I thought it might apocyrphal lol Want to add one of my own my best friend brought me round the God Box by Alex Sanchez and its really good, bout a teenager.
yeah its also first person which I am writing in. MY book is past tense. Oddly I think Sanchez might be what I need to put down as my competition for the query letter. He definitely is for the second book./ He gave it me 2 hours ago I am half way through
Elgaisma, I'd just like to say...it's really cool to see another straight woman enjoying gay literature! I love the stuff; I'm not sure why, but I just do. It's like a whole new, exciting world I can't get enough of. However, I'd like to be able to read gay fiction without having to 'defend' my sexuality...even my boyfriend started to get worried. Probably because at the time I was banging on about lesbians and Sarah Waters, but sheesh, I don't have to be the characters to love them!
I am probably bisexual but for me its never been an issue, because of my religious beliefs chastity was required so only ever slept with one man But I have loved the books I have read so far nearly finished God Box and read Sprout yesterday. Hoping Songmaster arrives tomorrow
was good, oddly I was trying to find out about what my books competition would be, I think Sprout and The God Box are closer to mine in someways than the fantasy novels lol I forgot it was Sunday today so no new book I have been handed another one by Hot Valley author not sure want to go through that again Although my bestfriend is yet again tickled about the fact I have included way too much gay innuendo in my new novel again without thinking about it He says I have to read some more
The human experience is a multifaceted thing, ever showing new facets. That you have an interest in Gay Lit just means you have an interest in looking at the bigger picture. As a writer this is a huge plus for you. This means more tools in your writer's tool box. As a person... well, it goes without saying that a wish to see the world through another's eyes is something I think all of us should strive for. Gay Lit, like Black Lit or Asian Lit or any other kind of lit that takes us out of our own personal paradigm is a magnificent source for growth on many, many levels.
I agree Wreybies, for me tolerance is accepting the viewpoint or opinion you don't like or understand. I try when I don't understand something to read about it and gain understanding. I try very hard to accept anything as long as its not restricting my own rights to be me.
When we no longer need to categorize literature as gay lit, black lit, feminist lit, etc., that will be the day we are all free.
I don't agree with that, that's like saying everyone has to be the same. I love the different cultures that make up me, I don't want to lose that. My country is currently working hard to bring more Scots Literature out. I think accepting diversity is more tolernat than trying to remove it. After all Gay Literature is just a category or genre that a person can come along and say I want to learn about that or I identify with that. The song I am What I am comes to mind. What I love is despite me being Mormon and my bestfriend being gay we can work together and love each other for who we are and neither requires the other to change. My husband has been very understanding and calls him my other husband. To me wanting to remove the categories is a bit fascist in nature and thats the one viewpoint I have tried very hard but have no understanding of.
Quoted for absolute truth, Wrey. I feel the same way. Speaking of Black literature (which I've been exposed to alot of since going to Uni - Derek Walcott and Alice Walker mostly), I've been meaning to read The Colour Purple for a long time. We have the book somewhere around here. I hope it doesn't make me cry my eyes out like the film did, lol. Or maybe I hope it does? And just to add to what Cog says - I agree that when genres are determined by the culture they're from, they shouldn't then be marginalised. People do tend to do these things - avoid the gay/lesbian section in waterstones, or the world culture sections, just because they think they won't relate to any of it. I think what needs to happen is this: Book stores should stop treating culture as a genre. Sure, coming from a certain culture means the books will be of a certain taste - but they're so much more than they get credit for. For example, Sarah Waters writes alot of gay fiction, and feminists consider her as an Icon for the gay community. However, she's also an amazing writer of character, and her narrative voice is frankly awesome. Most of her books have been set in eras gone by, which would make her an excellent writer of Historical Fiction. Her research is mind-blowingly extensive. When I think of all those qualities about her work, I do wonder why she just gets lumped into the extremely varied "Gay and Lesbian" section in Watersones, alongside a gay erotic art book and an assortment of erotic novels. Being gay isn't all that defines her and her work, and I can't say I appreciate the kind of smutty image they've associated it with. Gay fiction and Gay erotica ain't gotta be the same, yo. Makes no sense to me.
Maybe I am not understanding you we could be saying the same thing but I am not sure how we can not categorize people without ignoring their differences? Its nice for people to have a sense of belonging and to be themselves. Meeting with a group of people who share that aspect of you life can be reassuring and fun. Its bigotry that causes people to pass a category by or just a lack of interest. Its not the category that is the problem. I want my differences to be accepted, and embraced not ignored. I know important gay literature has been to the men I know in giving them an understanding of themselves. I know when I discovered there was a genre of LDS literature how much that helped me. Those categories help us embrace and love ourselves instead of pushing things to the background. When I was in a wheelchair it was part of me, I much preferred it when people didn't ignore it, but just accepted it was there. I needed to be catergorized, as things like ramps and disabled toilets where what allowed me to function.
Did you need wheelchair lit to validate your identity when you were wheelchair bound? Or was it better to simple see physically impaired people in literature, treated with dignity and taking part in the story?
yes specific disabled literature was helpful, it helped me come to terms on a much deeper and specific level than someone physically impaired just appearing in the story there is room for both. But no someone just taking part in the story wouldn't have had the same impact at the time. I had to learn how to be a different me, accept actually I wasn't going to be the same again.
If I might interpose for a moment, seeing as I am the one gay person in the conversation. I enjoy Gay Lit because sometimes I want to be wrapped in a bubble of self and of me, to read a story that is like my personal story. Something to which I can relate and that I feel is saying to me, "This is for you, Wrey. For you." But... There is much truth in what Cog has to say. One of the most illuminated people to ever put pen to paper, Arthur C. Clarke quite often had gay characters in his work. He had the genius capacity to include these characters in a manner that was neither self conscious nor "axe grinding." They were there, like all the rest of the cast within the book. Included, but not highlighted. Participating but without the klieg-light constantly and distractingly on them. Arthur was saying to us in his works, "In the future, people will be people. They will be different. We will not be some hive or ant hill. But the differences will be accepted and included and enjoyed and appreciated." Clarke was, without doubt, a multiculturalist in the sense of that word's use within the school of anthropology, not the twisted and mutilated sense that politicians have given to the word in recent years. Clarke was saying to us, "We are different. We are not all the same. And that is perfectly grand!" *places soap box back under bed* If you can't tell, I love Mr. Clarke dearly. Would that I could, I would give the man the biggest, warmest, most chummy celestial bear-hug that ever there was.
I do agree its great to have gay characters, black characters etc in books. That is what I am trying to accomplish with my current story, its a very ordinary story, its about two brothers one of whom is gay. But like you say Wreybies I also like reading the books that wrap me up in my own little world sometimes, books that feel they were written with someone like me in mind. Also the books like the God Box which i read last night serve a real purpose in helping people understand and accept themselves. It was actually a very cathartic book for me lol my teen years I identified with Angie as a gay man unintentionally broke my heart and still does on a regular basis With my illness when it came around the books I read were to help me gain acceptance of myself, they serve a purpose which I think promotes tolerance, someone who accepts themselves is generally more accepting of others and strong enough to fight for acceptance. I would just feel censored and unaccepted if my categories disappeared from literature
I think you'd be hard pressed to find many minorities who agree with that statement. It takes the view that difference (as in, difference from society's norms: white, male, heteronormative) is always negative, when really for minorities the assertion of difference is as much a source of power and pride as it is something that should be abloished. Black lit, for instance, subverts the English language and traditional English narrative forms and media to assert the difference between Black and White experience, not to efface it. Feminist lit similarly sought to alter patriarchal systems to better express the experience of women: the resulting works are markedly different from anyting written by a male author and this difference is not negative but positive, an assertion of control of identity and culture/counterculture. Literature, as much as language itself, is as much a source of culture as a result of it, and the idea that we should cease to distinguish different cultures (whether ethnic, social or sexual) from one another in favour of some universally innocuous form is, quite frankly, dangerously naive.
I have an additional question to ask, the 4 most recent gay literature I have read are in first person, is it more prevlelant(sp??) within the genre or is it just the books I have read? Because I have spent so much time writing first person in the present tense I am struggling with them being first person past tense, my brain is constantly correcting them I agree in someways it seems like a nice idea, but its like saying I'll accept you on MY terms, instead of accepting YOU. YOU need to fit in with ME, instead of how to I accomadate YOU or how do WE at least work together so WE can live together. For me removing the genres is the anitithesis of acceptance. Its what the English did in Scotland, Wales and Ireland, they tried to remove the culture. In 2010 the fallout from that is still being dealt with. There is a place for both, my book is a fantasy story with a gay character narrating it. Whereas the God Box and Sprout are about being Gay.
Wow! This thread is great. I wasn't aware of such a genre in literature. Needless to say I haven't read any book in that genre. As for movies, I have watched the highly censored version of Brokeback Mountain on HBO. And that's it! I'll try and find out if any of the books suggested here is available in India. I mostly write stories in which the MCs are gay. I didn't know what to do with them, and still don't know (I just file them, may be with the intention of burning them one day). I think may be I should start submitting them to publishers. Any recommendation will be greatly appreciated. (or should I start a new thread) Thanks Elgaisma for posting this thread. It is an eye opener for me. Sorry, I couldn't be of much help.
LOL I know how you feel, when I found a whole raft of literature relating to my religious beliefs I hadn't known we had a culture attached to it. Or when I saw a movie called Wide Eyed and Legless about a lady with ME, each gave me something and a sense of security. You are always helpful it gives me insight into how things are for you
I think this is a misinterpretation of what Cogito said. I don't think he advocated favoring any kind of universal form in literature, but merely doing away with the need to label individual works according to racial categories, gender categories, etc. I think he's right.
Thats actually what I took him to mean, do I think the main categories should include a wide range yes. But I like having the categories that apply to me. Books with Scots, Gay, LDS, Female characters in etc are important but so are the books about being each of those things. Good portion of the international literature from the past 200 years has Scots authors, and chracters but its not the same as Scots language literature etc Even Burns toned it down for his English audience
True. I think the point is - why do books about being any of those things have to be sub-categorized into some niche genre? Why can't they simply be presented as good books for any reader to read?
