Smart Bitches Trashy Books | All of the romance, none of the bullshit.

Courtesy of Jeaniene Frost who sent me much linkage, avast! A story so delicious, you’ll stick your own foot in your mouth.

Reporter Jane Henderson of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch posted on her St. Louis Today book blog an entry that has made a lot of people reach for their high blood pressure medicine. In her entry Laurell K. Hamilton knock-off for teens? she discusses a galley she received of Melissa Marr’s Ink Exchange, a YA paranormal novel about a teen who gets a tattoo and finds herself involved with the Faerie Court. Marr also wrote the highly acclaimed Wicked Lovely.

Henderson finds the similarities between the book - despite not actually having read Marr’s novel - and Hamilton’s Merry Gentry story startling.

Herein begins what I think of as The Hat Trick of Stupid Things Written in One Entry and One Comment. Hold onto your feet, folks.

Of course the cliche is that ‘imitation is the sincerest form of flattery’ but where does flattery end and copyright infringement begin? The book’s jacket even looks like the photos on Hamilton’s books.

Shit, if plots involving faeries are all infringing upon one another, especially in the legally sharp mind of that reporter, imagine the future wasteland of legal action to be enjoyed by each and every story featuring a vampire: “Your character sucks blood! MY Character sucks blood! YOU SUCK AND YOU ARE GOING DOWN, BEEEEYATCH!”

And the covers are similar? They do resemble the Jean Butt trend - except that Marr’s cover isn’t a jean butt so much as a shoulder. And doesn’t resemble the Hamilton cover as much as it does other YA books attempting to market a seductive tale to the YA market.

But wait we’re not done. Not satisfied to toss around the words “copyright” and “infringement” with such abandon as to make a barrister blush, Henderson goes on to say:

Another issue: A lot of parents might not think this series should be marketed to 12-year-olds, as it apparently will be. There’s a lot of difference between a 17-year-old girl and a 12-year-old girl.

On the other hand, most of the popular series being marketed to teen girls seem to involve beauty, sex and lots of designer purses. Maybe fantasy tattoos and paranormal love interests are no worse.  I’m not suggesting that books lead girls down the path to teen pregnancy. But with the sexualization of girls starting so young in all facets of culture, should parents speak up about what they see?  Thoughts?

Wow, did you miss that jump? Let’s recap in slow motion like we’re a sports show: This book with a 17 year-old protagonist may be marketed to 12 year old girls, just like many other popular series for young readers that feature slightly older protagonists. Speeding up past beauty! Sex! Designer purses! Fantasy Tattoos and paranormal love interests! And then we come to a SCREECHING HALT AT TEEN PREGNANCY! Whoa!

Holy. Shit.

Man, that was a Could Have Been An Interesting Question About Teen Sexuality blindsided by some WTF-tastic non sequiturs. Oooh, ooh can I try? Can I? Here’s mine! “Are book covers for YA novels more sexy and dark in imagery now? Yup. Sure are. Have prom dresses been skimpy and over-sexualized since I went prom dress shopping 15 years ago? Sure have! So are YA novel covers reflecting a sexualization of young people that’s been a standard for years? Possibly - but then, the novels often depict consequences or at least some healthy dose of reality for that sexual exploration, whereas mere images just contribute to the glamour of it. But then, I actually read YA novels, so I don’t know what I’m talking about at all.”

And the finale to this jaw drop of a newspaper book blog entry: Lindsay York Levack of the blog UrbanFantasyland sounds off like merde and mon dieu on Henderson’s request for “Thoughts?” by nailing a 5 point list that knocks the extraneous bullshit off Henderson’s entry, and addresses the points Henderson attempts to make about YA, sexuality, cover images, faerie tales, and writing. York Levack ends with a pointed, “Do your homework.” Well played, Ms. York Levack.

Melissa Marr, the author, commented on that entry and said that, surprisingly, she did have input to the cover art, and thinks that it’s an “iconographic image that ties to the plot.” Further, Marr says,

Interestingly, the idea that a fully clad, not sexualized girl with wings is similar to LKH’s covers does confuse me a bit. No bare midriff or legs, no scanty attire–instead it’s a face and upper back . . . Hmm. To each his/her own, I guess.

Another well played for you, Ms. Marr.

And for you, Ms. Henderson: NAUGHTY CORNER! No Cookie! Why?

Her commented response to the Urban Fantasyland entry on her own blog:

The cover of the teen book is very similar to Hamilton’s covers, and the stories do sound similar. However that applies to many books. In the romance genre, it’s sometimes hard to tell one author from the next.
If you read carefully, you’ll note that I did not make any untoward accusations or accuse the new book’s author of anything illegal. In fact, for many authors, being compared to Hamilton would be a compliment.

It’s not YA, it’s romance! And she brings in that 90-year-old creaky, arthritic dog of an accusation (Oh, please let the poor thing lie the hell DOWN already): “You can’t tell romance novels apart anyway.”

Not to be outdone, Ms. York Levack responds to Henderson’s comment on UrbanFantasyland lining up both the cover images, and the book summaries of Hamilton’s and Marr’s novels, delivering a many-word WTF Smackdown.

I agree that many authors would consider comparison to Hamilton a compliment– many authors of adult stories would. However, (1) you did not compare Marr’s work with Hamilton’s. You accused her of being a “knock-off” and of “taking a page”. This is not a comparison. This is a suggestion that Marr got her ideas from Hamilton. (2) If you are going to compare authors, please stick to authors of the same genre, same target audience.

And finally, the idea that you did nothing illegal is questionable. You have, by way of comparing adult-content with teen-content, damaged an author’s reputation with potential readers.

After a brief detour into the world of defining slander, York Levack again chastens Henderson most severely and ends with “...read the book first. Don’t start by comparing one author’s sexually charged work with another author who has sensitively navigated the issue of sexuality.”

Henderson responds by saying

I have read some of the upcoming book, “Ink Exchange,” and I have plenty of evidence for what I’ve written. There is nothing untrue about my comments, which are my opinions, and I am not intimidated by cyberbulling.

CueGennita Low’s Greek Chorus: You’re Soooo MEANNNNN!” Yes, disagreeing with you vehemently and calling you on things you wrote is exactly the same as bullying. Except not at all.

I see more than 300 books a week in my office. I have been a book editor for more than 12 years and when I say that something looks like a “knock-off” I have the experience and evidence to back that up.

My last thought before I go lie down and snuggle with that dog: You’d think after 12 years and 300 books a week, Henderson would know the difference between YA, romance, and adult paranormal fiction, let alone have developed some foresight before declaring a YA paranormal novel a “knock off” of a novel featuring exceptional degrees of explicit adult sexual content. And, for that matter, the difference bullying and incensed disagreement. 

52 comments •
Categories: Ranty McRant • The Link-O-Lator

Tags: This entry has not been tagged yet.