tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5921299676772566445.post7470839344694917387..comments2024-03-25T21:50:16.103-07:00Comments on Quick Sip Reviews: Quick Thoughts - (Posi/Nega)tivity in SFF Short Fiction ReviewingCharles Payseurhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04573698060020195566noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5921299676772566445.post-74520708671064577392017-08-28T04:58:46.108-07:002017-08-28T04:58:46.108-07:00Hey, I don't want to tell you how to interpret...Hey, I don't want to tell you how to interpret the story. I don't really agree with your reading, and I found your comment that the sex wasn't normal rather hurtful, but I do understand where you're coming from. For me, personally, sex that leads to soreness/rough sex/pain during sex isn't necessarily abusive, and while I do think that Johnny and Paul's relationship in the story is complex/messed up, I don't really think the sex is the crux of things. If you had framed your review as an opinion, though, maybe with this very good line: "I wanted to counter the impression it might create that gay relationships are always (or even usually) about one partner hurting the other one", I would have found it less judging of not just my story but what kind of sex I may or may not enjoy. Anyway, thanks for stopping in. Cheers!<br />(fyi there is a spotlight for the story, if it's of interest: http://www.lightspeedmagazine.com/nonfiction/author-spotlight-charles-payseur/)Charles Payseurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04573698060020195566noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5921299676772566445.post-59056319091984829752017-08-26T08:38:48.405-07:002017-08-26T08:38:48.405-07:00For some reason I didn't see this article befo...For some reason I didn't see this article before you posted a link to it in the SFWA forum. (Probably because you didn't put spaces in "Rocket Stack Rank" so it didn't trigger our Google Alert.)<br /><br />Perhaps you've found out that I'm gay since you wrote this, but I'll mention it anyway since it should make it clear that I'm rather unlikely to have objected to a story just because it had LGBT content. In fact, I'm rather disappointed that stories with realistic relationships between gay men are so rare in mainstream SFF.<br /><br />From the perspective of a gay man who was an activist in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, it's possible to read your story, "The Death of Paul Bunyan" as extremely homophobic, and that was my original take on it. Paul and Johnnie have an abusive relationship. Paul doesn't care that he hurts Johnnie during sex, and Johnnie just endures it. The text says he likes it, but it offers no rational reason for him to. And then they both die at the end. One could easily argue that the message of the story was "homosexuals are disgusting and are better off dead." This hateful message has appeared in countless stories and movies for at least a century, and I'm quite familiar with it. And it's an article of faith among fundamentalists that gay sex is inherently disordered because it always involves one partner taking pleasure from the other partner's pain. It's hard to read a story that seems to support this and not say <i>something</i> about it.<br /><br />Before I wrote anything, though, I did enough research to determine that you yourself are bi. So I gave your story a second look, and came up with a different interpretation. Reread <a href="http://www.rocketstackrank.com/2016/12/The-Death-of-Paul-Bunyan-Charles-Payseur.html" rel="nofollow">my review of your story</a> and see if you can't see where I'm coming from. I didn't want to condemn your story (nor did I), but I wanted to counter the impression it might create that gay relationships are always (or even usually) about one partner hurting the other one.Greg Hullenderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16720604327299886491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5921299676772566445.post-39049084450870468642017-01-08T08:37:40.206-08:002017-01-08T08:37:40.206-08:00When I used to do regular book reviews, I wrote my...When I used to do regular book reviews, I wrote my fair share of negative pieces. Sometimes it was cathartic, but eventually it started to wear me down. Why was I spending so much time on things I didn't like? Why was I trying to find redeeming qualities in work that I didn't connect with? It started to feel really mean-spirited, even when the negativity came from an honest place. <br /><br />I tend to consider most of the reviews I've read from you as fairly neutral. And if they are "too positive" (how have we gotten to a point where there's such a thing as too much positivity?), well, what's the problem with that? You're showcasing stories that people might not otherwise be exposed to, and a little bit of enthusiasm goes a long way. Why should reading *or* reviewing be a negative chore? <br />Anyway, all of which is to say, keep doing what you're doing, because it's absolutely worthwhile and appreciated. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00544251487108740226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5921299676772566445.post-19792590814446993052017-01-08T02:16:41.546-08:002017-01-08T02:16:41.546-08:00SFRevu just reviewed my "Winter Timeshare&quo...SFRevu just reviewed my "Winter Timeshare" in Asimov's as "Utterly Boring." Tangent also trashed it, after misreading it completely. One almost begins to take it as a compliment. Thanks for this piece: it's like scraping the stinger off the wound with a credit card. Ray Naylerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01350733695629428405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5921299676772566445.post-12470326484802362702017-01-07T14:32:50.300-08:002017-01-07T14:32:50.300-08:00Your reviews are always thoughtful and detailed. Y...Your reviews are always thoughtful and detailed. You appreciate writers that colour outside the lines, even if the risks they take don't always pay off. Keep doing what you're doing. leadlinedaliashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06143191269497918025noreply@blogger.com