AAR
Click here for full forums index
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 
"Fifty Shames of Earl Grey"
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    AAR Forum Index -> Let's Talk Romance Novels Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Linda in sw va



Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 4708

PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eliza wrote:
[I agree that Dowd is not for everyone, nor are acerbic commentaries for that matter (although I personally see this column as mild for her since I do read her on a fairly regular basis whatever the topic). I totally get and understand that. As a point just for general discussion, though, when someone's opinion or point of view is refuted or dismissed on personal grounds rather than on the topic itself, it's called ad hominem reasoning, which is normally described as a logical fallacy.


Thank you for the eduction on that Eliza, golly you're smart. Rolling Eyes

Yep I did the eye roll, I guess I'll have to answer to Christian. Wink

Linda
_________________
"The Bookshop has a thousand books, all colors, hues and tinges, and every cover is a door that turns on magic hinges." ~ Nancy Byrd Turner
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
erika



Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 487

PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eliza wrote:
erika wrote:
Eliza wrote:
Quote:
Interesting how Dowd uses an author who wrote about female sexuality to trash a book on female sexuality .


Erika, you don't mean to imply that it's de rigueur that women must automatically agree with one another, do you? That they can't or shouldn't differ, whether it's about sexuality in general, reactions to a book, or anything else for that matter? If you do think that, would you mind elaborating?


I don't mind women having differing opinions. However if one is going to be an advocate for women expressing their sexuality being critical of of how EL James expresses her heroine's sexuality is inconsistent with that advocacy.


I must've missed something, Erika. Dowd is an op-ed writer for the NYT who writes on many topics, but more often on politics. Same is true for all NYT op-ed writers, journalists who cover whatever. What made you think Dowd was an was an advocate for anything?

ETA:
Added from the NYT, which is accessible from her column: "Maureen Dowd, winner of the 1999 Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary, became a New York Times Op-Ed columnist in 1995 after having served as a correspondent in the paper's Washington bureau since 1986. She has covered four presidential campaigns and served as White House correspondent. She also wrote a column, "On Washington," for The New York Times Magazine.

Ms. Dowd joined The New York Times as a metropolitan reporter in 1983. She began her career in 1974 as an editorial assistant for The Washington Star, where she later became a sports columnist, metropolitan reporter and feature writer. When the Star closed in 1981, she went to Time magazine.

Born in Washington D.C., Ms. Dowd received a B.A. degree in English literature from Catholic University (Washington, D.C.) in 1973."

Also:
Quote:
This was my first Dowd oped. She definitely needs to read more romance. She'll then not be shocked by FS!

I guess this is a different strokes situation. I don't think any reader has to read more of any genre to have an opinion on a particular book. I read "Dune" by Frank Herbert as my first go at science fiction, and although I did like that series, I later learned I'm not generally into sci-fi.


Perhaps I should have been more specific. I was referring to Dowd use of Jong. Jong advocated female sexuality.
Frankly Dowd's fiction examples are silly since they aren't in the romance genre. Since Dowd prolly never read a romance I don't take her oped seriously.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xina



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 6635
Location: minneapolis

PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Linda in sw va wrote:


Thank you for the eduction on that Eliza, golly you're smart. Rolling Eyes

Yep I did the eye roll, I guess I'll have to answer to Christian. Wink

Linda



Are you biting your lip too? *now you're in for it* lol...watch out linda!
_________________
"As you wish"
~The Princess Bride
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eliza



Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Posts: 1092

PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

erika wrote:
Perhaps I should have been more specific. I was referring to Dowd use of Jong. Jong advocated female sexuality.
Frankly Dowd's fiction examples are silly since they aren't in the romance genre. Since Dowd prolly never read a romance I don't take her oped seriously.


I disagree on several points.

Jong is an author and a feminist who features sexuality in some of her writing; she's not a Dr. Ruth, a sex therapist. I realize most people know Jong for Fear of Flying but that's not the whole of her--just what's best known. She was also very much part of the rebellious '70s.

" Jong is ... the author ... of a "midlife memoir" called Fear of Fifty, in which she details her life as a member of "the whiplash generation," a generation of women "raised to be Doris Day, growing up wanting to be Gloria Steinem," and coping amid the widely diverging ideas of women's roles and expectations during the past four decades."

But even if Jong could be considered as an advocate, just for the sake of argument, who says she has to like a novel just because it has sex in it? She has a right to her own opinion just like anyone else. Historians, scientists and all sorts of professionals disagree over non-fiction books and topics, so why should novelists and fiction be any different?

As for Dowd--she is a journalist for a newspaper, not a reviewer for a romance board, so her including a variety of references, background and opinions is standard fare for journalism and entirely appropriate. She's also has a right to like or dislike any book she reads.

Once again I will say I don't think women have to agree with one another any more than men have to agree with one another--over anything, including novels. And one doesn't have to be knowledgeable in any genre to like or dislike an individual book either. I mentioned "Dune" before; this time I'll use "Outlander" which was my very first romance read. I fell in love with it without needing a course on romances beforehand. And romance readers may be just as split over Outlander as they are about Fifty Shades. They either like it or don't. It's all personal taste.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
erika



Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 487

PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 5:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eliza wrote:
erika wrote:
Perhaps I should have been more specific. I was referring to Dowd use of Jong. Jong advocated female sexuality.
Frankly Dowd's fiction examples are silly since they aren't in the romance genre. Since Dowd prolly never read a romance I don't take her oped seriously.


I disagree on several points.

Jong is an author and a feminist who features sexuality in some of her writing; she's not a Dr. Ruth, a sex therapist. I realize most people know Jong for Fear of Flying but that's not the whole of her--just what's best known. She was also very much part of the rebellious '70s.

" Jong is ... the author ... of a "midlife memoir" called Fear of Fifty, in which she details her life as a member of "the whiplash generation," a generation of women "raised to be Doris Day, growing up wanting to be Gloria Steinem," and coping amid the widely diverging ideas of women's roles and expectations during the past four decades."

But even if Jong could be considered as an advocate, just for the sake of argument, who says she has to like a novel just because it has sex in it? She has a right to her own opinion just like anyone else. Historians, scientists and all sorts of professionals disagree over non-fiction books and topics, so why should novelists and fiction be any different?

As for Dowd--she is a journalist for a newspaper, not a reviewer for a romance board, so her including a variety of references, background and opinions is standard fare for journalism and entirely appropriate. She's also has a right to like or dislike any book she reads.

Once again I will say I don't think women have to agree with one another any more than men have to agree with one another--over anything, including novels. And one doesn't have to be knowledgeable in any genre to like or dislike an individual book either. I mentioned "Dune" before; this time I'll use "Outlander" which was my very first romance read. I fell in love with it without needing a course on romances beforehand. And romance readers may be just as split over Outlander as they are about Fifty Shades. They either like it or don't. It's all personal taste.


But the Outlander series isnt a romance according to the author.

Who's saying Jong or Dowd has to like James novel?? I'm not.
I don't give their opinions weight as they don't read romance and think its great to compare a romance to a non romance like the Story of O or Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty series.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Linda in sw va



Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 4708

PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 5:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

xina wrote:
[Are you biting your lip too? *now you're in for it* lol...watch out linda!


Yep, I did that too, I'm a risk taker - living on the edge! Razz

Linda
_________________
"The Bookshop has a thousand books, all colors, hues and tinges, and every cover is a door that turns on magic hinges." ~ Nancy Byrd Turner
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Linda in sw va



Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 4708

PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 5:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

erika wrote:
[I don't give their opinions weight as they don't read romance and think its great to compare a romance to a non romance like the Story of O or Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty series.


Story of O and Sleeping Beauty are light years away from FSoG, it's comparing apples to oranges. Hard also to give weight to the opinion of those that love to comment all over FSoG but havn't actually read it, still seeing a bit of that going around as well.

Linda
_________________
"The Bookshop has a thousand books, all colors, hues and tinges, and every cover is a door that turns on magic hinges." ~ Nancy Byrd Turner
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eliza



Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Posts: 1092

PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

erika wrote:
But the Outlander series isnt a romance according to the author.


It appears you may have either missed my point or sidestepped it. Nonetheless, why is Outlander discussed on this romance board, right now as a matter of fact, why does Amazon list it as historical romance for its very first tag, and why do brick and mortar stores shelve it in the romance section?

BTW, I was convinced to read the romance Outlander by a friend who loves romances.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Linda in sw va



Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 4708

PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eliza wrote:
erika wrote:
But the Outlander series isn't a romance according to the author.


It appears you may have either missed my point or sidestepped it. Nonetheless, why is Outlander discussed on this romance board, right now as a matter of fact, why does Amazon list it as historical romance for its very first tag, and why do brick and mortar stores shelve it in the romance section?

BTW, I was convinced to read the romance Outlander by a friend who loves romances.


Eliza, Outlander is shelved in general fiction in Barnes and Noble, at one point it was shelved in romance but at the request of the publisher and author it was moved. It has so many themes going on I'm not sure some stores know how to classify it, something DG has also joked about. It's addressed on her website here -

http://www.dianagabaldon.com/resources/faq/faq-about-the-books/#romancequestion

I'm surprised you aren't aware that there are quite a few books discussed here at AAR that are not in the romance genre. Stephanie Plum, Anita Blake, JD Robb, Mercy Thompson, Sookie Stackhouse, etc. These books have some romantic threads and some stronger than others, but they are classified otherwise. Take a peek at the reviews section and you will see classifications of mystery, chick lit, time travel, steam punk, YA, urban fantasy, etc. This is one reason that AAR rocks out loud, variety. Smile

Have you read Fifty Shades of Grey for yourself yet?

Linda
_________________
"The Bookshop has a thousand books, all colors, hues and tinges, and every cover is a door that turns on magic hinges." ~ Nancy Byrd Turner
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eliza



Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Posts: 1092

PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Erika, I'd be happy to reply to you on any further issues or points you may have, most particularly about our most recent focus on if any reader has to be an expert or even experienced in a specific genre in order to read a book as a stand alone in order to form an individual opinion. I've given you several personal examples as talking points. Have you had a different experience when starting a new genre? Or would you prefer to just agree to disagree at this point?

ETA: I re-read your posts once again and if Diana Gabaldon's books are at issue here, how 'bout I tell you I moved to Julie Garwood's medievals next after DG. Does that help?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xina



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 6635
Location: minneapolis

PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Linda in sw va wrote:




I'm surprised you aren't aware that there are quite a few books discussed here at AAR that are not in the romance genre. Stephanie Plum, Anita Blake, JD Robb, Mercy Thompson, Sookie Stackhouse, etc. These books have some romantic threads and some stronger than others, but they are classified otherwise. Take a peek at the reviews section and you will see classifications of mystery, chick lit, time travel, steam punk, YA, urban fantasy, etc. This is one reason that AAR rocks out loud, variety. Smile

Have you read Fifty Shades of Grey for yourself yet?

Linda



I will add another one...The Time Traveler's Wife. Not a romance, but a romance within the story. Not a romance novel ending. Still we discussed the heck out of it many times.
_________________
"As you wish"
~The Princess Bride
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
erika



Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 487

PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2012 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eliza wrote:
Erika, I'd be happy to reply to you on any further issues or points you may have, most particularly about our most recent focus on if any reader has to be an expert or even experienced in a specific genre in order to read a book as a stand alone in order to form an individual opinion. I've given you several personal examples as talking points. Have you had a different experience when starting a new genre? Or would you prefer to just agree to disagree at this point?

ETA: I re-read your posts once again and if Diana Gabaldon's books are at issue here, how 'bout I tell you I moved to Julie Garwood's medievals next after DG. Does that help?


My objection to Dowd's oped is she uses non-romance book to make her point about FSoG. Erotica and romance are quite different. I would take her oped seriously if she had used romances to show FS is nothing new and used romance authors to give their prespective on FSoG good or bad.

You can disagree with my opinion and that's fine we all have differing opinions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shelf



Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 138

PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2012 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PWNN wrote:
I fail to understand why anyone thinks not liking a book and/or boggling at it's breakout success means one is carrying a pitchfork.

There are those that hate Judith Ivory's books and have oh dear commented on it on this very board! I happen to think her books are sublime and some of the best the genre has to offer but I've never referred to those who do not as "haters" or suspect they writhe sleepless in their beds at night gnashing their teeth over unjust kudos.

It doesn't "kill" me that the FSOG books are successful. I don't even find it mind boggling (Pet Rocks, Polyester Leisure Suits, Jackass and Dan Brown are more mind boggling). But I do enjoy jabs at it because if I have to hear about the books - and I do since it's everywhere - then I'd prefer a good laugh at their ludicrousness.



I agree with you and I am quite surprised at the response here on this forum (which still seems to be on-going months after I last visited the forum) to people who did not like FSOG with them being accused of being, among other things, bitter. That is such a trite and insulting argument but moreover, it's incredibly condescending.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shelf



Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 138

PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2012 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

xina wrote:
PWNN wrote:


Oh please. It was book news and I thought it was funny so I posted it. .


LOL...It's really not book news. Who will buy this?? This is crap, just like you think Fifty Shades is. So...we are even. Whatever.


It's something that's being mentioned at places like the NYTimes so I think that's sufficient to consider it noteworthy enough. Since this is the internet and it's hard to tell, I can't tell if you were joking with the 'So we're even comment' but if not, then this forum really has changed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Linda in sw va



Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 4708

PostPosted: Sat Jul 21, 2012 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

shelf wrote:
[I agree with you and I am quite surprised at the response here on this forum (which still seems to be on-going months after I last visited the forum) to people who did not like FSOG with them being accused of being, among other things, bitter. That is such a trite and insulting argument but moreover, it's incredibly condescending.


Hmm, maybe if some of them (not all of course) didn't sound so downright bitter they wouldn't be accuased as such? I think it fits.

bitter
Definition
bitˇter[ bíttər ]ADJECTIVE
1. strong and sharp in taste: having a sharp strong unpleasant taste such as the taste of orange peel
2. [b]resentful: angry and resentful[/b]"a bitter smile"
3. [b]difficult to accept: mentally painful, or very hard to accept[/b]"a bitter blow"
4. [b]hostile: expressing intense hostility[/b]"bitter fighting"
5. very cold: penetratingly and unpleasantly cold
"a bitter wind"

Linda
_________________
"The Bookshop has a thousand books, all colors, hues and tinges, and every cover is a door that turns on magic hinges." ~ Nancy Byrd Turner
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    AAR Forum Index -> Let's Talk Romance Novels Forum All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 5 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group