Because Sometimes PM Gets Old For Longer Conversations....

[redbrunja]

For rameena: Okay, which characterization choices bothered you? Because I got frustated with the second to last book (still haven't read Witch Witch, Black Curse) because it seemed like it was all about Rachel's sex life, and it was falling into the Anita Blake pit where everyone wants the heroine's ass. And then there was all this plotty stuff that was WAY more interesting than the boys in Rachel's life.

(FYI, flist - if you you also have thoughts about this, feel free to jump in.)

Comments

[rameena.livejournal.com]

Ahhhh..its been so long im spotty in terms of what I remember. But...from what I recall, Ivy bugged the hell out of me. Not at first. I thought she was so bad ass and perfect complement to Rachel. But then it started to feel like Rachel was letting Ivy treat her like a lover, when Rachel herself didnt feel the same way. If im remembering this right, Rachel never had romantic feelings towards Ivy, and she made that more than clear, but she would still feel guilty whenever she devoted more time to Kisten (? ?forgetting the names)or whoever she was into at the moment.
I think the one character that keeps me reading is trent. I LOVE his character and I want so much more than what were getting.
Okay, im going to go hunt up the books and refresh my memory to see if any of this made sense.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Oh no, that makes total sense.

And while I understand why you feel that way about Rachel and Ivy, that totally wasn't my reading of it.

I really like how we've been given hints from the very first book that Ivy thinks Rachel can fix her, and has been maneuvering their relationship so that Rachel would be willing to do so.

Which is fucked up, manipulative, and kinda romantic all at once.

Rachel letting Ivy treat her like a lover, for me, it ties into the whole mess that is Rachel's love life. Plus, I honestly feel that she's more interested in Ivy than she's willing to admit, and that's half of the problem right there.

[meganbmoore.livejournal.com]

IIRC, I eagerly bought the first HC book when it came out, then gave up halfway through because it seemed that the only thing it was about was her sex life and potential sex life.

But then, that's turned me off of most UF. It frustrates me to no end that, in a subgenre known for female leads and female authors, the only one I still read is by a man with a male lead. (Dresden Files. Which has nothing to do with DF or Butcher, but with what women are apparently expected to want in their fantasy, which is still very much a "male gaze" interpretation-clearly, our attention won't last more than 5 minutes if there isn't a love triangle involving Sexy Others, and the most appealing covers involve headless women half-dressed in leather. And it doesn't help that the things about UF that we all complain about the most-some of us more than others-are often included in the contracts by the publisher. Which accounts a lot for the series decline in quality when Patricia Briggs swtiched genres.)

(Ilona Andrews, though carrying many UF trappings, is actually post-apocalyptic fantasy, though I am willing to ignore technicalities in that regard.)

ETA: Wait! I take it back! I forgot about Marjorie Liu's UF series because I mostly think of her Dirk & Steele books when I think of her books.

[nimblnymph.livejournal.com]

Just commenting to say I love you and word to everything you said. That is my BIGGEST frustration with the UF genre, and it makes me sad to see so much awesome potential just ... well, ruined.

And Dresden Files is awesome. It has yet to fail me completely.

[meganbmoore.livejournal.com]

It gets even worse when you consider that publishers and fans both consider putting women on the cover of non-uf fantasy books is considered a risk, especially for epic fantasy, because there's too big a threat that men won't read it because they think only UF has women on the covers, or don't trust fantasy with a female lead. (Mind you, every male sff reader I know is perfectly happy and even eager to read about female protagonists in genre stuff, but the publishing world would have me believe that they're aberations. Like women who read superhero comics.)

[nimblnymph.livejournal.com]

Huh. That's some interesting marketing there. I would have thought, considering the sci fi/fantasy fanbase is ratherly largely male (at least in my observations) that they'd WANT as many scantily clad women as they could get on the cover to sell it ... which then leads into objectifying women and all that...

Man, SF's screwed no matter HOW it tries to market women -- either for them or using them.

My biggest complaint IS the fact that UF is transcending into romance's darker, angstier cousin. I don't mind a little romance with my UF, but I read it primarily for the story and the characters. And it irks me to no end when the story or character is lost in favor of having yet another unnecessary sex scene with yet another supernatural, unhumanly gorgeous man.

[meganbmoore.livejournal.com]

I read a lot of romance novels, but part of the appeal that the whole thing begins and ends in the matter of time it takes me to read 300-400 pages. The shenanigans involved in most extended romances aren't things I have much patience for unless they're secondary to a much bigger plot that interests me, and UF tends to utilize the worst of those shenanigans.

SFF actually has a very large female fanbase and a ton of female writers. They just get pushed aside for the men.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Also, romance novels have ONLY TWO PEOPLE in a romantic/sexual relationship.

As someone who doesn't like either love triangles or polyamourous relationships, most UF romantic plots leave me cold.

[meganbmoore.livejournal.com]

You can also tell pretty quickly whether or not the romance will work for you, or have enough other good things to make up for it (such as how I tend to love Shana Abe's plots and think she has some of the best heroines in the genre, but don't care for the actual romances due to her tendency to have heroes who are too alpha and controlling, whereas I dislike Olivia Parker's plots, but find her couples entertaining enough to get past them) as opposed to having it cause the series to crash and burn after investing yourself for several books, or to have half the pairing disappear and another love interest shoved in. (This can be gotten past in TV series because, even if you dislike it, you know that contracts and the actors' real lives and careers are a factor, but in book series, it's often a sign that the author feelss/he has written the series into a corner, and is trying to find a way out of it.)

Also, being contained and being able to figure out if you'll hate it or not early on makes it easier to read the bad ones to laugh at/appreciate the good ones.

I can't tolerate 99.9% of love triangles myself.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Very good points.

(This can be gotten past in TV series because, even if you dislike it, you know that contracts and the actors' real lives and careers are a factor, but in book series, it's often a sign that the author feelss/he has written the series into a corner, and is trying to find a way out of it.)


Also, which tv shows, it's much less likely to happen, precisely because they sign a contract.

I honestly can't think of a love triangle that actually worked for me.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

We've bitched about this before, so I'll just say 'WORD.' (Although I tend to love urban fantasy covers.)

And I just put Marjorie Liu's UF on my wish list.

[nimblnymph.livejournal.com]

I know we've talked Anita Blake/LKH to hell and back again. You know where I (very bitterly) stand on that. But have we ever talked Kim Harrison at any length? I don't think so...

Anyway, I stopped reading around book three for many reasons, one of which is the reason you mentioned above. Rachel was turning into another Anita Blake; she had these hidden, super-supernatural powers, everyone wanted to do her blue, and she was getting a little TOO abrasive to be likeable.

But my main reason for quitting was the whole Rachel/Ivy thing. When they were friends, it was awesome. Ivy was fantastic, Rachel was fantastic. They were THE Dynamic Duo. But then things had to turn to sex.

I don't care that Ivy's a lesbian. In fact, I think that's pretty damn cool. What I object to is that it feels like, to me, that the decision to make Ivy gay was total fanservice. It didn't feel legitimate to the character, which is due to the way Harrison wrote it in.

I also haaaaaated the way Rachel acted with Ivy about it. Rameena said it perfectly in that she let Ivy treat her like a lover when she didn't feel the same way. To me, it cheapened Both Rachel's and Ivy's characters significantly.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

See, I have the opposite reaction as to the Ivy/Rachel relationship. I remember shipping it from the very first book and being a bit uncomfortable and confused about the fact that they were, you know, both girls.

So, I totally disagree about the Ivy/Rachel relationship feeling unnatural, since it's been hinted at from the beginning (to my eyes), as has the


SPOILER



subtext that Ivy thinks Rachel can fix her, and has been maneuvering their relationship so that Rachel would be willing to do so.

Which is fucked up, manipulative, and kinda romantic all at once.

Rameena said it perfectly in that she let Ivy treat her like a lover when she didn't feel the same way. To me, it cheapened Both Rachel's and Ivy's characters significantly.

While I sort of agree with this, for me, it ties into the whole mess that is Rachel's love life. Plus, I honestly feel that she's more interested in Ivy than she's willing to admit, and that's half of the problem right there.

[nimblnymph.livejournal.com]

See, I didn't get ANY of that really in the first two books -- most noteably the first one. I could sort of see the shipping a little bit, but it was very subtle.

And, around 3/4 of the way through the second book and most particularly in the third ... it's there. It was done too sloppily for my tastes and read like Harrison was just trying to draw in some fanservice.

If Ivy's character had been better established ( in terms of sexuality) in the first book, and the fucked up romantic portions a little more planned out, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. But as it stands, with the way it's written and portrayed, it weakens both characters for me.

Oh, off topic (sort of) but I'm on the second Vaugh book. And I love you. Thanks for rec-ing these to me.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Isn't Kitty fantastic?

I'm just rereading the series at the moment as well. During the first book, I actually laughed out loud.

[nimblnymph.livejournal.com]

I've been meaning to a couple books to you (and maybe I have already) that you might enjoy.

"Crossed" by Nicole Galland. Qualapec actually let me borrow this. I'm very nearly done with it and it is FANTASTIC so far. Lilliana is an utterly delightful whore, and I looove the Briton in it.

"Johannes Cabal: The Necromancer" This one I'm very certain I might have pimped to you already. I was dying from laughter in the first chapter. Johannes is just pure win.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

I put "crossed" on my wishlist, which Johnannes Cabal already is. As soon as I get free time again...

[nimblnymph.livejournal.com]

Which isn't likely to happen until MAYBE next year. *grins* You're almost there, lady!

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Yeah... at this point I'm really excited about graduting.

Less excited about moving back home, but I need to not be paying full-rent for a while.

[nimblnymph.livejournal.com]

*pats* I hear you. One of the saddest days of my life was surrendering the keys to my apartment. it was SO NICE having the groceries I wanted, the ability to watch whatever I want on TV without someone pulling faces and going, "Ugh, you like that anime crap?" and to just have SPACE.

*sighs* I'm sad now.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Sorry for bringing up painful memories.

Luckily I don't live with someone who concrits my tv choices (NOT LIKE RANDOM MORONS WHO WANT TO CRITIQUE WHAT I'M READING, FUCKERS), but I feel you on the grocieries thing.

[rashaka.livejournal.com]

Not reading the comments because I don't want to get spoiled!

I just finished book 4, Fistful of Charms. I am kind of annoyed by the Twilightish turn that the Rachel/Ivy relationship is taking ((I'm sorry I bit you and almost killed you / No, I passively-aggressively secretly was asking for it, so it's my fault!)), but I figure it's going to come to more and more eventually.

I'm kind of torn on Rachel as a character. I like her and she's fun, but I don't like her as much as, for example, Mercy Thompson's character. Rachel is so reckless and she makes very risky decisions...I have to smack my head sometimes and think "Oh WHY did you just agree to that? Why did you just do that???" She's somewhat immature, and at least in book 4 her friends started to notice and complain about it some.

I still have a ways to go, and when I get further along I'd love to talk meta with you!

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

I look forward to it. And yes, Rachel is very reckless - but I do think that this has been getting worse and it's presented as an honest to go character flaw.

I am kind of annoyed by the Twilightish turn that the Rachel/Ivy relationship is taking ((I'm sorry I bit you and almost killed you / No, I passively-aggressively secretly was asking for it, so it's my fault!)), but I figure it's going to come to more and more eventually.

Yeah, I started liking the series less at right around this book as well - that was the one where they went up north to get rid of the statue, right?