Thursday, February 12, 2015

Worst 50 Shades Article Ever; Hate-Watching "Looking"; Nicholas Sparks "Crappy" Romance Writer

Worst 50 Shades Article Ever

I'm not sure where to begin with this, because it's so off base I'm actually not even sure it's worthy of commentary. And, it is an advertorial...paid for by Fifty Shades of Grey the movie.

But since so many people don't seem to know anything about Fifty Shades of Grey I figured I'd add a few small details. I was part of a book of essays that examined the book, FSoG, you can check out here if you are so inclined. I've been paid already for being part of the book and I'm not hocking for more sales. It's just a suggestion, if you're interested.

First, in this article I'm talking about right now, they seem to think gay culture had some kind of odd connection to FSoG. The title is a bit ironic, too...We Did It First: Five Ways Gay Culture Influenced "Fifty Shades of Grey." You need boots up to your knees to wade through THIS one.

The most ironic thing about this is that FSoG wasn't even titled FSoG until a publisher took it on. According to wiki, it began as Twilight FanFic, and was originally titled Master of the Universe. You can read more about that here. 

The Fifty Shades trilogy was developed from a Twilight fan fiction series originally titled Master of the Universe and published episodically on fan-fiction websites under the pen name "Snowqueen's Icedragon".

This is what the article I'm linking to now says about FSoG.

All across the country, randy theatergoers are flocking to their local suburban movie complexes to see the film adaptation of E.L. James’ internationally bestselling novel 50 Shades of Grey starring dreamboat Jamie Dornan and Dakota Johnson.

But what few fans of the book (and now movie) may realize is that even though 50 Shades of Grey features a young heterosexual couple, it’s actually a very gay-inspired story.


Whether or not FSoG was gay inspired is only something E. L. James, the author, can verify, and certainly not a paid for advertorial. I've never heard this anywhere before, and frankly I think it's the kind of article that gives a misleading impression about FSoG and gay people. And, in full disclosure, I actually liked FSoG the book and I love what it did for the publishing industry in a general sense.



You can read more here about the worst 50 Shades article ever. They go on to mention the five things about gay culture that inspired FSoG that actually have little to do with FSoG.

This one really made me want to kick something:

The average lifespan of a gay relationship

50 Shades of Grey takes place over the course of a month, with Ana falling in love with Christian by week two and breaking it off with him by week four. Not to perpetuate stereotypes, but this is on par with the average lifespan of many gay relationships.

Now that's about as bad as it gets when it comes to being soooo wrong about gay relationships.

This time the comments are all spot on, and they all seem to agree with what I just posted...and many add a few more details I didn't even want to get into right now. As a result of this advertorial, I think I'll be passing on the film just on principle alone. This is the best example of passive aggressive homophobia I've seen in a long, long time.

Hate-Watching "Looking"

This is amusing. At least I think it is for personal reasons. I've posted about how much I enjoy Looking, the TV show. However, I can't watch it with Tony in the room. He doesn't just dislike it he hates it so much he won't even hate-watch it for fun. I actually have to DVR it and watch alone.

But let's face it, Jonathan Groff's character (I love him) bought a mountain fresh scent douche, he got down on all fours on national TV, and douched his ass. It's kind of hard to criticize anyone with a good sense of humor for hate-watching Looking for these highly amusing scenes. Who does that, in quite that way? And I'm not even going to get into the time Goff's character got shtupped against a redwood tree at Russian River.

Looking creator, Andrew Haigh, thinks people who hate-watch Looking are crazy. Notice the use of abelist language there. It's not a word I would use in that context.

In any event, here's part of what Haigh said:

Before the show came out, people had already decided whether they hate it or love it. I understand it, there’s so little gay representation on screen so there’s a lot of pressure on it. But it’s a pressure that we can’t possibly live up to. They want it to be something that it’s not going to be. And I read things sometimes by some people and I’m like, ‘You are insane. We’ve never said that’s what this show is. Why do you think it’s that show?'

I still love Looking and I'm still watching...even though I'm doing it alone when Tony's not in the room. I recommend it, too. You can read the rest of Haigh's rant here.  I actually "get" what he's saying and I hope they continue to ass-douche and tree-pound and sleaze/camp it up as much as they can. Most of all, I love the characters. I like to think that when I'm watching Looking I'm laughing with them, not at them.

Nicholas Sparks Crappy Romance Writer

Here's another insult to the romance community. 

This isn't as amusing as some of the scenes in Looking.  The only douchey thing about this article is the douchecanoe who wrote it. He refers to Nicholas Sparks as a "Crappy Romance Writer" and that really pisses me off royally. There are many ways to refer to Sparks in this piece without slamming the biggest genre in publishing. And Sparks himself has stated he's not a romance writer, and frankly I don't consider his books romances for a variety of reasons.

I'm not getting into the theme of the article because it's way too clunky, ambiguous, and filled with hearsay. Nicholas Sparks can deal with that in court. 

My focus here, right now, is how offensive that "Crappy Romance" comment is, especially when gay romance novels are so popular now with the LGBT community and many who support us. And I think the guy who wrote this and worded it this way should study his book genres before he makes a jackass out of himself.

You can read the rest here. But only if you care.

And if you don't believe that Nicholas Sparks is not a romance writer, check out this one. Sparks writes romantic-drama, which is not the same thing as romance. But even if Sparks were considered a romance writer, the guy who wrote the article above is still a fucking jackass.

The Rainbow Detective Agency













 



No comments: