litcritted

[julesjones]

This should amuse at least two of you -- I have been cited in an academic blog that litcrits romance:

http://teachmetonight.blogspot.com/2007/02/women-writing-men-doing-men.html

In the comments they're discussing slash, including the question of why bisexual and lesbian women read m/m. I know some of you lot are better qualified to answer this than I am, so if anyone feels like wandering over there and giving them one of the many possible answers, or at least pointers to one of the meta groups that will talk to outsiders...

Comments

[ex-emilyvei.livejournal.com]

I would love to say the following but no power on earth can get their visual verification key to show for me.


-----------------------------

I think that it is an error to think there is a single motivation behind female-authored M/M. There are mutliple academic explanations offered by the likes of Constance Penley & Mark McLelland, each applied well to the specific context they know (early zine slash and yaoi, respectively). Other academics have offered evolutionary or feminist explanations. Other authors I know offer even more explanations to do with stepping outside typical gender/power assumptions or even just "If one cock is good, two is better". (excuse language).

I think that although some kind of female authored M/M can be tracked back through the centuries the apparent similarity of expression doesn't imply a unitary motivation even within a narrow genre like erotic romanceebooks. Some of the motivations my fellow authors claim do not apply to me in the slightest.

As a TMT contributor

[sarahf.livejournal.com]

I'm with you, Emily, and I don't think Laura was trying to claim a single motivation by any means. As much as my criticism attempts to theorize a broad understanding of why women read romance (of whatever variety), MY personal interest and feelings obviously inform the theories I come up with. I've had people explain to me why they read a book and have been almost completely unable to understand their reasons. But we like the same book. Go figure.

And I'm with you on the "one cock is good, two must be better" idea! ;)

Sorry about the verification thing. I'll email Laura and see what, if anything, she can do about it.

Re: As a TMT contributor

[ex-emilyvei.livejournal.com]

Thanks.

I'm also at peace with not really knowing why I like M/M. Like so many things I felt this fascination since I was very young. I suspect the cause may be unconscious/respondant or even genetic and so [gasp] not accessible to rational insight.

Re: As a TMT contributor

[sarahf.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I get you there, too. I've given up trying to theorize/explain my sexuality. I just enjoy it and enjoy exploring it and leave it at that!

Re: As a TMT contributor

[eroticjames.livejournal.com]

Here freaking here.

Part of it is the blogger changeover. I don't have a problem if I use my gmail account to post. However, if I try straight blogger it screws up.

Re: As a TMT contributor

[(Anonymous)]

*giggles at the thought that the 'straight' blogger cant access the m/m convo*

Re: As a TMT contributor

[julesjones]

I was having problems with the verification as well - the box was showing, but I had to re-enter it several times to get it to let me in.

Something I forgot to put in my post -- there was an enormous rambling thread in rasfc a few years ago where a bunch of women sf writers sat around and explained to the men in the group what the appeal of Hot Boy-On-Boy Action is. Putting that thread into a coherent essay is one of the things on my Circular Tuit list.

[esmeraldus-neo.livejournal.com]

Lesbian != omg men are uuuuuuuggly bastardseverylastone.

Men are pretty and strong and intense. It's nice watching them play. Like panther cubs!

[niobedancing.livejournal.com]

I'm pleased that they chose your work to reference. :) It's some nice, free, well-deserved publicity for you!

[julesjones]

Oh yes, I appreciate the exposure. :-)

[hafren.livejournal.com]

Love the way they couldn't be sure if you were m, f, straight, gay or bi. Total vindication, I think.

Maybe they should be pointed at this if they're really interested.... it doesn't give the full programme but there's a fascinating-sounding talk on age of sail slash ("Rum, Sodomy and the Slash", if I recall aright). I'm planning to get there in time for that. And among the keynote talks is a comparison of slash writers and female litfic novelists with the same obsession. Besides there's a lovely little pic of Illya and Solo!

[julesjones]

If you look at the bragbook on my website you'll see how many of the reviewers initially assumed I was a man -- and that reflects how many of the people on the romance mailing lists thought that. This startled me when I first ran into it, because of course coming from slash my default assumption is that anyone writing that style of gay erotica is female until proven otherwise.

I think there were a couple of things feeding into this. One is that apparently in the US most people think "Jules" is a purely masculine name, and it wouldn't occur to them that it could be a woman, unlike in the UK where it's a common short form for the entire Julius/Julia-derived group of names, whether male or female. The other is that I first came to attention in pro erotic romance as part of "Jules Jones & Alex Woolgrave", and I'm pretty sure that there were a lot of women unfamiliar with slash fanfic who were fantasising about this gay male couple writing love stories together. (Scott & Scott are a real example of such.)

Yes, were I in the UK I'd be very tempted by that study day -- does it produce proceedings? And of course the reason I thought one or two people might be amused by me being litcritted is that the fanfic zine series I edited was cited in an academic study of fanfic, and someone else was contemplating citing me in an academic paper on sf this year, so the romance blog completes the genre trifecta...

[hafren.livejournal.com]

Mel Keegan is female but passing for male, no? Her target audience was meant to be male - ha! - and I think the publisher thought they'd prefer to think that.

Slash Study Day 1 didn't producce formal written proceedings but I think a fair amount of what was said is now webbed in various places. I should chase it up.