tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post8566102182064321074..comments2024-03-26T01:10:13.720+00:00Comments on Teach Me Tonight: Guest Post: K. A. Laity on Joanna Russ on Slash FictionE. M. Selingerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00426524354823232002noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-72543151036822826972010-10-18T10:52:51.759+01:002010-10-18T10:52:51.759+01:00"The way men's bodies are objectified in ..."<i>The way men's bodies are objectified in romance seems to more mirror how they are idealized in comic books</i>"<br /><br />I thought about this, and despite the fact that <a href="http://jprstudies.org/2010/08/there-are-six-bodies-in-this-relationship-an-anthropological-approach-to-the-romance-genre-by-laura-vivanco-and-kyra-kramer/" rel="nofollow">I've written about the way heroes' bodies are depicted in romance</a> and despite the fact that I've read Jane Litte's post about "<a href="http://dearauthor.com/wordpress/2008/09/30/the-super-sizing-of-the-alpha-male/" rel="nofollow">The Super Sizing of the Alpha Male</a>" in which she commented that romance<br /><br /><i>authors have tended to over masculinize the hero to the extent that we have caricatures instead of characters for heroes. In recent years, I’ve seen the romance alpha hero morph from tall, strong, and commanding to oversized, monstrous, and overbearing.</i><br /><br />I think that while I'm intellectually aware of the phenomenon, it doesn't actually affect me much while I'm reading because I have almost no visual imagination, so I don't visualise any of the characters I read about. If I were to read fan fiction based on a film/TV series, though, I'd have some idea of what the characters look like.<br /><br />I've often wondered what it would be like to have a visual imagination like other people do. In this particular area it seems as though my lack of one may be working to my advantage. ;-)<br /><br />I don't read much fan fiction, probably because I don't watch/read most of the films/texts a lot of fan fictions are based on (I have come across and read some Jane Austen fan fiction) so I don't feel competent to write blog posts about it.<br /><br />I was very grateful to K. A. Laity for her contribution, though, and since I came across a couple of MA theses about romance and fan fiction, I've just <a href="http://teachmetonight.blogspot.com/2010/10/fan-fiction-and-romance.html" rel="nofollow">put up a post about them</a>. I've quoted from your comment because it seemed very relevant to something the author of one of the theses mentioned. I hope that's OK with you.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-19023260824090432212010-10-18T08:57:37.573+01:002010-10-18T08:57:37.573+01:00"Or would you not count the descriptions of m..."Or would you not count the descriptions of male bodies in romances....as "objectifying"...."<br /><br />This may be just me, but it isn't that I wouldn't consider such descriptions objectifying, but that I am more likely to encounter such descriptions in slash than I am romance. Especially the kinds of descriptions that do not paint the man as always the aggressor, and instead describe men's bodies in a more submissive and wanton way, rather than as pervasively dominating.<br /><br />So, I guess, no. I really wouldn't consider them objectifying in the same way. The way men's bodies are objectified in romance seems to more mirror how they are idealized in comic books rather than the way women's bodies are objectified in general. And since I don't find the Hulk* to be all that sexy....<br /><br />Granted, the slash I read is pretty specific, and the romance I've read was mostly from the years leading up to the current erotic romance boom. So, it's not like I can be certain of overall current trends.<br /><br />Still, while I'm sure there is romance - especially erotic romance - out there that goes against what seems to be the norm, as a reader I have an easier time finding fanfiction - especially m/m ff - that does this than traditionally published anything that does this.<br /><br />For me it's sorta like the way I tend to be more cautious about reading genre books by men over genre books by women. It's not that I think I'll hate everything any male science fiction writer ever writes, or that I will adore everything every woman ever writes, it's that experience has taught me that I need to be a bit pickier about which men I read in order to avoid the stuff that makes my skin crawl.<br /><br />*except for FEMINISTHULK bc he just rocks so much**<br /><br />**yes, I mentioned the Hulk just so I could mention FEMINISTHULKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-64985006567537212852010-10-14T09:22:21.219+01:002010-10-14T09:22:21.219+01:00"Men objectify the the body they desire, and ..."<i>Men objectify the the body they desire, and women don't seem to have the tendency to do that except in the context of slash</i>."<br /><br />Don't women often have that tendency in f/m romances?<br /><br />Or would you not count the descriptions of male bodies in romances (whether m/f, m/m, m/m/f or any other combination involving "m"s) as "objectifying" since, if the romance is well-written, each male protagonist has a personality as well as a body? But then, that's probably true of much slash fiction too, isn't it?Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-83408666199574633662010-10-14T06:41:02.694+01:002010-10-14T06:41:02.694+01:00actually when said like that, it seems a bit weird...actually when said like that, it seems a bit weird and sad that we'd have to express our desire for the male body in such a convoluted way. we do it by identifying with the point of view of a gay male, laura mulvey would have a field day with that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-53519452886714375942010-10-14T06:37:30.182+01:002010-10-14T06:37:30.182+01:00Or simply that m/m fiction allows women to turn th...Or simply that m/m fiction allows women to turn the male gaze on the man. I remember watching a late night tv show that talked about portraits and how you could tell a painting had a homosexual subtext by the way the male positioned himself as an object of desire. Men objectify the the body they desire, and women don't seem to have the tendency to do that except in the context of slash. by taking the point of view of a gay man, you're able to oogle the male body all you like, or you could switch points of view depending on how sexually attracted to either. <br /><br />from that point of view, if m/m slash is written by mostly het women, then why would you think they'd wanna write f/f if they're straight? It reminds me of an episode of Coupling when one of the male characters said he only liked watching lesbian porn because he's afraid of seeing even the hint of the naked male body. ok, we're not that extreme, but the same idea applies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-71134972434902872202010-10-12T13:22:14.225+01:002010-10-12T13:22:14.225+01:00I began my writing career in the slash fandoms. I ...I began my writing career in the slash fandoms. I now write original fiction in the M/M erotic romance genre. I also own a small press that publishes nothing but M/M it in print and ebook. I'm straight, married with children and this is the genre that appeals to my imagination enough to write. I enjoy the more equal power dynamic. M/M gives me the opportunity to explore the things I like best and least about men from both sides of the relationship. I don't have to worry about what danger I put them in as being beyond acceptable or one 'having' to rescue the other for anything but personal desire or need. No societal conventions force reactions from the characters in regard to their intimacy. There is more freedom, in my opinion, to be rough and tumble, distant, overpowering, intense and all the other emotions/actions that are usually contained in m/f romance. Plus I find the fantasy thrilling and attractive. <br /><br />Bottom line is I write it because I want to. The only reason any author ever has to give. <br /><br />Even ROLLING STONE Magazine put M/M romance on their 2010 HOT LIST this month in the 'hot books' section.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14568263664182155579noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-38326952286106258112010-01-30T10:01:37.939+00:002010-01-30T10:01:37.939+00:00"Maybe the misogynistic teenage slashers I st..."Maybe the misogynistic teenage slashers I stumbled across will grow up to be radical feminist slashers. "<br /><br />One of the most fascinating aspects of the ongoing current discussion in fandom has been to see how slash has helped so many young women express, understand and accept their sexuality. The vagina hatred doesn't surprise me much, since women are trained to see each other as competitors, and there's certainly a good deal of male-derived propaganda taught in places like Catholic girl schools (as I know from personal experience) which teaches women to suspect and even despise their own bodies and sexuality.<br /><br />As a non-het writing m/m author and ex-slasher, I'd love to know which slashers now write decent het (because all the ones I know go on to write m/m.) The only one I can think off hand is Jennifer Pelland, and she's an SF author, not Romance.Ann Somervillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18174848179481724352noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-47239532771571762452010-01-30T09:57:03.634+00:002010-01-30T09:57:03.634+00:00Er, to just clarify a bit more: there's anothe...Er, to just clarify a bit more: there's another angle where there's a sub-set of slashers who are quite misogynistic, who seem to have internalized ideas about men being important and worthwhile--both mentally and physically: I recall with horror the discussion I came across where teenage slasher girls were talking about how the vagina is <i>objectively disgusting</i> compared to the penis--in ways that women aren't and focusing on them for that reason, and I think it's interesting to contrast that with Slashers who are consciously questioning gender roles instead of acting out of internalized misogyny and how that can lead to some of them having the impulse to write Het that does something similar. I just find it interesting that two of the groups of women who slash could come to it for such conflicting reasons. Though maybe it's not so conflicting, since they're both reactions to misogyny. Maybe the misogynistic teenage slashers I stumbled across will grow up to be radical feminist slashers. ;)unlikelyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11665862792874221646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-35434688435960859532010-01-30T09:49:14.633+00:002010-01-30T09:49:14.633+00:00To bring in another angle, I'd like to say tha...To bring in another angle, I'd like to say that I've long noticed that my favorite Het fics are often done by women who primarily Slash. Gender essentialism tends to be problematized or thrown out altogether in their work, the couple gets written more like individuals with their own unique assortment of masculine/feminine traits than representations of the archetypes Man and Woman and I adore it ever so much. I think that it can be argued that the practice of slash can maybe develop ways of thinking about romance that are not sexist in women who had a longing for that already, building up those mental muscles through practice so that they can overcome the cultural programming to cast Het couples in a patriarchal script.unlikelyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11665862792874221646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-7567894085408490022010-01-27T16:57:19.137+00:002010-01-27T16:57:19.137+00:00"Betz does have a little bit to say about Jan..."Betz does have a little bit to say about Jane Rule's <i>Desert of the Heart</i>, but it's discussed in a relatively small number of pages"...<br /><br />Hmm. I'd have thought it (and several of Rule's later novels) deserved rather more than a few pages, for many reasons. I suppose one might argue that many of her books are not 'romances' as such, but <i>The Desert of the Heart</i> is a romance, and was quite a ground-breaking publication when it came out in 1964. After all, its chief precursor was 'The Well of Loneliness'!AgTigressnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-13618526930014797922010-01-27T13:01:43.807+00:002010-01-27T13:01:43.807+00:00"It is only in a discussion that is very clos..."<i>It is only in a discussion that is very closely moderated by a chairman that this sort of drift can be avoided, and the drift is valuable, anyway.</i>"<br /><br />Yes on both points. I don't particularly want to stop interesting "drift" because (a) it can be valuable in its own right and (b) it may turn out that it's not really a "drift" at all, but unexpectedly leads to much greater understanding of the original topic.<br /><br />"<i>I am interested to hear about the book you are reading currently, and wonder if you will discuss it in detail at some point</i>"<br /><br />I'm wondering if it's going to be reviewed in JPRS. I think the first issue is coming out this Spring, and it wouldn't surprise me if Betz's book was reviewed there.<br /><br />Another thing which makes me want to hold back is that I'm currently reading it rather fast, because I have a deadline to meet, and I'm really only looking for very specific sorts of information, so although I'm reading the whole book, I'm not sure I'm paying enough attention to all the details to be able to review it properly.<br /><br />In addition, I don't know much about lesbian romance novels, so I doubt I'll be able to tell if there are gaps etc in what Betz has written about them.<br /><br />She has written quite a bit about romances with heterosexual protagonists, and while I agree with some of what she has to say on that topic, I also think she's included some debatable statements (often based on sweeping generalisations made by the authors of some of those romances, particularly in the <i>Dangerous Men, Adventurous Women</i> volume). This means that some of the comparisons she makes between lesbian and heterosexual romances seem less convincing to me because of that.<br /><br />Still, I may jot down a few quotes and see what I can pull together by way of a mini-review. It might be a while before I post about it, though, because to write the review I'll have to go back and re-read the first couple of chapters, and as I said, right at the moment I'm in a bit of a rush.<br /><br />"<i>My particular interest is Jane Rule</i>"<br /><br />Betz does have a little bit to say about Jane Rule's <i>Desert of the Heart</i>, but it's discussed in a relatively small number of pages, so you might find the amount of space devoted to it a little disappointing given that it's your "particular interest."Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-35300146378866653152010-01-27T12:02:12.410+00:002010-01-27T12:02:12.410+00:00Laura, my perception of these blogs and the commen...Laura, my perception of these blogs and the comments to which they give rise is that they are essentially <i>conversations</i>, and as such, straying off the point and sometimes leaving questions hanging are perfectly normal. It is only in a discussion that is very closely moderated by a chairman that this sort of drift can be avoided, and the drift is valuable, anyway.<br /><br />So now I shall make another couple of slightly off-topic remarks.<br /><br />I am interested to hear about the book you are reading currently, and wonder if you will discuss it in detail at some point. Lesbian novels generally seem to me to have a very interesting background. My particular interest is Jane Rule, whom I regard as one of the finest novelists of the 20th century, but who was never widely acclaimed, apparently because her overt lesbianism led her books to be sidelined into that dubious realm labelled 'gay & lesbian fiction'. It seems that when a straight writer creates gay characters, his/her work is still 'general fiction', but even when a gay writer has a mix of straight and gay characters (just as in real life), their work is regarded as 'genre fiction'. Maybe that's changed now, but it certainly used to be so.<br /><br />Also slightly off-topic: I do so wish 'slash fiction' had another name, one that was more appropriate and less ambiguous. It's a horrible name. I know it actually refers to what I call an 'oblique stroke' (though I don't know why), but it is quite impossible for me to avoid the mental image of slashing/cutting with an edged weapon.AgTigressnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-47114631137126605842010-01-26T18:53:42.869+00:002010-01-26T18:53:42.869+00:00Since a few comments have been made about the purp...Since a few comments have been made about the purpose and contents of this blog, I thought it might be helpful if I responded to them in general terms.<br /><br />Firstly, I agree with Ann that "this blog is all about education and discussion" but I think that precisely because it's all about discussion as well as education, the flow of information goes in more than one direction. I'm always aware of how much information and expertise the readers of TMT have, and I've learned a lot from the comments many have made, as well as from my co-bloggers and guest bloggers. [Yes, and if I carry on in this vein it's either going to sound like an acknowledgments list, or a call for a group hug, so I'll stop there ;-) ]<br /><br />Secondly, with regards to what K.A. said about not addressing <br /><br />"<i>current debates because this blog already does that; I wanted to provide a missing piece that was part of the history leading up to the current discussion. I certainly never meant to suggest that this was the final word or the only voice; simply a lost one</i>."<br /><br />I'm only one of the bloggers here, and I can only really speak for myself, but I'm going to be a bit more modest about what this blog does/has done. As far as my own posts go, I do try to cover a range of subjects, including ones which are rather outside my areas of expertise. I'm learning as I go along, and there are some areas about which I know a lot less than others. When I write about areas like that, contributions from those who know more than I do are particularly appreciated.<br /><br />In addition, the nature of blogs and blog posts mean that Teach Me Tonight isn't a carefully structured and comprehensive overview of the entire romance genre (and related topics). It's a somewhat haphazard collection of calls for papers, analysis of individual texts, news items, musings on larger topics, summaries of existing research etc. Some of those summaries are more comprehensive than others.<br /><br />Today I started reading Phyllis M. Betz's 2009 book on <i><a href="http://www.mcfarlandpub.com/book-2.php?id=978-0-7864-3836-5" rel="nofollow">Lesbian Romance Novels: A History and Critical Analysis</a></i> and it seems to me that the topic we're discussing on this particular thread has so many ramifications that someone could almost certainly write a whole book about it, too.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-41738664773904070252010-01-26T13:34:14.179+00:002010-01-26T13:34:14.179+00:00Correction: "to ask why is it that"Correction: "to ask why is it that"C. Margery Kempehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15910282257993793334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-7507883427576653272010-01-26T13:33:11.907+00:002010-01-26T13:33:11.907+00:00Russ is suggesting that the reason women writers u...Russ is suggesting that the reason women writers use male characters to "escape" from sexism and misogyny is because of those patriarchal pressures. In other words, to ask why is that men=people and women=not men.<br /><br />I didn't address current debates because this blog already does that; I wanted to provide a missing piece that was part of the history leading up to the current discussion. I certainly never meant to suggest that this was the final word or the only voice; simply a lost one.C. Margery Kempehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15910282257993793334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-83468862335799282472010-01-26T03:09:03.177+00:002010-01-26T03:09:03.177+00:00"the point was not to suggest that nothing ha..."the point was not to suggest that nothing has been done since 1985, but to acknowledge a key text from the past that has been often overlooked."<br /><br />Sure. But you didn't put it in context, nor indicate that scholarship - and discussion - after Russ continues, and as I said, I found that disappointing, since this blog is all about education and discussion.<br /><br />I said nothing approaching "m/m negates female sexuality."<br /><br />"that's precisely what Russ is arguing."<br /><br />No, not precisely. She's tying it very specifically to idealised sex and the suppression of women's sexuality by the patriarchy. She's ignoring - or you are presenting her work as ignoring - many wider issues of expression and oppression.<br /><br />It's not all about sex, whatever Freud said!Ann Somervillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18174848179481724352noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-62198479651686654522010-01-26T02:27:39.582+00:002010-01-26T02:27:39.582+00:00I think it was me, actually, who used the word neg...I think it was me, actually, who used the word negate. I don't think anyone else went that direction.Angelahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10036078211777850499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-57253246749558591832010-01-26T01:30:50.078+00:002010-01-26T01:30:50.078+00:00Ann, if you read my introduction, the point was no...Ann, if you read my introduction, the point was not to suggest that nothing has been done since 1985, but to acknowledge a key text from the past that has been often overlooked.<br /><br />I would also never suggest -- and Russ is not suggesting -- that m/m negates female sexuality.<br /><br /><i>I want to idealise my own existence. That is, I want to create an avatar who doesn't have to deal with sexist bullshit and misogyny</i>: that's precisely what Russ is arguing.C. Margery Kempehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15910282257993793334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-39986868911291492762010-01-26T01:16:33.478+00:002010-01-26T01:16:33.478+00:00I don't want to be an apologist for Russ or cl...I don't want to be an apologist for Russ or claim to know what is in her head, but her writing about slash and her recent interview with my (and my colleague) suggest very much that Russ comes to the same conclusion as Ann Somerville. More importantly, though, and here is why I think Russ is particularly useful when thinking about fandoms in which slash is prominent, Russ urges to think about the relationships between the mostly straight women writing m/m *for* each other and reading *with* each other. A community of women is producing this work, not women in isolation. Far from negating female sexuality, m/m slash is awash in it.<br /><br />Ann is correct, though, that anyone interested in writers examining the whys and hows of slash fandom would do well check out the conversations going on right now.Conseulahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18332456428940044637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-76252740922578841312010-01-26T00:31:42.307+00:002010-01-26T00:31:42.307+00:00I confess I was somewhat disappointed. I was hopin...I confess I was somewhat disappointed. I was hoping for a more updated assessment of women writing gay romance, and yet to read your article, one would think Russ was the last lesbian feminist to write on this subject. Certainly I'd have expected a small nod, at the least, to the huge and growing body academic studies on fandom, gender, slash and those who write it (<a href="http://www.henryjenkins.org/" rel="nofollow">Henry Jenkins</a>, anyone? <a href="http://www.henryjenkins.org/2007/06/gender_and_fan_studies_round_t_2.html" rel="nofollow">As here</a>?) and an acknowledgement that there are plenty of academics currently writing about this subject and who are active in slash or m/m writing, like <a href="http://robin-anne-reid.livejournal.com/profile" rel="nofollow">Dr Robin Anne Reid</a>, and <a href="http://www.muhlenberg.edu/depts/english/faculty.html" rel="nofollow">Dr Francesca Coppa</a>. They even have a name for people like this - 'aca-fen'.<br /><br />Things have moved on just a tad from Kirk/Spock. It would have been useful to have acknowledge that in your post, even though it's admittedly an overview of one particular piece and academic, because people, academics and non-academics alike are coming to this subject fresh all the time. Even media articles about slash either only talk about K/S or Harry Potter. You never see a mention of the huge Real Person Slash/Real Person Fiction, for instance. Or the fact that women wrote gay male fiction before slash or pro m/m. Or that gay <i>men</i> slash and write m/m for the female market.<br /><br />"The continued popularity of M/M slash and romance suggests that even in 2010, it is still difficult for women to imagine that happening between heterosexual couples."<br /><br />Since your article is about a lesbian academic, this is a strangely blinkered summary of what reading and writing m/m and slash is about - why are lesbians and bisexual women writing it (<a href="http://melannen.dreamwidth.org/77558.html?format=light" rel="nofollow">in signficant numbers, even possibly as a majority of writers</a>), if it's all about the het couples? I grant you that idealisation is part - but only part - of why women write this stuff, but it's a far more complicated issue even for heterosexual women like me, as I have recently been exploring in my own journal with respect to myself.<br /><br />As it happens (and as Dr Vivanco knows from reading my journal), your post has arrived just as slash fandom and some of us on the pro side are going through a serious navel-gazing exercise about why women slash and if it's a good thing or not. You might like to look at these:<br /><br /><a href="http://maryaminx.livejournal.com/154286.html?format=light" rel="nofollow">http://maryaminx.livejournal.com/154286.html?format=light</a><br /><a href="http://ithiliana.livejournal.com/1219054.html" rel="nofollow">http://ithiliana.livejournal.com/1219054.html</a><br /><a href="http://mistresscurvy.livejournal.com/2721.html?format=light" rel="nofollow">http://mistresscurvy.livejournal.com/2721.html?format=light</a><br /><br />And though I hesitate to use this post to pimp my own, this is where I, as a straight woman, talk about why I am writing this:<br /><br /><a href="http://annsomerville.logophilos.net/?p=2773" rel="nofollow">http://annsomerville.logophilos.net/?p=2773</a><br /><a href="http://annsomerville.logophilos.net/?p=2805" rel="nofollow">http://annsomerville.logophilos.net/?p=2805</a><br /><br />Discussions with Dr V have led me to the conclusion that I write about and through male characters not so much because I want to idealise men (that's certainly part of it) but because I want to idealise <i>my own existence</i>. That is, I want to create an avatar who doesn't have to deal with sexist bullshit and misogyny - and in this world, that means creating a man to play me on television, so to speak.<br /><br />I'm no academic (at least, not on this subject) I find Russ's explanations too simplistic, in other words.Ann Somervillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18174848179481724352noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-85969786552005554932010-01-26T00:21:04.967+00:002010-01-26T00:21:04.967+00:00"...'historical' films (and I think b..."...'historical' films (and I think by analogy, historical novels) tell us a lot more about the present than they tend to do about the past."<br /><br />Yes, indeed they do. The great trick in understanding the past is learning to distinguish the ways in which our ancestors were different from ourselves, and the ways in which they were similar. Sometimes the praiseworthy aim of trying to be objective and setting aside our own personal cultural conditioning can go too far; I have read some papers by colleagues in my own field in which they seem to assume that we are a totally different species from the humans of a couple of millennia ago!<br /><br />In some respects, the cultural divide between the past and the present is no greater than that between modern contemporary cultures. I am full of admiration for historical novelists who can make the past accessible for the general reader without doing serious violence to the realities of the era they have chosen.AgTigressnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-67292850428259423052010-01-25T21:43:23.672+00:002010-01-25T21:43:23.672+00:00Yeah, Consuela -- I can't wait to read that in...Yeah, Consuela -- I can't wait to read that interview, too!<br /><br />Lisa -- Thanks for stopping by!<br /><br />AgTigress -- you are so right. That's the importance of historical context. I'm teaching a course about medieval texts on film and one of the texts I use is Arthur Lindley's <a href="http://www.latrobe.edu.au/screeningthepast/firstrelease/fir598/ALfr3a.htm" rel="nofollow">The ahistoricism of medieval film</a> which spells our how 'historical' films (and I think by analogy, historical novels) tell us a lot more about the present than they tend to do about the past. Of course there's a big difference between the creators and how much research they employ, but those historicals are always going to be shaped by modern sensibilities to some extent.C. Margery Kempehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15910282257993793334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-27757143475169836562010-01-25T20:48:35.770+00:002010-01-25T20:48:35.770+00:00"we haven't decided where would be the pl..."we haven't decided where would be the place for it"<br /><br />In that case I'll be very, very predictable and suggest that, as the interview is about "slash and female sexuality" you could perhaps submit it to <a href="http://iaspr.org/journal/" rel="nofollow">JPRS</a>, as it says on the <a href="http://iaspr.org/journal/call-for-submissions/" rel="nofollow">call for submissions</a> that, among other things, JPRS is looking for interviews.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-89958042337936731072010-01-25T20:34:17.606+00:002010-01-25T20:34:17.606+00:00Laura--We haven't yet published it (life and g...Laura--We haven't yet published it (life and grading tend to take up a great deal of time), in part because we haven't decided where would be the place for it.Conseulahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18332456428940044637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-36031761032363011142010-01-25T20:23:49.762+00:002010-01-25T20:23:49.762+00:00Great post, Margery! It has left me with much to ...Great post, Margery! It has left me with much to ponder. ;-)Leigh M. Lanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04419221093398839195noreply@blogger.com