[identity profile] dwg.livejournal.com
Today, I woke up to Anne Rice talking about "negative fans" over multiple Facebook posts and LKH gets her own special mention.

This is hilarious when you know about Rice's greatest wanky hits. )

(Sidebar: Did you know Anne Rice is now writing about werewolves?)

Let us bask in this moment. And hope that LKH responds.
[identity profile] naeko.livejournal.com
As a response to Hamilton's delightful blog about how all other authors are doing it wrong, Jennifer Armintrout had some things to say.

Barfing On My Keyboard
"Bleeding On My Keyboard" begins innocently enough with Laurell lamenting how difficult it's been for her to work on her latest manuscript. Fair enough, I've been there. I can get on board with feeling like your own writing is trying to straight up murder you. In fact, I would wager that pretty much every writer has felt that way now and again.

Laurell disagrees with me:
Some very successful writers don’t seem to feel that emotional connection to their work, or at least not to the degree I do. I used to envy them until I realized the price of that cool distance. They write like they feel with less depth, less of themselves on the page. It is a safer way to write, less frightening, less hurtful, less pain for the writer, but the writing shows that.

This is where it all starts to go a little wrong. As a writer, I resent the implication that unless "I’ve screamed at my computer, cursed other characters, fought and lost to them," I haven't managed to make a connection to my work. I love my job. I wouldn't love it if it constantly frightened and hurt me, and I don't think it needs to.

(More at the link, of course)


This has been brought up elsewhere, but not here, yet, so I'm relaying it for those of you who haven't seen it. I personally think Armintrout has made some good points, and I like to see when other professional authors calls LKH out on her shit. She likes to put up a wall of, "haters gonna hate" and just assume that all the people who don't fall at her feet and worship what she writes are just not intelligent enough or just don't get her, or whatever other excuse du jour she's using. I like seeing another professional, published author take issue with her words. To me it seems like she might be at least slightly more likely to take them seriously.

Then again, she's not listened before, so maybe I'm wasting perfectly good hope.
[identity profile] quizzicalsphinx.livejournal.com
Author Christopher Rice (son of Anne Rice) recently published a short, sharp piece on The Daily Beast, entitled "Why Crime Novelists Don't Get Women"--not as in why they can't get women to date them, of course, but why they don't seem to get into the heads of female characters, relying instead on tired stereotypes. In the essay, Rice listed four overused types of female characters in crime novels: The Cop's Wife Who Just Doesn't Get It, The Babe Assassin, The Ice Queen Bureaucrat, and the Token Lesbian Cop; the full description of these "types" are under the first link.


Today on NPR's "Talk of the Nation," Rice talked about the list in a little more detail and took some questions from callers. The very first caller mentioned Our Gal Anita.


I'll transcribe the parts that are relevant to our interests. )


The full interview with Rice can be heard here. The discussion of Anita Blake starts at 6:35. (Clip may only be available for short time.)

Fan Fic

Oct. 27th, 2009 04:50 pm
[identity profile] shalotts-lady.livejournal.com
While regularly assaulted by LKH's abuse of the retweet recently, it made me remember something I meant to ask the lashout crew awhile ago.

What is LKH's standpoint on fan fiction. I remember her tweet about how she'll be forced to take legal action if people provide her with links or discuss their fan fiction in the Meritaverse with her. Is this a common thing authors do? Or is LKH just stiflifing my muse?

(also, I have no idea what to tag this as!)
[identity profile] easol.livejournal.com
Everybody here knows about the Kitty series, and about Carrie Vaughn's dislike of the "RARG! I is strong woman! I has sex! I has guns! I is like MAN WITH BOOBS! FEAR ME!" urban fantasy heroines. In other words, Anita clones

Well I'm not sure if you guys have seen the latest Kitty book, in which Kitty goes to Vegas. There's a weapons convention there, swarming with sociopathic bounty hunters... and swaggering around the place is a hilariously parodic urbfan woman. If she had a dozen effeminate men trailing after her and having sex in the casinos, it would so obviously be Anita. As it is, they share a creepy number of similar traits that have infected the urbfan genre.

There's really not many spoilers here, but I'll have a LJ cut for length. Here's what goes on around her first and second scenes involving Brenda.

Enter Brenda )
[identity profile] the-mome-wrath.livejournal.com
I found this three part article on the urban fantasy genre and the second part covered many of the cliches and annoyances of the genre. Sadly it seems the genre really is becoming formulaic. It doesn't name any series as examples, but as I was reading down the list I found that unsurprisingly LKH is in violation of many of them. The only thing I really noticed on the list that we haven't seen in the books yet is the lower back tattoo. Anita should get a tattoo, but it should say something like 'run while you still have a personality.'

For your reading enjoyment, here's the articles:

Urban Fantasy Part 1: The Formula
Urban Fantasy Part 2: When Things Go Wrong
Urban Fantasy Part 3: Deconstructing Urban Fantasy
[identity profile] unrund.livejournal.com
While cleaning up my favorites bar on Firefox I came across two gems who have been stewing there a while. I dimly remember wanting to post them sooner but alas, life [and my lazyness] have a way of getting between me and things that need to be done.
As we all know LKH lives in an Ivory Tower - or well, a Gothic Mansion because I doubt she would want to live somewhere with lots of light and white but that is neither here nor there - and more or less recently two authors I have a habit of reading wrote about Ivory Towers re:living in them.

The first one is Mitzi Szereto and her post is titled 'Aren´t we just precious? Writers Who Live in Ivory Towers' and the second one is by Elizabeth Bear on storytellersunplugged titled 'Your genius (sung or otherwise)'
[identity profile] contrariwise.livejournal.com
So I was browsing at the library and picked up Janet Evanovich's* How I Write. Right there, on page 14, an interesting passage jumped out at me:

Q: Some people say they start writing and the character tells them what's next. In other words, the characters take over for the author. Do your characters ever surprise you like that?

Janet: NO! What does surprise me is that people say this happens. This is fiction! Your character doesn't do anything you don't want him to!

You do have to be very careful never to force a character to do something simply because you think he needs to do it for the sake of the plot or because you think it's funny or because you think it's hot or it's cute or whatever. Characters have to do what they are supposed to do according to your creation of them and your plot line. The bottom line is: Writers control the story and the characters. And don't let anyone tell you different--particularly your main character.

For some reason, I thought immediately of a certain author...


*She writes the Stephanie Plum series, featuring a spunky (but not very good at her job) bounty hunter, her wacky family, and her two on-again/off-again hot dudes. It's a fluff series, but it knows it. *g*
[identity profile] tsubaki-ny.livejournal.com
First post. I'm not well-read in the Anitaverse at all (read one, skimmed others, read the comic, seen lots of excerpts and reviews), and so I've hesitated joining the com, or saying anything too mean (I'll probably continue hesitating on that one), based on, well, my scanty qualifications.

Still, I read something today that was rather like a lightning strike, and I wanted to share. (I've Googled to see if it's shown up in this community before, and I can't find it.) It's an old blog entry by Kit Whitfield (an author I first heard of in this com) on a permutation of the Mary Sue -- the "Snappy Sue."

The fit is so apt it's kinda scary, I think.

Writes Whitfield (naming no names):

"A variant of Mary Sue becoming increasingly common in female-written and -marketed fantasy fiction. Snappy Sue is an empowered chick, generally urban and frequently in her twenties or older, who's respected/admired/worshipped for being a Strong Woman. Unfortunately, the author continually asserts her strength by giving her a tendency to take her temper out on all around her. This, oddly, makes people admire her more."

[....]

"Though she owes much to the rise of feminism, Snappy Sue fundamentally doesn't like women. She tends to be surrounded by men and have few female allies - female heroism is in short supply here, and Snappy gets all of it. ..."


Full blog entry:
http://www.kitwhitfield.com/2006/09/mary-sue-gets-mean.html

It's really fascinating.

(The preceding entry is also pretty fun: Mary Sue in the time of George Eliot)
[identity profile] theotherbaldwin.livejournal.com
"It makes you look like an asstard."

Best-selling sci-fi author John Scalzi weighs in on the recent El Kay Haich blogsplosion, and says, in part:

"Here's the thing. Some people won't like your books. If these people also have access to the Internet, the chances are good that they might tell other people how they don't like your books. Sometimes, they'll tell people they don't like your books, even if they haven't read your books, because some people are crazy screechy monkeys.

[...]

Eventually you'll have to retreat; declare moral victory if you like, but the fact is, the colony of monkeys is still screeching crazily at you, people are pointing and laughing at your asstardery, and you're covered in monkey shit."


As they say in blogtopia (y! sctp!), you really should read the whole thing.

Teresa Nielsen Hayden who is one of my most favorite writers, online or off, has some real zingers, pretty much saying exactly what I felt, only more eloquently. Here, check out her first comment:


"Oh lord. Hamilton's screed is worse than I'd imagined. For instance:

...someone stood in line for hours at a signing, smiled at me, and had me sign the book, then said to my face, "I hated this book. I hate what you've done with the series." I blinked at them, and said something like, "Sorry to hear that." When I ask, "Why do you read the books then?" Answer, "I keep hoping they'll get good again." ... I don't get it guys. I'm not going to get it. I finally realized that I'm not going to understand this noisy, unpleasant minority of my fans. Because you are fans. Only fans would spend this much time and energy on anything. ... And if you don't think you are the minority, well, sorry, guys but you are. I have the sales figures to prove it. Each book’s sales are more than the last.


If fans really loved the earlier books in a series, they'll often stick with it for exactly the reasons she quotes. It's an act of faith. But when their patience finally snaps, not only is it going to be damned hard to get them back -- your starting position is not neutral -- but they may stop reading all books by that author, whether they're part of the series or not. Sometimes they'll stop reading all books of that sort, no matter who wrote them.

Laurel Hamilton is dissing the fans who've stuck with her Anita Blake series. The specific people she's singling out were willing to buy her books, stand in line for two hours to get them signed, and publicly identify themselves as her fans, even though the later series hasn't been paying off for them. I don't think "affronted incomprehension" is her ideal response to this situation.

Worse, she's telling people they're wrong when they say they haven't enjoyed the later books. That's always an error. You can't argue with someone's experience of a book. If they enjoyed it, they enjoyed it. If they didn't, they didn't.

And to cap it all off, how does she prove she's right about the series, and they're wrong? Because her sales figures keep going up. Way to go, lady. Get right out there and tell your fans that the reason you don't have to listen to them is that they keep buying your books. They'll have that paradox sorted out for you in nothing flat."


The Notorious T.N.H. pegs exactly why, though my wife may still buy the Anita series, as Danse Macbre, she has the next book (which promised Edward) to keep me as a fan or that's it, I'm through. I'm already staying far, far away from the Merry Gentry series because of my annoyance, but eternal optimist that I am, I keep hoping that, hey, Edward will help make the book readable again (because the character is all that, a bag of chips, and a tub of organic Awesomesauce).

Profile

lkh_lashouts: (Default)
LKH Lashouts

January 2023

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 22nd, 2025 04:10 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios