update on the Keldara review link.

[boogieshoes]

not sure how he found it, but John Ringo found David Hines's review of the Keldara series.   

i have to say, issues with subscriptions aside, the more i read of *John's* reaction to the books themselves and the hub-bub surrounding them, the better i feel.  this is because it allows me to see John as human again, which is important if i ever want to be able to read his books - any of his books.  yeah, things inside get pretty knotty over when it comes to the Keldara books.

we were discussing them in chat last night, and strega42mentioned she'd like to lay out her opinions in lj behind a cut so they can have a discussion without upsetting me.  to be fair, luke_jaywalker asked if i would say what my issues with the series were, and i chose to answer... but it seriously winds me up.  i was struggling very hard to stay contained, so my conditions last night were that i would answer the question, but not discuss either the answer or the books.  to say my upset was obvious is probably an understatement - but that is, of course, exactly why discussion is out of the question right now.  i can barely stay coherent long enough to lay out my own opinions of what i see as the major issues, so i know any attempt at discussion is going to be seen as an attack - at best.

and i'd dearly love to lay out my own opinions on the matter in a comment-disabled post - but i can't do that, either.  i can't let this be 'real' to me yet.  there's stuff there - deep emotional shit - that i'm just not ready to face.  and if i type it out in a permanent format, it's there everyday.  it's real, and i have to face it, because it's staring me in the face, daring me to ignore it.  i get through my life one day at a time - and this just isn't the right time for facing that particular pile of shit.

at any rate, this is my favorite line from John Ringo's comment on David's review:

"If YOU think you were thinking 'OH JOHN RINGO NO!', be quite aware that that is what I was thinking most of the time. Especially in Ghost. The book was so over the top, my working title was 'The Wanker Piece.' (Marketing forced me to drop the title. :-)"

this makes me giggle.  because i can quite seriously see him saying that to himself.  'omfg!  wtf am i *doing*?!'  and then when people started saying he should publish it, i can see him going 'i cannot *seriously believe* you like this crap!  and it *is* crap!  omfg! wtf am i *doing*?!'  and it makes me like him more to know that he recognizes the wtf-ery of this particular series.

anyway.  that is today's public post.  if i post more, it'll be on the GDPfusion fic thing.

-bs

PS - and everyone who was in chat with me last night, thanks for putting up with me.  ::hugs::

Comments

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

::HUGS::

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

::hugs more:: and i hate getting so wound up about this i can't talk about it, because it occurs to me that the series could be a *really excellent starting point* for social discussions on rape and rape-culture and etc.

which when i say i'm frustrated about not being able to talk about it much - that's like, half the reason.

::hugs::

-bs

[chuckles48.livejournal.com]

That would be my fault, potentially. Soon as I read it, I email John & Miriam the link. I'm sure others did as well, but I knew he had to see it.

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

ah. i figured it would eventually get around to him. but when i asked if i could hand the URL out, David said on LJ was fine, but had asked me not to post the URL *onto the bar forums*, because he didn't want to cause a lot of wank. which, you know, i totally understood. i just didn't realize that *others* would feel this so funny they had to pass it on, hee.

i mean, i can't even read the review completely yet - issues with subscriptions, remember? - so i only had the comments to go by. and while people were definitly laughing, sometimes laughing at something is because you hate the thing being mocked, not because you almost-fondly regard it as badfic. and Ghost comes up regularly, so i thought it might make for some interesting conversation fodder.

but dude. OH JOHN RINGO NO! that takes the cake for a number of reasons.

:-D

-bs

[chuckles48.livejournal.com]

You can't read the review itself? Should we repost it for your edification?

And yes, OH JOHN RINGO NO! has definitely entered meme-space. ;>

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

no, i meant, my issues wrt Ghost are f*cking me up enough that trying to read the review gave me heartburn. not because it was *bad* - or good, or whatever - but because when i tried to do anything more than skim, my issues started jumping up and down hollaring they they HAD TO BE AIRED NOW, GODDAMMIT!!!

i'm frustrated with that response, because 1) i really would like a chuckle and 2) believe it or not, i'd actually like to read the books to the end. the changes Harmon is making in the Keldara culture are going to be interesting, and i want to see if Ringo's ideas are similar to my own.

but i can't read it without the red haze descending, and the urge go on a very messy killing rampage bubbling up. i mean, the sort of 'messy' that gives grown men nightmares and countess bathory enough of a blood supply for a zillion years... and the image of that blood and destruction starts looking... very *purifying*, if you know what i mean, when the issues start clamoring for voice.

so, um, yeah, when i say 'i can't read it', for this particular post and books and any serious tavern discussions about said books, the implied addendum is 'without risking the life and limb of everyone around me.'

which may lead you to ask why i linked at all, or originally read David's review.

i came across it on metafandom, where the blurb mentioned John Ringo, but not Ghost. so when i clicked on it, half-expecting a very liberal/ leftist-leaning review of Hymn Before Battle or something. i didn't know it would be about the Ghost series. and having clicked on it, i scanned it to check the tone of the review. and also, in the back of my head, i figured it would be a good way to 'spot check' where i was on this issue internally. i mean, to see if i was ready to move forward. obviously, i'm not. :-p

but by the same token, given that what i skimmed seemed fairly even-handed, and the responses in the comments indicated a lot of people found it funny, i figured other people might be interested to. the rest is history.

... except i'm still wound up about it. sheesh. i need to do some serious processing. either that, or smack the crap out of my pell when i get home.

-bs

Re countess bathory bloodbath

[oldcurlywolf.livejournal.com]

*hugs*


I feel that way bout the world in general. Politics in particular. Yeah I know do not qoute me Honor Harrington about despite the fact I hate politics I'd better learn to live with/understand it. We had that discussion in the last couple of nights in chat didn't we? I disremember exactly but I think we did Hmmm this really deserves its own post in my own lj now..because I'm about to digress and I really hate doin that to my friends ljs. :)

[oh btw dear since you reference the ever so lovable *snort* countess. Have you read the Halflife series by Wm Mark Simmons? I think you might enjoy it]

Wolfie

[chuckles48.livejournal.com]

I have to admit, I found telling John's comment about 'Thank you for writing this. I thought I was the only one.' Ummm, I know people like that. Well, even. Very well, even.

I'm sorry about the issues thing. I'll be honest - I don't think most people realize "what evil lurks in the heart of men". I'll be blunt - we're pondscum. If men were judged on what runs around in their heads, the world would be a smaller place. But we aren't - we're judged by our actions, which is why you can have a character such as Mike, and have it actually, in a twisted way, work.

Seriously - judging from your reaction, if you could read the minds of the people around you, we'd have to commit you, as a safety measure. You'd go crazy.

An example of this: A long time ago, I realized that I could make a sh*tpot of money in real estate. All I had to do was deliberately stack the deck against potential clients. Play the system against them, deny them useful information, don't let them fact-check, etc. And I realized, at the same time, that if I did that, I'd never be able to look in a mirror again, because I'd despise the person I was looking at. I'd be rich... but I'd hate myself, on a very intimate level. And it wouldn't be that hard to do.

Guys realize just how much crap lurks beneath the surface. One of the reasons why guys put women on pedestals, is because we know _men_ are that bad, and we hope _women_ are made of something better.

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

Guys realize just how much crap lurks beneath the surface. One of the reasons why guys put women on pedestals, is because we know _men_ are that bad, and we hope _women_ are made of something better.

which is why guys will always be disappointed. we're not better, we're human, too. the good and the bad, and the dehumanizingly callous, and the monstrously ugly. we're all that, too. and until people understand that, grok that men and women are made up of essentially the same reactions as each other, the same base instincts and the same civilizing influences, we're not going to get *anywhere* in terms of gender politics, sexism, rape issues, etc ad nauseum. individuals of the same gender have far more differences from *each other* than the groups stats between one gender and the other.

i seriously think you're doing your gender a disservice by characterizing them as all pondscum. it's because you're *not* all pondscum that the rape stats *aren't* 100% of women, 75% or better of men, by the time they're 15. seriously. i think... a lot of people don't understand what they're *saying*, but i can't seriously believe that we're all that neck-deep in crud.

because if we *are* all that crappy? we might as well nuke ourselves now, because *there is no hope*. remember, i've seen the crap too. i've seen *an* elephant, even if it isn't *the* elephant, but it's still damned ugly and scary. but if all everybody can do is ride elephants, then all we have left is the Circus.

and i refuse to believe that. people aren't all about the Circus any more than they're all about the food on the table. and i can tell because we have things like Rodin and the Mona Lisa and the Parthenon and Celtic Knotwork and all sorts of beauty, things men create as well as women. if the male of the species was only a barely contained piece of crap, there wouldn't be beauty. there wouldn't be decency of *any* sort, let alone the real chivalry i've seen people display.

so no, i reject the idea that men are pondscum. they're not. i don't think 90% of guys really *think* about issues like these much - but i also think it's more of an 'out of sight, out of mind' thing, not deliberate obtuseness. that is, they don't have to deal with a lot of sexism or rape or abuse cases, so it does occur to them to spend brainpower on it. but that's not 'pondscum' thinking - that's *natural*, in the scheme of things. i don't think about racist commentary all that much, or the plight of the homeless, because i've never been there. and it's not that i'm not sympathetic when i hear about it, it's that i've got my own fish to fry, and people are inherently self-oriented (and that's not negative - you have to take care of yourself before you can take care of others).

so no, not pondscum. not always brain-engaged, but not pondscum. and this is a comforting thought to me, and it should be re-assuring to you. it means we have the means to improve our conditions - which is to say, even the people with the most power in the society in the traditional sense (yes, the old white male privilege thing) can be known to give a crap. that's what decency is.

ok, i should stop lecturing now :-p

-bs

[chuckles48.livejournal.com]

Ummm, you'll note that guys _are_ constantly disappointed. They find out the hard way that women are human too - different (different socialization, instincts, etc.), but the same genetic material, and dealing with the same issues.

As to "men as pondscum"... no, I'm not. But I think you missed a key thing. It's not about what is in your head. It is about what you do with that. I find that the vast majority of men _and_ women choose, conciously, to _act_ better than the demons that run around in their heads. It's about freedom of choice.

At some levels, I guess it's a very fundamentalist attitude. We are, mostly if not "born in" sin, socialized into it, implanted with it. We are also socialized so that we recognize it, and so that, largelly, we choose not to act on what's in our heads.

You might note, largely the studies bear this out. If you remove all consequence, people turn _really_ nasty, _really_ ugly. Social censorship is a BIG restraint. Of course, the really, really hard one is when the only censor available is the one inside your head. That's when you find out what you're really made of - are you, at core, an angel with a lot of underlying demon, or a demon, with a thin veneer of angel.

Hell, look at the real world. In societies where there's no social restraint, what happens? It gets ugly, fast. When Fallujah was being run by AQ, briefly, it turned into hell on earth. Under Saddam, his senior henchmen basically had harems. Look at how your standard third-world dictator operates - money, women, and lots of evil to keep the wogs in line. No censorship.

Writ small, you see that throughout society.

But you've also tumbled to one of the reasons why, for example, most men REALLY HATE wife beaters, and abusers of children. They know the potential for that lurks within them - and they hate even more those who let that demon or demons out, to prey on those unable to defend themselves.

Anyway, enough of Charlie's "Underlying guy pshrinkology 101".

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

i'm going to have to stop this. i mean, it's interesting, and i *want* to continue... except my issues are choking me again, and draining my energy to boot. ::rolls eyes:: some days, it's not worth chewing through the straps in the morning, and it doesn't even have anything to do with other people!

but anyway, don't you dare say you're sorry for triggering me or something silly like that! i chose to participate in this conversation, so, you know, responsible for my own anxiousness, here. except now i have to bow out, cause i'm trying not to hyperventilate at work.

my poor pell. oh, well, better a stick in the mud than the neighbors...

-bs

[chuckles48.livejournal.com]

I'm not sorry for triggering you. You own that - it's all you, hon! I am, however, sorry that your issues prevent you from discussing this, or from trying to understand it from a guy's perspective. And I'm sad that a discussion like this would publicly mess you up that much.

Here's a positive thought on all this. Many/most of those nice guys you know? They've conquered their inner demons, and chose not to let them out, ever. They've _made that choice_, and some do every day. Strong, good people, those.

[boogieshoes.livejournal.com]

well, it's one of those things that i take on a day to day basis.

and as i just mentioned in chat - my philosophy has *never* been 'don't ask me the triggery questions about emotional topics', but rather 'be prepared if i say i can't talk about this right now'. because you know, sometimes it's just too big to discuss, or you're not in a safe mental space or whatever.

taking benedryl and a nap this afternoon helped, i just ran out of energy for dealing with this today. :-p

::hugs:: if acceptable? thanks for understanding that i needed to stop.

-bs

[chuckles48.livejournal.com]

[hugs]

No problem. I understand completely.