![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
marinessOh, for the love of god, New York Times, STOP.
STOP.
Thanks to their new paywall, I've recently managed to successfully avoid the various annoyances of the New York Times. Until television critic Ryan McGree (who, I'd like to note, was not particularly enthusiastic about HBO's upcoming Game of Thrones, but that's ok; I don't expect everybody – or even most people – to like it) pointed me to – or more accurately, warned me off from -- The New York Times review of Game of Thrones.
The reviewer didn't like it.
That's ok. What is not ok is this bit:
This is not the first time the New York Times has, to use their own word, patronizingly assured us that women just don't like all that fantasy stuff. That fantasy is just for the guys. And yes, for the record, a couple of my female friends didn't like The Game of Thrones either. But also for the record, a couple of my guy friends also hated the series or couldn't get into it. This isn't a gender thing.
So, let me be clear, New York Times. I'm a girl. I'm even a girl who – gasp – likes to wear dresses from time to time. I am a girl who loves (good) chick flicks and Pride and Prejudice and hot baths with lots of bubble baths. That sort of thing. I'm also a girl who has hated several chick flicks and chick books and that sort of thing.
I'm also a girl who loves dragons, swordfighting, zombies and all that stuff. I'm a girl who has happily devoured books about men, or books with mostly male characters. And I'm a girl who has happily devoured books featuring the adventures of girls and women in fantasy worlds.
And I'm not alone. News flash: women don't just read and watch this stuff, they also write it. And as a writer, I'm here to tell you: you don't write fantasy unless you really, really love fantasy. Trust me on this one. And as a reader, I'm here to tell you: having girls and women in fantasy books is not a new thing, and it wasn't done as a "little something for the ladies."
If you don't like Game of Thrones, fine. But don't drag in this sort of crap. And stop telling me that I can't like this sort of thing because I'm a girl.
(Also, for the record, I am not in a book club, and I have never read Lorrie Moore. But if I were in a book club, yes, I would strongly suggest that everyone, but everyone, read The Hobbit just because it's such a satisfying book, even if The Hobbit is all about the guys, well before we read Lorrie Moore.)
STOP.
Thanks to their new paywall, I've recently managed to successfully avoid the various annoyances of the New York Times. Until television critic Ryan McGree (who, I'd like to note, was not particularly enthusiastic about HBO's upcoming Game of Thrones, but that's ok; I don't expect everybody – or even most people – to like it) pointed me to – or more accurately, warned me off from -- The New York Times review of Game of Thrones.
The reviewer didn't like it.
That's ok. What is not ok is this bit:
The imagined historical universe of “Game of Thrones” gives license for unhindered bed-jumping — here sibling intimacy is hardly confined to emotional exchange.
The true perversion, though, is the sense you get that all of this illicitness has been tossed in as a little something for the ladies, out of a justifiable fear, perhaps, that no woman alive would watch otherwise. While I do not doubt that there are women in the world who read books like Mr. Martin’s, I can honestly say that I have never met a single woman who has stood up in indignation at her book club and refused to read the latest from Lorrie Moore unless everyone agreed to “The Hobbit” first. “Game of Thrones” is boy fiction patronizingly turned out to reach the population’s other half.
This is not the first time the New York Times has, to use their own word, patronizingly assured us that women just don't like all that fantasy stuff. That fantasy is just for the guys. And yes, for the record, a couple of my female friends didn't like The Game of Thrones either. But also for the record, a couple of my guy friends also hated the series or couldn't get into it. This isn't a gender thing.
So, let me be clear, New York Times. I'm a girl. I'm even a girl who – gasp – likes to wear dresses from time to time. I am a girl who loves (good) chick flicks and Pride and Prejudice and hot baths with lots of bubble baths. That sort of thing. I'm also a girl who has hated several chick flicks and chick books and that sort of thing.
I'm also a girl who loves dragons, swordfighting, zombies and all that stuff. I'm a girl who has happily devoured books about men, or books with mostly male characters. And I'm a girl who has happily devoured books featuring the adventures of girls and women in fantasy worlds.
And I'm not alone. News flash: women don't just read and watch this stuff, they also write it. And as a writer, I'm here to tell you: you don't write fantasy unless you really, really love fantasy. Trust me on this one. And as a reader, I'm here to tell you: having girls and women in fantasy books is not a new thing, and it wasn't done as a "little something for the ladies."
If you don't like Game of Thrones, fine. But don't drag in this sort of crap. And stop telling me that I can't like this sort of thing because I'm a girl.
(Also, for the record, I am not in a book club, and I have never read Lorrie Moore. But if I were in a book club, yes, I would strongly suggest that everyone, but everyone, read The Hobbit just because it's such a satisfying book, even if The Hobbit is all about the guys, well before we read Lorrie Moore.)
(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-15 04:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-15 06:55 pm (UTC)ALERT THE NEW YORK TIMES! WOMEN HAVE FANTASY AND SCI-FI BOOK CLUBS!
(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-15 06:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-15 06:58 pm (UTC)Oh, right. The sort of real people who can also have an election that only lasts a few weeks instead of the American years :(