The Other F Word

I like to have these posts once in a while. You know, as a reminder to anyone who thinks that feminism is unnecessary in this day and age.

Misandry is not equal to feminism.
(in other words,)
Man hating/bashing/killing is not equal to feminism.

All feminists are not lesbians, bra burning,  mustache sporting whatever else you want to add that. Have you ever considered that the negative views about feminism may be a patriarchal ploy to ensure that women turn away from what potentially offers them a way to fight for equality? Yes, equality and not superiority. Being a feminist doesn’t mean wanting to be a man. It means having the right to be as much woman as a woman wants to be without being questioned about it or made to feel guilty about it.

It means having the freedom to wear what clothes you want, showing as much skin as you want without being told you are teasing and you deserve whatever violence is done to you. It means getting the same amount of pay a man would get when he is doing the same job you are doing. It means that no one will count the number of men you sleep with and judge your morals accordingly.

If you still don’t know whether you are a feminist or not, Caitlin Moran has an easy way to figure it out. She says:

“But, of course, you might be asking yourself, ‘Am I a feminist? I might not be. I don’t know! I still don’t know what it is! I’m too knackered and confused to work it out. That curtain pole really still isn’t up! I don’t have time to work out if I am a women’s libber! There seems to be a lot to it. WHAT DOES IT MEAN?’

I understand. So here is the quick way of working out if you’re a feminist.

Put your hand in your pants. a) Do you have a vagina? and b) Do you want to be in charge of it?

If you said ‘yes’ to both, then congratulations! You’re a feminist.”

I’ll leave you to decide.

On Reading

Happy Thanksgiving to my fellow Canadians. I hope you are enjoying your turkey or whatever you eat and being thankful. I was originally going to post a list of things I am thankful for in my life and it’s a long list but I am writing a paper that is due tomorrow – well, I am editing a paper that’s due tomorrow and it’s important and I don’t feel thankful at the moment (haha) so here’s a topic I was cogitating about earlier this week.

The way a person reads changes over time. I know this is not news but I become more and more aware of this phenomenon as I experience it myself. There were books I read about two years ago that I happily gave four stars to but which, if I went back and reread, would probably get one star from me. The question this asks is which one of us has the truest experience with reading. The younger me read books just to consume the entertainment they offered and the older me is a whole lot more discerning where literature, even literature that is leisure reading, is concerned.

Now in Grad school, I am taking a creative writing class with a whole lot of talented MFAs and they bring to the table yet another way to read.

An author reads in a different way (or perhaps perspective would be a better word here) than a normal reader. One of my peers in the writing class said about Rowling’s much disliked epilogue of the Potter series, “It’s her book, let her end it the way she damn well wants to!” A writer would generally feel this way but a normal reader who has nothing at all to do with the process but the result of it? I think they would be well within their rights to complain about the ending because the book belongs to them as much as it belongs to the author. If an author builds a world, it is the readers who populate it, who bring the characters to life in their imaginations and let them live. The reader response theory says that anyway.

I have come to appreciate the writing more than the plot in books though I will probably always be forever annoyed by books that have shoddy logic. Books have become an escape from me but it is a conditional escape and I can only run away from real life if the book is structured properly, written prettily and has logic. Anything else keeps jolting me out of the narrative and has me reaching for my pencil so I can make a note for all the world as though I’m once again critiquing a story for class. I think the tone of my reviews will also probably change even though these are published authors and I am just an aspiring one.

Have you felt that the way you read, the perspective from which you read, is always changing? Being effected by your experiences with literature and life? Or is it just me?

A Response to The Bionic Book Worm aka In Defense of Book Bloggers

The article “The Bionic Book Worm” appeared in The Independent on the 25th of September. The following is a response to the opinions expressed in the article.

So Sir Peter Stothard, a privileged white male (this is significant), is the editor of the Times Literary Supplement and a judge of the Man Booker Prize. According to him, the world of literary criticism is in danger because of bloggers who “will leave the industry “worse off” with their uneducated reviews of books they read and then write about. (Of course, some will assert that we do not write reviews, we write blog posts. Damned if we do and damned if we don’t.)

Stothard goes on to say that “[n]ot everyone’s opinion is worth the same.”

My lovely readers, I did not make this up. He is quoted verbatim. So, what we can understand from this article is that book bloggers like you and me? Our opinions count for nothing because whaddya know, we may not all have the same high level of tertiary education that is so necessary for us before we can tell whether we like a book or not. Our opinions have no bearing because we are not all speaking the literary critic’s language. Apparently “I like this book and this is why” has no bearing in the face of “confident criticism.”

Okay, show me hands if you read critical commentaries or book reviews to find out what book to read next? Because I don’t. I depend on people who read books I like. I read for entertainment and sometimes for knowledge. To be intellectually challenged as well as entertained – two main reasons I read. And the kind of literary criticism that Stothard talks about? I’ll be honest with you – they make books that I may want to read sound utterly boring so I avoid them. I want enthusiasm and glee and a sort of fanaticism that is only present in people who have shed all snobbery and elitism to push the books they love on other people. In other words, book bloggers.

This is not to suggest that other people do not read these literary criticisms Stothard is so proud of. They  probably do, all 300 of them. Because let’s face it, literary novels may win honors, prizes, medals whatever but the audience? It will always, without fail flock to Twilight or 50 Shades of Gray or whatever novel promises the most entertainment. Which is not to say that I particularly liked any of those novels but these are facts, the numbers will prove my point. Literary novels such as the ones winning the Man Booker Prize do not have as much readership as genre fiction does. Stick with me, I have a point.

You do not see book bloggers making elitist comments saying that literary critics are a dying breed (which they might be) because we are cool like that. We love reading. We love talking about reading. So we may not have the degrees or the so-called qualifications to analyze a book, but we are certainly capable of discerning whether a novel affords enjoyment or not. The best thing about book blogging? The number of voices there are. Not all of us are privileged or white, not all of us have the same education but what we do have in amazing amounts is a love for books and where I come from, that’s all you need.

And of course Stothard is right when saying that not all opinions mean the same thing because his opinion means nothing to me. It makes me angry, yeah, that such an elitist, alarmist comment exists in the first place but honestly? Who cares? He will certainly not venture out into the crowds where bloggers lurk and even if he did, I doubt he’d find much of a warm welcome unless he gives up his hoity toity attitude. Colonialism ended a long time ago – we are no longer under any aegis to think that any race (societal construct though that may be) means more than any other.

Oh and according to Stothard, reading 145 books in one year is “unnatural”.  I have read 334 books this year. I read widely and from many different genres. And I am not alone. Many of my fellow book blogger friends have read more than 150 books this year. And many of them read more than one genre – literary or otherwise. If you were to consider from that angle, it would make us book bloggers far more qualified to talk about books than some people I could mention.

How to Deal with Rejection – What Not to Do

So today I got rejected for seven titles I requested on Edelweiss. Let me take a moment:

Did it twinge? Oh yes. Did I wail and stomp my foot and rant at the unfairness of it all? No. Was I tempted to? Maybe. I know that publishers have their own rules (written and unwritten) about the people they approve and the ones they don’t but to a reviewer who is filled with nothing but the greatest passion for the books she requests, there’s nothing less disappointing than seeing the words “declined” or even worse (on Edelweiss) the red cross that denotes your undesirability as a reviewer. They probably did me a favour and I will eventually read the books I am requesting but still, there is a certain glee (of the glorious kind) in reading things before anyone else has a chance to. However, the ones approved for arcs etc are few and the majority of us have to contend with the dreaded (no matter how nicely it is worded) rejection. So, I figured I’d put up a list of things not to do when rejected for an ARC/E-Galley.

1. Do not, I repeat, do NOT go on a rampage on twitter decrying the dubious integrity of the publisher in question. The foray down that road will  not bring you any happiness as several authors can probably (hopefully) tell you now that the dust has settled. All the rampaging will achieve is to make the publisher’s attention swing your way and mark you as an untouchable so any future business you could potentially have done with them. Besides, it just ain’t classy, yo. Keep your class and walk away.

2. This is just as important as the previous one: Do not harass the author for an ARC. Promotions are usually done by the publishers and any arcs the author wants to give out are at her own discretion. And chance are that the arcs she gives out will be to trusted blogs with whom she has worked in the past. Asking once is okay but if no reply is forthcoming, keep that class and walk away. Do the hula. Go out and drink an ice cream slurpee (soooo good). Just step away from the computer.

3. Do not cross the title off your to read list. Okay fine, you can do that if you want but really? That’s silly. That book could be lovely and just because you couldn’t read it early does not mean its readability has diminished. Of course your experience with the book prior to reading it may colour the experience a bit but if you wanted it so badly, then there must be something in it that stills call you.

4. Don’t sink into depression that needs shrink bills, alcohol, copious amounts of chocolate and an intervention to pull you out of it. In the grand scheme of things, a rejection for an arc/galley is like a thorn prick. It hurts but life goes on, libraries remain open, other books present themselves to you. Being rejected does not decide your worth(lessness) or your abilities as a reviewer. It just means that the audience you reach is not according to the wants of the publishers.

And finally:

5. Here’s what you can do if you get rejected for an arc/galley. Go read something else. A book you have really wanted to that has been released or you already have. Don’t scour the internet for IMM/Book Haul posts/vids that show other reviewers/bloggers posing with the books you know you’ll review better and read with more passion. Go for a walk. Spend time with your family. Eat some chocolate. I know it doesn’t compare to that feeling of getting approved but still. Writing threats to the publisher/author/publicity agent won’t help either. Probably. Haha.

What did I do when I got declined/rejected for all those titles I requested?

I went to my commencement ceremony. And graduated. And standing on that stage, getting conferred and then later being admitted made the rejections seem like mere bumps on my road to success however twisty it may be.

Hidden Warror (Tamir Triad #2) – Lynn Flewelling

Mass Market Paperback, 551 pages
Published November 26th 2008 by Bantam Dell
Source: Purchased
Synopsis:
As the orphaned nephew of the king, trusted companion to his cousin, and second heir to the throne of Skala, Prince Tobin’s future is clear. But not as clear as the spring in which a hill witch shows him his true face–and his secret destiny….

Now Tobin carries a burden he cannot share with even his closest friend, Ki, his squire. He is to rule–not as he is but as he was born: a woman. Given the shape of a boy by dark magic, Tobin is the last hope of the people of Illior–those who desperately seek a return to the old ways, when Skala was ruled by a line of warrior queens. They still believe that only a woman can lift the war, famine, and pestilence that have run rampant through the land since the king usurped his half sister’s throne. It is these outlaw wizards and witches who protect Tobin–and it is for them that Tobin must accept his fate.

With the unsuspecting yet fiercely loyal Ki at his side, Tobin must turn traitor against the only blood ties he has left. He must lift the masks of Skala’s rulers to show their true colors–before he can reveal the power of the woman within himself.

Review:
The second novel in The Tamir Triad trilogy loses none of the charm of the first. In fact, it makes an already intriguing world downright amazing. I loved how the characters are developed and the faint stirrings of romance between the two main characters promises that the conclusion to the trilogy will pack a punch in more than one way.

So the pace continued in its languid manner and I’m not gonna lie, I did for a minute or two wish they could just hurry up and get the reveal over with. However, at the end of the novel I was glad that Flewelling took the time she did because it has more momentum when it happens the way it did. I was surprised by how Korin’s character was developed and I thought that Flewelling’s careful attention to the grey in a person’s character was well done. The novel is populated by such wonderful characters that I wouldn’t mind reading all their individual stories. There’s Lutha and Nikides, Una, Ahra – it is actually an awesome compliment from me (ahem ahem) that I remember the names of the characters in the book because usually I don’t even remember the name of the main character.

And this book won my love by having cats being mini characters. I am a cat person (future cat lady? ha) and Flewelling’s portrayal of the felines was entertaining. Of course, on the other side of it, Niryn became slimier than ever. What is he doing with that Nalia? Okay, I’ll stop pretending this is a review because honestly, I just want to talk about the book. I thought that Tobin going naked in front of all those people took balls he didn’t have. I understood why it had to be done and I don’t even have to any trouble with it. I just thought it interesting.

Oh also, I hope Flewelling keeps Tobin/Tamir as ordinary as possible and not, you know, on a pedestal. That would interfere with the original dynamic too much and I don’t know…I kinda like it the way it is right now. I am not looking forward to see what that wizard has up his sleeve but I am looking forward to seeing how Ki copes with a female best friend.

A Note on The Scandal

I’m not a terribly popular blogger. I am well aware of that and while sometimes I may feel a bit put out that I’m not read as widely as I feel I should be, I also am quite cognizant of that fact that I don’t promote myself as assiduously as popular bloggers do. I don’t go around commenting every day, I don’t friend everyone and I don’t even butt in on conversations happening on twitter because I’m really kinda shy like that. Or maybe, more appropriate, more reserved than that. I think popularity comes with the pressure to keep being popular. Me, I’m not keen on anything that takes me away from my first love: reading. Blogging is an expression of reading but it’s not reading so…you get my point, right? But if you are popular, you may feel the pressure to keep that spot, those statistics etc that keep you at the top. That may lead you to push yourself to keep on doing new things, finding new ways to keep your readers.

But there are certain limits you simply cannot cross. I’m sorry but this is book business. Plagiarism is never okay. It is never excusable. It is never justifiable. It is wrong. Whether it is forgivable remains to be seen. What Kristi did was wrong. It will always be wrong and no matter how many twists you give to it, it will remain wrong. I don’t condone it. I can’t condone it.

That said, people need to understand that there is a difference between disapproving (for lack of a better word) her actions and slandering her as a person. I don’t think going after her because she is popular or because she gets review copies that you lust after is right. That said, what Kristi did was not right. She is not the victim so the people who are sending the true victims, the bloggers who were plagiarized, hate emails should be ashamed of themselves. I understand that you might have revered Kristi but open your eyes and smell the scent of reality. Realize it.

Personally, I feel bad for the plagiarized blogs and also Kristi. I don’t know what was going through her mind when she did what she did but I do know that whatever she’s going through right now must not be pretty. Hopefully, she learns from this and not just her, I believe there is a lesson in this for everyone involved. Including me.

Finally, while I won’t automatically paint Kristi as a bad person for plagiarizing, (I realized that this might seem a bit ambiguous so to clarify, let me restate that while I do not condone Kristi’s actions in anyway whatsoever, I do not want to villify her,  I don’t know how else to articulate it), I won’t follow her anymore. I will continue to read debut novels but not  under the DAC banner. I will continue sharing books that are new on my shelves but they will no longer be IMM. As I said, there are limit and boundaries. I have mine.

Let’s Talk Literature

I’ve been thinking about writing this post for a long while but never gotten around to it. So now when I am on the verge of passing out due to exhaustion, my brain decides it has to write this piece or die. So while, as always, I shall try to make some sense, if I don’t, please blame my brain. Now on to my thoughts.

Literature: What is it?

The widely accepted definition is (thanks Wiki) that Literature is “the art of the written word, not confined to published sources.” I am going to take it one step further and say that literature is narration which can (and, indeed, does so frequently) include pieces which may have begun and completed several cycles as strictly performed oral traditions.

The beauty of literature is that every culture, no matter race, ethnicity or location, has their own literature, in vernacular or the official language.

Debates are still raging whether literature can be seen as an accurate reflection (and representation) of culture.

In the context of this blog, let me reword this.

Say a person 500 years from now found a book, (God forbid), Twilight and after reading it, decided that it was an accurate representation of males and females and, hell, society of the past.

What would you say to that?

Apart from “OH HELL NO!,” I mean.

Therein lies the dilemma. While I don’t think literature can wholly be seen to reflect society, I think what it does do is reflect the tastes of the society and the culture in which it was written.

To put it in a contemporary context, looking at the dystopian novels flooding the market right now, it would not be inaccurate to assume that North American society at the moment loves dystopian novels  – to go deeper into this and explore why dystopian novels are so popular, one must understand the economics and the instability contemporary people are struggling with at the moment. To take it even further, dystopian novels offer contemporary people not just escape from difficult lives but a peek at solutions should the worst come to pass.

Stuff like that.

Today in one of my classes we were talking about the nature of the novel and the role of the author in a novel. The book we were discussing is “Paul’s Case” by Lynn Crosbie which talks about the serial murderers Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka.

What I found profound about the discussion was the gradual realization I had that writing a book really is not so simple as picking up a pen and some paper or opening up a  new page on Word. Writing, personaly, is the continual recreation of selves.

When writing a book, you cannot simply use YOUR voice to write a character and present it as Character A. You have to create Character A, give her Voice A that is distinct from your own voice in not just the way she expresses herself but also in the opinions that she expressions. And then you have to create Characters B, C, D, E, F and so on and give them their own voices etc. This is complicated stuff, you guys.

And then, as was the case in Crosbie’s novel, comes the case of appropriation of a voice that does not belong to you.

Now things are going to get the slightest bit technical because I have to drag in some post-colonial theory.

Okay, for example, you have Draco Malfoy and Dobby. What if one day Draco decided to write a book as Dobby? Write down Dobby’s experiences as though he knew exactly what Dobby went through?

You would scoff at the idea that Draco could, in any way, understand and correctly express the trials and tribulations of Dobby’s life, yeah? What is more likely is that he will project what HE thinks Dobby went through and thought onto Dobby who doesn’t have a voice.

So that’s the theory behind “the appropriation of voice.” When people write from the perspective of other people who are unfamiliar to them or who do not have a venue of their own in which to speak.

In Crosbie’s case, she appropriated the voice of a rape/murder victim. She projected her own thoughts about what the victim might have gone through, thought and felt and wrote it as though the words belonged to the victim.

And she pissed off many, many people by doing so.

I am always very wary when I see North American white authors (yes, I might as well go out and say it) writing from the perspective of people outside their culture. Can an American, Caucasian author really represent an African American or an Indian or Mexican or whatever? Should they even try?

Personally, I am rather skeptical when I see authors trying to do so. It is not that previous authors haven’t successfully done so but that took ages and ages of research and a carefully constructed understanding of not just the foreign culture but also the motivations that may be very different from the author’s originating society and culture. One author spent 20 years living among a tribe of First Nations people before she wrote a slim volume called “I Heard the Owl Call My Name” and her experience, her understanding of the people she wrote about is very apparent in the novel. However, if you are going to write about a different culture and your research is limited to “travelogues,” well then.

I often feel that Children’s Literature, being a new genre, is often passed over in talks of “serious literature.” I feel that most scholars do not give much credence to the kind of stories that populate the crowded bookshelves in the YA genre. I think that’s a mistake. I think that to find the true meaning of literature, one should not look at obscure literary texts that are read once in a blue moon but at popular novels that give dreams, hope and entertainment to vast numbers of people. I think understanding culture, society and people is a natural result of studying the literature popular with the culture, society and people.

And next September when I start my Master’s degree (iA), I intend to do just that.

In Which Nafiza Talks About Ratings

(with a lot less vitriol than the last time we had this conversation, I promise you.)

Here we go again. That’s a familiar refrain these days, the (seemingly) endless drama on Goodreads between the two factions that are at once close friends and archenemies (or so the story goes) continues.

Of course, I am talking about authors and readers. One cannot exist without the other but it seems like one cannot live with the other either. How does it go? You can’t live with them, you can’t live without them. Heh. (In this case, rather literally since readers are the ones who provide the moneys with which authors buy foodstuff.)

Without naming names, this time around, an author emailed a reader who had given her book three stars and told her that (in my own words) the book was probably beyond her, she couldn’t understand it’s greatness and that’s why she gave it the nasty three. And then some authors responded on twitter (about ratings etc) and there was the sound of shit hitting the fan only not so much because people have managed to keep it this side of civilized.

So the author who will remain unnamed for the sake of diplomacy (I’m trying okay, I’m trying, if you really want to know, just research a little bit) insulted the intelligence of the reader who gave her book three stars. My mind, it refuses to comprehend. Three stars? Is good stuff, you guys. From me, it means (as I told Twitter) that while I wouldn’t name my kids after the book, I would name my cat. I like cats. A lot. So you see? It’s a compliment. Three stars!!

What I don’t like about this incident (situation? event?) is the implication that we, the collective readers, owe it to the authors, our personal taste notwithstanding, to give them four or five stars.

Ya see what I am saying?

This author went out of her way to email a reader, questioning her intelligence, as though there is no reason (aside from lack of intelligence and an inability to appreciate “good” literature) the reader would give her book less than the five stars I’m assuming she (the author) thinks her book deserves. How about…the book did not make the reader break out in paroxysms of absolute glee.

Which is what I look for before I award a book five stars.

Authors (and I use the term generally) have no right griping to their readers about the number of stars (or balloons, cupcakes, giraffes whatever) they receive. Their job is to write the novel they think is the best they can write and then wave it a teary goodbye as it goes into the big wide world to make friends (and enemies).

Why is it that North American authors have suddenly developed this extremely thin skin where negative reviews are concerned.

Or, as in this case, reviews that are not as full of the adulation they think they deserve? Is it indicative of the culture we live in, where our “entitlement” issues pose a growing problem? Is this problem a new one or is it an old one but is becoming more apparent now just because of the new mediums people have for sharing their thoughts and expressing their opinions? Your guess is as good as mine but there is one thing that I do know for certain.

Any author worth his/her salt knows how to take criticism. Emailing a reviewer and insulting her intelligence is neither classy nor is it smart. Also, whining about ratings on a public forum where anyone  (even potential readers) can view it is not a good idea. Remember how I said that I hate for an author’s personality, politics etc to shadow her novel? Well…banzai.

The purpose of this post is not to antagonize anyone or use this incident to garner attention. I just want to encourage discourse, some dialogue about things that we plainly need to talk about. About boundaries that should not be crossed by either party and about respect, both given and received. If I have made you think, at least a little bit, well then…

Where We Discuss Reading

Let’s set the stage first.

A fourth year English Literature class (one focusing on murder as presented in literature, if you want to get specific). The classroom is a mini lecture theater with the back wall made entirely of glass and the  blinds pulled up to let the sunshine in. The class is well attended and almost all the seats are full. The professor is trim and young, dressed in a black t-shirt and jeans. He has a marker in his hand and the whiteboard is full of his scribbles.

The class is currently in the midst of discussing Alias Grace by Margaret Atwood when a Caucasian male in his early (or mid or perhaps even later) 20s puts his hand up to contribute to the discussion. And then in the course of him making his point about Grace Marks or Margaret Atwood, he, very definitely, remarks, “I don’t read Canadian literature.”

There is a silence and the professor flinches as though he has been physically attacked.

Then the professor says, “Excuse me?”

This launches another discussion (which is a complete digression from the topic on hand) about Canadian lit, the sense of national identity in CanLit, and why this student has such a marked hatred for all things CanLit.

As the discussion rages between the professor (who is professing his love for the genre? Can Lit is a genre, right?) and the student (who remains resolute in his disdain for it), yours truly is wondering why this is such a big deal.

Another student (also Caucasian, male, older) remarks, “Isn’t reading about whether you enjoy the book and not about who has written it or what genre it falls into?”

To which the professor replies, “You are naive.”

Now, this brings us (me) to the meat of the whole affair. Why is it naïveté to think that reading is exclusively about what books interest you? I mean, you are not trying to (or possibly will be able to) make any statement by reading books written by a certain author, or by authors of a certain descent, race, ethnicity, etc. I feel that both the prof (who admitted that he almost exclusively reads only Can Lit) and the student (who reads everything but Can Lit,  unless of course, he is forced to by school) are, well, okay, I’m going to come right out and say it, flawed (wrong) in their stance. There are so many books out there that move beyond their creators and find greater meaning in their context to YOU. Books that mean something to you because some experience YOU may have had resonates with what you read in the book. And I feel that both of these people have unfortunately closed themselves off from making discoveries that could potentially surprise them, change their lives etc etc.

I am of the firm opinion that reading and books are individualistic journeys. And I mean that in two ways. First of all, reading is an individual endeavor. You may be able to read a book together with the friends but, like with everything else, your experience will be very different from theirs simply because you are a different person; you are all different people. Also, I believe that while collectively books can have some sort of unifying theme or, as in this instance, proselytizing about Canadian identity, I think that each book is wholly individual or perhaps the better word would be unique (and we are not talking about the YA genre in this instance, I am just making it clear right now, hur) and therefore should not be judged by the setting of the book, the nationality (ethnicity, race, whatever distinction you want to make) of the writer.

I think you should judge a book by the amount of feeling it evokes in you. By what (and how much) it makes you think (or not). And most of all, I think you should approach each book with a certain degree of open-mindedness that lets you experience reading in, perhaps, a whole new way.

As for the whole debate with the student and the prof, I believe they just agreed to disagree. Me? I was getting hungry and wanted the class to end so I could go find food.

Forbidden Romance: A Lengthy and Convoluted Discussion

Dear Denizens of the YA Reading Community,

If you and I are friends on GR, you might have noticed my status update which read something like:

“I am so over forbidden romance.”

If you are the curious sort, you will want to know what brought that on and since I feel like obliging, I shall tell you. You see, I was reading the synopses of  books that are due to be released sometime in the near future when I realized, to some dismay, that all of these books share one thing in common: all the protagonists fall for forbidden guys giving rise to forbidden romance which sounds more thrilling than it is, really, it’s not even scandalous. No one’s married or anything. They are sometimes different species but hey, that didn’t stop Bella.

Ahem.

I understand why this trope is utilized so often in this particular genre. I mean, teenagers are subversive, books that are about rebellion will fire them up (*cough*Hunger*cough*Games) and what is more polemic than forbidden romance? Honestly.

So what if he (or she) is a different species than you, hell, he doesn’t even have to be alive, you CAN and WILL fall in insta-love and bear down on him/her with the force of a raging meteor. And then there will be major smoochage and then many, many tears followed by some angst and perhaps one or two weeks of extreme black despair after which things will regain their rosy tinge, the bad guy will be slayed and happily ever after waits (only if there isn’t a sequel). If there is a sequel, there will be more forbidden romance and the presence of one (or many) mean girls who will stake prior claim on the guy and then we will be accorded a regurgitation of book one except with more adjectives and greater pathos.

I am rather tired of this forbidden romance trope. I will confess that my next writing project does (maybe did, no, it definitely does)  involve a forbidden romance and I am smacking myself upside the head for that. Thank you. I shall endeavor to change it if I can.

But the thing is, the forbidden romance trope is used in a very superficial way. Except in Forbidden by Tabitha Suzuma in which the implications of the forbidden romance were true and horrifyingly real. THAT’s what forbidden romance is. Not “omg, he’s a vampire and I’m a werewolf, our babies will be weird hybrids who will have fangs and be furry at midnight!” kind.

I know you are thinking that I’m being a complainer. And petty at that. But you know what?

I’m campaigning for all the eligible dudes who are NOT forbidden and NOT as beautiful but still have lots to give in the way of boyfriend materials. What about the best friends? And the guy in your math class (incidentally, math has never been conducive to insta-love, there is something about math that is a turn-off romance-wise, I guess?)? Or the dude who bags your groceries and has a very nice smile that he flashes in your direction? I’m just saying. Can we have normal romance?

Okay fine, if you want to get paranormal about it, how about your werewolf best friend who helps you when you get furry during the full moon? No?

I would whine that the girl never picks the human but I finished Everneath recently and the girl most definitely bat for the human team. (I’m not giving anything away, it says so right in the blurb.) Anyway, the point of this rather pointless ramble is that I wish the forbidden romance trope would be given a break (so Romeo and Juliet can go back to their eternal rest, look at how their story turned out) and we can be spared the angst. (And I might as well put it out there, writers should never EVER ever use the term “soul mate.”)

Angst is not good for potatoes.