in bed instead of doing chores. He made up an excuse for being there, left without acknowledging he’d seen the boy and then lets him stew for days before he brings it up in a scene.
“Ah, sweet fate. I'll let him squirm for a while. He'll relax eventually. I’ll bet he tip toes around his duties and the conversation for a few days though. Besides, time is on my side and I never forget.
....
I know better now. I know what to ask, how to ask it, and how to deduce the subtle answer about what was not said as opposed to what actually was said.
Mistakes generally occur because of eagerness to be part of a scene. In this case, I had been thinking with my dick instead of my head. Experience is the best lesson.
The language we all use to communicate is borrowed, adapted, and labeled with special meaning to become applicable to the Leather culture. Words are still words, but some have dual meanings and carry more power under circumstances for which the original meanings were not designed.
My Leather taught me one very important fact: communication is not just talking, it is also observing.
....
Good communications skills - more to the point, good listening skills - allow me to disseminate information and express ideas that ultimately lead to my objective, whether that objective is buying a car or negotiating my way into someone's pants. I remember scolding a bottom and telling him that there was a reason he had two ears and one mouth. His wrong reply was, so that I had something to hold onto while he gave me a blowjob. He was difficult, but he got over it - with a little help from the welts on his back.

The book also shows that there’s a lot of philosophy as well as psychology at play. At one stage, Don the Dom discusses the concept of listening:
Too many people like to hear themselves talk because it makes them feel important. Listening allows me to change my mind about a willingness, or unwillingness, to advance the conversation with someone to whom I am attracted.
....
Many scenes have gone awry because of misinterpretation. For this reason, the ability to listen, as well as the ability to ask the right questions without tipping your hand are crucial to success.

I could list more examples.
Despite the weighty thoughts behind it, the writing is lyrical and easy to read. This is a good example of the bits that lift the book from the mundane to the extraordinary:
The looks on those faces swirling around the bar are enough to entertain me all night. The music seems to increase in volume, rhythms guiding the gyrating masses, the din of conversation lowering under the weight of the music, communication becoming eye contact only. The hunt has started. Needy eyes, glazed eyes, come-fuck-me eyes, eyes that were begging just for that masculine touch against their skin at any cost. The want was so evident that it scares off most with its pleading and eagerness. Few eyes make contact with mine. It is the honesty in my eyes, I think, that is intimidating to most. Nothing superficial about the questions in my eyes, "What are you really looking for?" and, "Are you prepared to be honest in return?" No hidden agendas here. Naked trust questioned at a glance. "Are you willing? Will you bare your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" They glance away.

I am indebted to Teddy Pig for leading me to this book. He mentioned it in a blog he did back in 2005 http://www.leatherflog.com/2005/11/leath... and then repeated part of it in his current "Naughty Bits" blog. I'll leave it up to his experience to comment on the validity of the content, I'm happy just to share and recommend it to those looking for a fuller picture of the scene.

View all my reviews
Add Comment
 
 
The All Trilogy: All TogetherThe All Trilogy: All Together by Dirk Vanden
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Kudos to loveyoudivine Alterotica for re-releasing Dirk Vanden's "All" trilogy: "I Want It All", "All Or Nothing" and "All is Well" in one combined book. The three stories stand alone, each told from the first person viewpoint of a different character, however common characters and a couple of common events link them together.

The first version was released before the Stonewall Riots, and to quote Dirk: "My books weren't considered worthy of editing when they were first published.... We were lucky just to get the books published and to get a few bucks for an outright sale."

Drugs feature unapologetically strongly throughout. Both the upside - the euphoric feeling that you had all the answers, understood the essence of life and the universe and then the downside as reality stabbed euphoria in the back and painted black shadows around everything.

Apparently, one publisher wanted Dirk to "apologise" for all the drug use in his books, but as he explained it to me in an email: "We were illegal, immoral perverts in those days and anything we could do to our heads to keep from thinking how terrible we were just to have sex with each other and how even more terrible we were to write about it. As a result, I tried marijuana, mescaline and LSD and discovered that they "opened doors in my mind. Drug use in Gay bars in the 60s and 70s was as common as beer and cigarettes, and, of course, like nicotine, and alcohol, the drugs were addictive."

The books are set solidly in the late sixties, early seventies, an era famous for its music, its hippies and its drug taking, but still a time when homosexuality was illegal in most States. The times they were a-changing though. Chuck, the son of the last book's protagonist, sees it as a time when sex was not a big deal, and who you did it with was almost irrelevant.

In each story, a man who always thought of himself as straight, discovers he is happier being gay. Remember that in those days, this was a fate considered far worse than death. Those who identified as such were hounded by the law, consigned to the depths of hell by religion, rejected by family and rebuffed by their peers.

Making an apology is another theme in common. The viewpoint character has to acknowledge and seek forgiveness for a hurtful act. Until this is done, the character can never find peace within himself.

So let's get into the stories themselves. If the concept of golden showers and other such things turns you off, don't read this trilogy.

If you don't like learning about what it was like to be gay back in the 1970's, don't read this trilogy.

If politically incorrect sections like this:
"Gay guys are the most bewildering people on earth! One minute they can be so damned pleasant--and then turn right around and be the bitchiest bastards you've ever seen. It's like they all had split-personalities! (I kept remembering that kid I'd picked up in Nevada, and the Jekyl-Hyde thing that happened to him.) I don't know--it's like gay guys live on a tightrope or something; you never know what's going to set them off! Like--a guy would come in and order his drink, and usually he'd be smiling and happy, saying "hi" to everyone--and he'd pick out a spot to stand and display himself and cruise; but then, maybe half an hour later, you'd hear him snapping at people, swearing--or go storming out, shoving people out of his way! And who knows what the hell happened? Maybe he cruised someone and got turned down--or maybe he thought things weren't happening fast enough--or got hungup thinking nobody wanted him! Or, you're down at one end of the bar and a guy wants to talk--and someone else goes down to the other end, wanting a drink--and no matter what you do then, you're wrong; they act like you're insulting them both by not being in two places at once! Or if you're out of the one kind of beer a guy likes, it's like you've said something against his mother!"
offends your sensibilities don't read these stories.

If reading about rape upsets you - again don't start reading.

While there is a "Happy Ever After" for each, if you're looking for a sweet m/m romance, don't read "All Together".

Are you getting the picture, yet?

However, if you want an honest, no-holds-barred look at the scene back then, check it out. The background is painted around a basic plot of what happens to three different "straight" men involved in the rape of a gay man passing through town.

The second story, "All or Nothing", runs in parallel to "I Want it All". The first chapters cover the same territory but it's seen from a different point of view.

Being a painter himself, Dirk has a very observant eye. He remarked to me in an email: "My head works differently somehow. I see "more" than other people. I don't know what that means. I've always thought of it as "paying attention."

Here's an example:
"They were all fascinating to watch--the way most of them tried to look so casual; they really worked at it, leaning against the wall, or the bar, or the pool table in the alcove, in just the right stray gleam of light to show off their "baskets." (I learned many new words that night.) They were posing in every sense of the word--some of them not just for a possible "trick" but for themselves; I got the feeling that if anything happened to disturb the pose, they wouldn't be able to function until they got back into it."


Once again, he is also not afraid to make some statements about being gay and what it means:
"At any rate, I learned that night that there were almost as many "types" as there were gay men. Apparently something had changed since I'd first heard about "fairies.""


and remember this was written back in the seventies.

Dirk, via his character, has some interesting takes on marriage too:
"Maybe someday the laws and ideas about marriage will change also, and when that happens, maybe it won't be impossible to have both a wife and a family and a male lover-friend, all at the same time."

and earlier in a description that parallels his own relationship with his partner who died in the AIDS epidemic.
"Gay marriages just don't work, Bill. The only ones that do are where they're not really lovers, you know? Not in the sense of a husband and wife at least. They're friends. Each one does his own thing for sex, but they live together as friends."

This is backed up by his thoughts about why the character's marriage didn't work:
"(the) part of the female personality that, to me, made females unattractive--a blind preoccupation with two people getting together in a "marriage" and devoting their entire lives to it."

In his recent interview on Lambda Literary, http://www.lambdaliterary.org/features/0... Dirk commented that he wrote the stories to say: "It's okay to be Gay!" "There are those who believe that Gay Liberation started at the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village on June 28, 1969. That is like believing that a flower can blossom without having been planted." Most of Richard (Amory)'s and my books were published before Stonewall. I would like to think that all those Gay dirty books were the fertilizer to make the Gay flowers grow."

"All is Well", the final story in the trilogy is different. It's a lot more cerebral for a start. A lot of the "action" takes place inside the hero, Bob's, head.

Being the son of a Mormon Minister, for Bob, religion played a large part in his upbringing. I've read two other books that use this religion as part of the plot: James Buchanan's "Hard Fall" and Z.A.Maxfield's "The Pharaoh's Concubine". While these two authors may have done meticulous research, they don't capture that overwhelming feeling of guilt and stultifying constriction of attitudes and beliefs that Dirk conveys so well, having been brought up a Mormon himself.

The trilogy as a whole is uncompromising; "All Together" is by no means an easy read, but worth it in the end. Dirk's writing makes you care even when the guys are at their worst, wallowing in their misery (particularly the last story). You just want Bob to break out of his funk. I'm not a fan of paranormal, and this is a good example of what you can do without resorting to that level of fantasy. We all have the capacity to do these things ourselves. Be the strong invincible vampire, the werewolf that can change to a form that can vanquish its enemies and we can all harbor the demon from hell within.

In some ways, "All is Well" covers the steps of the archetypal hero's journey, complete with the wrong goal, the black moment and the mentor (in this case drugs). As in all such journeys, the hero has to reach deep inside himself to find the solution to his predicament and confront his worst fears in doing so:
"I had created the problems myself, however childish or ill-advised I had been, and now I had to solve those problems myself."

I don't know whether this was intentional on Dirk's part - to follow Joseph Campbell's prescription, but there are definitely elements there. There's even the symbolism of the epiphany happening on Easter Sunday when the hero leaves his past behind and is reborn, complete with the biblically significant three day turnaround from the time he leaves San Francisco and returns.

None of these literary elements intrude on the narrative. Many readers may not even see the story at this level, but I enjoyed "All is Well" that much more after I recognised what had happened.

Another theme that ran through this story was:
"I had to keep an open mind, adjust myself to the changes in the world."

The world was definitely a-changing. Another book that came to mind as I read was Andrew Holleran's The Beauty of Men. Set in the nineties, after AIDS had decimated the gay population, the different scenes in steam baths bear comparison. Although there are two very different establishments in "All is Well" neither have that pathetic lost quality that imbues Holleran's classic.

In Dirk Vanden's time:
"Here there were dozens of men wandering around, most of them young, and many of them very attractive, manly-looking, well-muscled, with white towels narrowly wrapped around trim tanned waists. One or two I saw were clean-shaven and short haired, but most of them had long hair, moustaches, sideburns, many with full luxuriant beards.

While in Holleran's book, the middle-aged Lark describes it thus:
Driving to the baths in 1983 was like going to Valhalla, he thinks as he walks down the hall. Going to the baths in 1995 is like driving to have his tires rotated and oil changed.

In the end, the title of the last segment of the trilogy takes on a new triple-edged meaning as the different worlds collide and become one. Not only do the three characters come together, but for Bob, the hero of "All is Well", "all" the facets of his personality converge as well. Very neatly done.

There is almost a messianic fervor in the closing pages. The certainty hippies had in the seventies that a New Age was coming: The Age of Aquarius. Forty years on we can see that unfortunately the Roberts of the world didn't quite lose their grip. And while the Bobs may no longer be jailed for their sexuality, there is still room for more change to happen.

Dirk's writing style is fluid, his dialogue natural and his characters are vivid. It's great to see the trilogy, re-edited to tidy up a few problems and published with a great new cover based on one of Dirk's own paintings. Again, congrats to loveyoudivine Alterotica for recognising what should be seen as one of the building blocks of gay fiction.

View all my reviews
Add Comment