Madam Librarian (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
cruelest_month) wrote2011-09-28 12:02 pm
cruelest_month) wrote2011-09-28 12:02 pm
Entry tags:
(no subject)
Question: When are issues you have with a book not worth including in a book review?
Explanation: I'm working on a review for a book about werewolves on the Titanic and I feel sort of ridiculous... But I am horribly offended that the message of the book is that heterosexual love interests can redeem werewolves who would otherwise end up as soulless, cannibalistic monsters living in an exclusively male pack.
I get the idea that this relates to the idea of Old World values vs. New World values and the way secret societies and gentlemen's clubs are set up... But it's not well done or even explained clearly. And the whole book is about an evil male werewolf who wants to own another one body and soul but also wants to kill the heterosexual love interest or sleep with her. And then the good werewolf is saved and made whole because he loved a lady.
I feel like on one hand I'm reading too much into it and on the other it's not like the idea is so horribly buried that a reader wouldn't notice it. And it reminds me so much of English Literature discussions with Lisa. And this 70s vampire book I'm reading where, of course, the evil character is bisexual and I really feel like throwing up all over both books at this point.
Worth mentioning or not, intentional or accidental, I do think that's sort of a disgusting message to pass along. Particularly if you take out the supernatural element.
But maybe I'd be better off saving the bulk of my ire and making a post about "How Not To Offend People Who Like GLBT Characters" at some point in November. Could be more fun at any rate, Y/Y?
Explanation: I'm working on a review for a book about werewolves on the Titanic and I feel sort of ridiculous... But I am horribly offended that the message of the book is that heterosexual love interests can redeem werewolves who would otherwise end up as soulless, cannibalistic monsters living in an exclusively male pack.
I get the idea that this relates to the idea of Old World values vs. New World values and the way secret societies and gentlemen's clubs are set up... But it's not well done or even explained clearly. And the whole book is about an evil male werewolf who wants to own another one body and soul but also wants to kill the heterosexual love interest or sleep with her. And then the good werewolf is saved and made whole because he loved a lady.
I feel like on one hand I'm reading too much into it and on the other it's not like the idea is so horribly buried that a reader wouldn't notice it. And it reminds me so much of English Literature discussions with Lisa. And this 70s vampire book I'm reading where, of course, the evil character is bisexual and I really feel like throwing up all over both books at this point.
Worth mentioning or not, intentional or accidental, I do think that's sort of a disgusting message to pass along. Particularly if you take out the supernatural element.
But maybe I'd be better off saving the bulk of my ire and making a post about "How Not To Offend People Who Like GLBT Characters" at some point in November. Could be more fun at any rate, Y/Y?