Trying to find Books With 'Ships I Like
Dottie: Want me to kill him?
Peggy and Sousa: Do not kill him!
Dottie: Come on. It'll be quick.
-- from Agent Carter 2x06 "Life of the Party"
I find it fascinating when people make blanket statements about the dynamics of online spaces: "Facebook is this" or "Tumblr is that".
Because what they actually mean is "This form of social media, in terms of my experience and the experiences of others that I've heard about, is X".
Your experience depends on who you're friends with, who you follow, who you respond to and who responds to you. It depends on what your interests are and whether you choose to engage with those fandoms and what those fandoms are like.
It's a mixture of some things you have control over - in really concrete ways, like whether you follow/friend a particular person - and some things you have very limited or no influence over - like what the culture of a particular fandom is or whether or not your friends post political rants.
It means one person's experience can be very different to another's.
My Tumblr fandoms are mostly book-based or webseries-based, and they're all on the small side. Or their Tumblr presence is small. They've generally been friendly, intelligent, drama-free sorts of spaces. But I realise not everyone has that Tumblr experience, and not everyone is able to engage with the communities who share their interests and have that experience.
*
Every so often, I'll read (or attempt to read) another romance novel and I'll come back to the question of Why don't romance novels work for me? Why, when I love Jane Austen and Jane Eyre and Georgette Heyer and Eva Ibbotson and Mary Stewart's romantic suspense and YA novels with romantic subplots and murder mysteries with romantic subplots and fantasy novels with romantic subplots?
There are exceptions in the romance genre - which is probably why I keep coming back to the genre, hoping I'll find more - but they're still only exceptions.
I've come up with a few theories over the years as to why this is, and have concluded it cannot be explained by one theory (such as "I prefer romance to be the subplot rather than the central focus"). It's not that simple.
1. My reaction to a romance novel depends on a lot on what else is going on in the story - how interesting or entertaining or captivating I find that. The more the rest of the story grabs me, the more forgiving I'll probably be of romance and the less likely I'll be to care about something that would annoy me in another context. The more gripping the situation is, or the more delightful the characters are, or the stronger the prose is, the more likely I will be to become invested in the characters as people... and hence the more likely I will be to become invested in the 'ship.
2. I don't mind the inevitability of genre romance - often I want the guarantee that the romance will work out in the end - but sometimes it is all just too predictable (for me).
a) Multiple POV can be really effective, but they're often employed in a way in romance novels which diminishes tension (and the fun of anticipating what might happen next). Instead, it's blindingly obvious who is going to end up together and it's obvious exactly how they feel right now, that they're already attracted to each other. This isn't an inevitable consequence of multiple POV - if a character takes a long time to become interested in someone else (or just takes a long time to acknowledge that attraction), or if the style means the narrative doesn't give away absolutely everything a character thinks and feels. Georgette Heyer can head-hop without giving away everything. Zen Cho's Sorcerer to the Crown managed that really well, too. I like more subtlety.
b) I don't really like it when the inevitably that the hero and the heroine will ride off into the sunset together is extended into an inevitability that all their other problems will be resolved equally well. That takes really the tension out of things. And makes it all feel a bit too unrealistic. Leave the characters with some problems, or at least some untidy solutions! That means their relationship and their happiness in each other is even more significant.
c) I like reliable happy endings, but it can bother me when there is such a set idea that this must be "marriage and kids". Commitment, walking down the aisle, raising a family with an epilogue set a few years later so you know this all lasts kind of happy ending. I don't need quite that much certainty to consider a romantic ending a happy one, and I like it when stories feel like other endings are possible.
3. I think "Do I trust you?" is a more interesting question than "Am I attracted to you?" I am much more interested in emotional intimacy than sexual intimacy. Sometimes there's just not enough cuddling or deep and meaningful conversations, and there's too much of the characters going on about how sexually attractive the other person is. Sometimes it can be a lot of fun to read characters going on about someone they're attracted to, but there's a point where it becomes TMI (for me)... it does depend somewhat on the context and the language used to express that attraction, but… romance novels can veer very quickly into Not My Cup of Tea territory.
a) On the whole, I think a lot of YA novels handle all of this in a manner that appeals to me. But I don't want to read exclusively about teenagers.
b) Another solution would be to go looking for "clean" romance novels. But while that would address one issue I have with genre romance, it wouldn't actually solve the others. And, in a way, the other two are the most important. I can overlook a bit of TMI (for me) if the rest of the story appeals.
I don't know.
There are a couple of Georgette Heyer on my shelf that I haven't read (plus a couple of murder mysteries and over a dozen other things, I think I counted a total of 21 unread books). And I have a couple of books waiting to be picked up from the library, plus one I still haven't finished.
Maybe I should focus on my metaphorical TBR pile instead of trying to find Books With 'Ships I Like...
*
Generally the computer (and since the purchase of a PlayStation, video) games my brother plays do not appeal to me. I've no interest in running around fighting things.
But in Flower you just fly around, collecting/activating flowers which dot the landscape. Once you've flown through/activated all the flowers in a set, the scenery changes.
The scenery is pretty and the game-play is mostly relaxing. I ended up finishing the game before my brother did.
*
I really enjoyed episodes six and seven ("Life of the Party" and "Monsters") of Agent Carter.
I read a review which claimed the plot was becoming frayed but I didn't think that was the case at all. Or rather, if it was I didn't care or even notice. Because I care more about character interactions than the plot, and these episodes had character interactions in spades.
Dottie is fun. (I am a little surprised by how much I like Dottie.) Dottie being a member of the team - even if only temporarily and under duress - was excellent. Having her go undercover with Jarvis - with Peggy and Sousa forced to listen in from the sidelines - somehow made it even more entertaining.
I liked Peggy's reaction to hearing that Violet had broken up with Sousa. she's vehemently defensive of him, because he's her friend and she cares about him... but also because she cares about him and that's easier to deal with if he's romantically unavailable.
I feel like this season has allowed Peggy and Sousa to really become friends, to become a team.
and her conversation with Jarvis about the awkwardness of having two "quality suitors". I'm not hugely fond of love triangles, but I like that its awkwardness is acknowledged. And that Peggy's dilemma is not framed as "who do I chose?" but rather "how do I proceed without hurting anyone?"
Then episode nine ("A Little Song and Dance") decided to open with a musical number for no apparent reason that frames it entirely as "Who are you going to choose?" I wasn't thrilled about that. If they had found a different topic to sing about, I probably would have had a completely different reaction to the musical number.
Episodes eight and nine were generally darker and more tense. With the exception of Peggy's interactions with Jarvis, I didn't find them very enjoyable.
But "Hollywood Ending" - that was fun. Not the strongest ending - perhaps things were a bit too easily resolved - but I didn't mind. I was very relieved that it didn't resolve things in the manner I'd feared. No one made any stupid sacrifices - no one succeeded in making stupid sacrifices, at least.
And I was happy with the shippy ending! The build-up to that scene - in terms of the build-up across the season as a whole - worked.
Of course, there are lot of things season two of Agent Carter could have handled better - like making the flashback to Peggy's early experiences of WWII less stereotyped, or making her relationships with other women more of a focus (an obvious solution would have been for the flashbacks to have been about a sister rather than a brother). But I'm glad Peggy got another season.
*
In Youtube news:
The microseries Tiny Feminists is cute.
I started watching All For One, a "a modern, badass, gender-swapped, feminist, totally awesome adaptation of Alexandre Dumas' The Three Musketeers", about a college student trying to join a sorority. Same channel as Carmilla - so not an amateur production. Looks good so far.
Project Green Gables is still my favourite-of-the-moment. And Gilbert Blythe has actually sort-of made an appearance, which I wasn't expecting.
reading: The Bands of Mourning, very slowly. I like it but am finding it very easy to put down. Last night I started rereading The Time-Traveller's Wife instead…
Peggy and Sousa: Do not kill him!
Dottie: Come on. It'll be quick.
-- from Agent Carter 2x06 "Life of the Party"
I find it fascinating when people make blanket statements about the dynamics of online spaces: "Facebook is this" or "Tumblr is that".
Because what they actually mean is "This form of social media, in terms of my experience and the experiences of others that I've heard about, is X".
Your experience depends on who you're friends with, who you follow, who you respond to and who responds to you. It depends on what your interests are and whether you choose to engage with those fandoms and what those fandoms are like.
It's a mixture of some things you have control over - in really concrete ways, like whether you follow/friend a particular person - and some things you have very limited or no influence over - like what the culture of a particular fandom is or whether or not your friends post political rants.
It means one person's experience can be very different to another's.
My Tumblr fandoms are mostly book-based or webseries-based, and they're all on the small side. Or their Tumblr presence is small. They've generally been friendly, intelligent, drama-free sorts of spaces. But I realise not everyone has that Tumblr experience, and not everyone is able to engage with the communities who share their interests and have that experience.
*
Every so often, I'll read (or attempt to read) another romance novel and I'll come back to the question of Why don't romance novels work for me? Why, when I love Jane Austen and Jane Eyre and Georgette Heyer and Eva Ibbotson and Mary Stewart's romantic suspense and YA novels with romantic subplots and murder mysteries with romantic subplots and fantasy novels with romantic subplots?
There are exceptions in the romance genre - which is probably why I keep coming back to the genre, hoping I'll find more - but they're still only exceptions.
I've come up with a few theories over the years as to why this is, and have concluded it cannot be explained by one theory (such as "I prefer romance to be the subplot rather than the central focus"). It's not that simple.
1. My reaction to a romance novel depends on a lot on what else is going on in the story - how interesting or entertaining or captivating I find that. The more the rest of the story grabs me, the more forgiving I'll probably be of romance and the less likely I'll be to care about something that would annoy me in another context. The more gripping the situation is, or the more delightful the characters are, or the stronger the prose is, the more likely I will be to become invested in the characters as people... and hence the more likely I will be to become invested in the 'ship.
2. I don't mind the inevitability of genre romance - often I want the guarantee that the romance will work out in the end - but sometimes it is all just too predictable (for me).
a) Multiple POV can be really effective, but they're often employed in a way in romance novels which diminishes tension (and the fun of anticipating what might happen next). Instead, it's blindingly obvious who is going to end up together and it's obvious exactly how they feel right now, that they're already attracted to each other. This isn't an inevitable consequence of multiple POV - if a character takes a long time to become interested in someone else (or just takes a long time to acknowledge that attraction), or if the style means the narrative doesn't give away absolutely everything a character thinks and feels. Georgette Heyer can head-hop without giving away everything. Zen Cho's Sorcerer to the Crown managed that really well, too. I like more subtlety.
b) I don't really like it when the inevitably that the hero and the heroine will ride off into the sunset together is extended into an inevitability that all their other problems will be resolved equally well. That takes really the tension out of things. And makes it all feel a bit too unrealistic. Leave the characters with some problems, or at least some untidy solutions! That means their relationship and their happiness in each other is even more significant.
c) I like reliable happy endings, but it can bother me when there is such a set idea that this must be "marriage and kids". Commitment, walking down the aisle, raising a family with an epilogue set a few years later so you know this all lasts kind of happy ending. I don't need quite that much certainty to consider a romantic ending a happy one, and I like it when stories feel like other endings are possible.
3. I think "Do I trust you?" is a more interesting question than "Am I attracted to you?" I am much more interested in emotional intimacy than sexual intimacy. Sometimes there's just not enough cuddling or deep and meaningful conversations, and there's too much of the characters going on about how sexually attractive the other person is. Sometimes it can be a lot of fun to read characters going on about someone they're attracted to, but there's a point where it becomes TMI (for me)... it does depend somewhat on the context and the language used to express that attraction, but… romance novels can veer very quickly into Not My Cup of Tea territory.
a) On the whole, I think a lot of YA novels handle all of this in a manner that appeals to me. But I don't want to read exclusively about teenagers.
b) Another solution would be to go looking for "clean" romance novels. But while that would address one issue I have with genre romance, it wouldn't actually solve the others. And, in a way, the other two are the most important. I can overlook a bit of TMI (for me) if the rest of the story appeals.
I don't know.
There are a couple of Georgette Heyer on my shelf that I haven't read (plus a couple of murder mysteries and over a dozen other things, I think I counted a total of 21 unread books). And I have a couple of books waiting to be picked up from the library, plus one I still haven't finished.
Maybe I should focus on my metaphorical TBR pile instead of trying to find Books With 'Ships I Like...
*
Generally the computer (and since the purchase of a PlayStation, video) games my brother plays do not appeal to me. I've no interest in running around fighting things.
But in Flower you just fly around, collecting/activating flowers which dot the landscape. Once you've flown through/activated all the flowers in a set, the scenery changes.
The scenery is pretty and the game-play is mostly relaxing. I ended up finishing the game before my brother did.
*
I really enjoyed episodes six and seven ("Life of the Party" and "Monsters") of Agent Carter.
I read a review which claimed the plot was becoming frayed but I didn't think that was the case at all. Or rather, if it was I didn't care or even notice. Because I care more about character interactions than the plot, and these episodes had character interactions in spades.
Dottie is fun. (I am a little surprised by how much I like Dottie.) Dottie being a member of the team - even if only temporarily and under duress - was excellent. Having her go undercover with Jarvis - with Peggy and Sousa forced to listen in from the sidelines - somehow made it even more entertaining.
I liked Peggy's reaction to hearing that Violet had broken up with Sousa. she's vehemently defensive of him, because he's her friend and she cares about him... but also because she cares about him and that's easier to deal with if he's romantically unavailable.
I feel like this season has allowed Peggy and Sousa to really become friends, to become a team.
and her conversation with Jarvis about the awkwardness of having two "quality suitors". I'm not hugely fond of love triangles, but I like that its awkwardness is acknowledged. And that Peggy's dilemma is not framed as "who do I chose?" but rather "how do I proceed without hurting anyone?"
Then episode nine ("A Little Song and Dance") decided to open with a musical number for no apparent reason that frames it entirely as "Who are you going to choose?" I wasn't thrilled about that. If they had found a different topic to sing about, I probably would have had a completely different reaction to the musical number.
Episodes eight and nine were generally darker and more tense. With the exception of Peggy's interactions with Jarvis, I didn't find them very enjoyable.
But "Hollywood Ending" - that was fun. Not the strongest ending - perhaps things were a bit too easily resolved - but I didn't mind. I was very relieved that it didn't resolve things in the manner I'd feared. No one made any stupid sacrifices - no one succeeded in making stupid sacrifices, at least.
And I was happy with the shippy ending! The build-up to that scene - in terms of the build-up across the season as a whole - worked.
Of course, there are lot of things season two of Agent Carter could have handled better - like making the flashback to Peggy's early experiences of WWII less stereotyped, or making her relationships with other women more of a focus (an obvious solution would have been for the flashbacks to have been about a sister rather than a brother). But I'm glad Peggy got another season.
*
In Youtube news:
The microseries Tiny Feminists is cute.
I started watching All For One, a "a modern, badass, gender-swapped, feminist, totally awesome adaptation of Alexandre Dumas' The Three Musketeers", about a college student trying to join a sorority. Same channel as Carmilla - so not an amateur production. Looks good so far.
Project Green Gables is still my favourite-of-the-moment. And Gilbert Blythe has actually sort-of made an appearance, which I wasn't expecting.
reading: The Bands of Mourning, very slowly. I like it but am finding it very easy to put down. Last night I started rereading The Time-Traveller's Wife instead…