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

Someone on one of the AAR messageboards has accused us Smart Bitches of having an anti-Christian slant.

Candy’s Take:

Confession time: Organized religions in general give me a mild case of the heebie-jeebies. Organized religions in particular that make a very stark distinction between the saved and unsaved, those who Got God and those who Don’t Got God, tend to give me even more heebie-jeebies. The latter claim I’m going to burn in Hell and/or am Satan’s minion for the lone fact that I don’t believe in the right deity, regardless of how good or bad a person I actually am; would you blame me for feeling just a teeny bit uncomfortable?

But the people who identify themselves as belonging to a certain religion? They’re such a varied bunch that I can’t make blanket judgments about them. It’d be impossible. As with anything else, I take ‘em on a case-by-case basis. If they deserve to be made fun of or taken to task, then I try to call it as I see it.

For example: A Christian pharmacist who won’t prescribe birth control to someone because he believes it’s “chemical abortion” is an asshole (as well as deserving of having his degree yanked--what kind of shit chemistry and biology classes did this motherfucker take?). The same pharmacist who does this AND refuses to return the prescription to the customer so she can fill it elsewhere is a super-duper, grade A, mecha-Streisand stupid asshole; the fact that the asshole’s opinions are informed by his religious values also makes him a religious asshole. That doesn’t change that he’s an asshole, first and foremost. He could be ANY religion. In this particular case, he was Christian. I’d call him a Christian asshole.

But some people insist on reading that as me calling all Christians, alla time, assholes.

So let me make this clear once and for all (even though I’ve said this many times before on this blog): Assholism is a major religion in and of itself, and its practicioners range far and wide. Assholism is oftentimes caused by fundamentalism: the belief that you have the inside line to God (or non-God, as the case may be), know what’s best and everyone else needs to live only according to your values. Atheists, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Jainists, Zoroastrianists, Scientologists, Pagans, Worshippers of the Puckery Purple Men of Uranus, whatever--all of these have their share and then some of assholes.

I’ve said some inflammatory things on this blog before, but I’d like to know: were any of them attacking Christians and Christianity as a whole? I’d like to think I’m careful enough to make it clear that I’m usually talking about specific individuals or sub-groups, and not the Christian population as a whole.

There’s a difference between talking about the group, and talking about individuals. Perhaps we all need to learn to read more carefully when it comes to these sorts of statements?

Unless y’all want to argue that asshole fundamentalist Christians are the only true Christians around. I certainly don’t.

Now, if you want to talk about a group of people that us Bitches have consistently and ruthlessly attacked, I can tell you exactly who they are: Cover models. We’ve called them everything from child molesters to gym monkeys. If Fabio ever wants to take us to task for making unkind statements about him, he’d have a rock-solid case.

I seriously doubt you’d find the same level of hateration for Christians on this site.

Sarah’s Take: Since my blog was mentioned in that particular conversation over at AAR, I have been tempted to respond. But for the life of me I can’t figure out what I’m being called on the carpet for, there. It seems the complaint is that my strong feelings of Christianity might bleed...somewhere. Aside from the biohazardous nature of my alleged opinion, I have to wonder: Do I have strong feelings about Christianity?

Sure I do. I think that the teachings of Christ as depicted in the gospels are some damn fine code of human behavior, and a marvelous demonstration of fair ethics that everyone could do well to emulate.

Heck, you could say that because I liked those ethics of Jesus’ so much that I converted to Judaism in 1999. I used to be Christian, now I’m a homie of Christ. And last time I checked, Jesus was not down with harming other people in his name. Moreover, the tenets of Judaism and Christianity advocate for treating everyone with respect, honor and kindness.

So am I anti-Christian? No. Like Candy, I am anti-fundamentalist. I think the root word of “fundamentalism” is Mental, and that people who hurt others in the name of religion need some serious cans of whoopass cracked in their vicinity. I think ostracizing anyone who doesn’t believe what you believe is like revisiting 6th grade gym class every day of your life.

Furthermore, I do not have any problem with people who achieve peace and happiness through great devotion to their religion.

I do have a problem with people who, having achieved their own peace and devotion, seek to bend me to their will and force me to adopt their ways. If it works for you, great. But do not force your religion down my throat, even if it is my own. So I’m not going to hold your little Scientology cans in the middle of 42nd street, nor am I going to tie t’fillin (which I wouldn’t be asked to do anyway since I’m a girl and all), I’m not going to shake the lulav with you, and I’m not going to kneel and recite the rosary because you think I ought to do so.

I wonder if the root of the comments regarding our alleged anti-Christian bias lies in our personal dislike for inspirational romance. I personally do not enjoy it, because I feel that the underlying rhetoric of those few inspirational romances that I have read is that as a non-Christian, I am not saved. I find shades of the exclusive rhetoric that permeates orthodoxy of all religions in the structure of inspirational romance, and I feel that it does not apply nor appeal to me.

Do I rant and rave and yell that inspirationals should not be considered romance? No. I don’t care if RWA devotes an entire award to them; I know that personally, they are not my cup of holy water, so I’m going to find my romance elsewhere. But does disliking inspirational romance make me anti-Christian? No.

However, I refuse to change my opinion on man-titty.

...only this one doesn’t have to do with eating Irish babies, I swear.

(Besides, everyone knows Cambodian babies are the tastiest.)

I came up with a story idea last night. Part of it’s based on a dream I had--I have crazy, adventuresome dreams all the time, like the one in which I was Conan the Barbarian hunting down an Alien through the Kuala Lumpur Hilton--and part of it’s inspired by Serious Sam, a video game. While waiting for my rice to finish cooking last night, I banged out part of Chapter 1, and realized, wheee, this is really fun. And I came up with this idea:

I’m going to try and start a serial story here on Smart Bitches, sort of like what some of those pulp magazines featured in Days of Yore. The story is going to be over-the-top, and the action is going to be improbable, gory and fun. I’m not going to do any research--or at least, nothing that can’t be looked up in two seconds on Wikipedia or Google. Anything I can’t figure out for myself, I’m going to bullshit my way through, and any nitpicks about how I got this detail wrong or how the setting for THIS region is so TOTALLY NOT REALISTIC will be laughed at and disregarded. I’m aiming for gloriously silly mind candy, and I want to bestow said mind candy upon you teeming masses.

I’m thinking I can bang out a chapter once a week, once every couple of weeks. Every chapter will be plotted as it’s written; I have a pretty good idea of where I want the story to go, but I have no idea what the ending is going to be. I’ll find out where the story is going at about the same time you will.

So what do you guys think? This regular feature will spare me from thinking up scintillating issues to discuss every day, and hopefully it’ll bring some much-needed discipline to my writing habits, not to mention it’s a chance for me to exercise my flabby (er, non-existent) fiction writing skillz. Before you weigh in, though, down below is the part of Chapter 1 that I’ve written so far. Once you’re done reading it, let me know if you’re interested in seeing this story being continued for the next few months. Be honest. No hurt feelings if you think this is quite possibly the most retarded partial chapter you have ever read.

Best Novel with Strong Romantic Elements
A.K.A. Goddess
Evelyn Vaughn

Sarah: I keep looking at this cover to determine how I feel about the out-of-focus image of the heroine. The background imagery with the arches and the medallion in the background does it a marvelous job of indicating the plot - but the fuzzy heroine? Hmm.

At first, my thought was, “All covers look like this if I don’t wear my glasses!” But as different as it is, I like it. I’ve not seen a cover like it in romance, and while I found it distracting at first, I think it’s an intriguing design. I’m not sure it would catch on with cover design, but it’s fascinating.

Candy: Look! It’s the Bionic Woman! Now with Blur-Tronic™ Technology! Also featuring the hottest shade of Auburn Shimmer hair color, coming to retail stores soon, brought to you by L’Oreal Feria! (They don’t call it hair dye any more--only floozies dye their hair, classy dames color it. Ahhhh, love me some marketing.)

Anyway, the cover itself is quite nice. But the motion blur effect? I think it’s cheesy as hell. Moderation, people! Moderation! Plus with the mildly worried yet resolute look on the model’s face, I wonder if she’s actually worried about being smeared off the page altogether.

Best Contemporary Single Title
Bet Me
Jennifer Crusie

Sarah: I love this cover. LOVE IT. Luscious, sexy, sassy, and so perfect for the story. LOVE it. Crusie might have also have to be named an official Lucky Bitch™ for this and her other recent covers. I love when a writer gets a distinctive design for her book covers that emerges in subsequent issues - Crusie and PC Cast both have almost iconic covers and the attention to design paid to their novels makes me so happy from a respect-from-publishing-houses perspective. I mean, why shouldn’t romance novels get kickass cover design?

Candy: Can’t find anything to snark about in this cover. It’s sassy, it’s beautifully-designed (look at the fonts! And the colors!) and the shoes are relevant to the story, and I could gush on and on but hot damn, that’d be so boring… One of the few instances in which a deserving book is graced with a truly wonderful cover.

Best Paranormal Romance
Blue Moon
Lori Handeland

Sarah:From the middle down I love this cover. But avast, me hearties! Man-titty ahoy! However, since it’s a partial image of a man, it’s some what more mysterious, and as I’ve said, I am a fan of the faceless dude. Faceless or neck-down images allow me to put my own face on the hero, which is much more satisfying. Man-titty aside, of course. Arrrrgh!

Candy: Strut on a line, discord and rhyme, he’s on the hunt he’s after you… After your support bra, that is!

And is the wolf howling in sweet, sweet sorrow at the presence of unnecessary man-titty in the cover?

Sorry, the boobage just ruins this cover for me. Bleh.

Best Inspirational Romance
Grounds To Believe
Shelley Bates

Sarah: Again, from the middle down, awesome artwork. From the middle up? What’s the message here? Is he God? What’s with the “Touched by an Angel” backlighting?

Candy: I am not a fan of the “dude leering over a landscape” type covers. I mean, da fuck? If he’s God, then God looks like baggy-eyed, vaguely pouty white yuppie scum? And Heaven is full of inoffensive pastel colors?

Ugh. Talk about Hell.

Grounds to believe… that this is a lame-ass cover.

Best Regency Romance
A Passionate Endeavor
Sophia Nash

Sarah: “I can totally see down your blouse, my lady.”

I’ve never understood the homogeneity of Regency covers (this after I get all giddy over iconic cover design for specific authors, allowing me to spot them at ten paces sans glasses). But similar design for a genre? Makes it easy to grab your Regencies, I suppose, but after awhile, is it possible to create something original in what has become a very standard cover design?

That said, that is a fine looking dude right there. Wish he’d appear on more covers than that other guy, the other Fabio.

Candy: “Ahhh, ma cherie, it is charming that you are attempting to read. But I know what it is like to be a woman, with your greatly diminished intellectual capacity. Here, let me help you sound out the words as you read.

“Ahhhh, yes, a fine book, ma puce. Let us begin!

“‘See Dick run. Run, Dick, run!’ Ahhhh, quel aventurier, our leetle Dick.”

Sorry. Something about the guy just brought to mind someone sleazy, French and condescending.

Not that I’ve EVER met good-looking French guys who were sleazy or condescending, or anything. *koff*

Best Short Contemporary Series
Miss Pruitt’s Private Life
Barbara McCauley

Sarah: Looks like someone has Miss Pruitt’s hair off-camera and is about to give it a mighty yank. Weird hair aside, Rwor! Nice sexy cover. Not enough overt sex oozing off the page to make me want to cover the screen with my hand, but enough to make it spicy.

Except for the hair pulling. I HATE it when my hair gets pulled.

Candy: This one’s all right. It’s not hideous, praise Jah. But it’s also kinda cheesy and brings to mind made-for-TV soft porn. The cover says to me, Harlequin Blaze: It’s the Skinemax of Romance!

Best Long Contemporary Series
John Riley’s Girl
Inglath Cooper

Sarah: Hey. HEY! Get a room! Not in front of the newborn foal! Maybe you want to go see why the burro baby isn’t standing up yet? Or are you looking at that riding gear over her shoulder and thinking, “Hmmmm!”

Candy: Oh, the poor foal. It has no idea what unspeakable acts are going to be perpetrated upon it by these two Stepford People, does it?

So much for no bestiality on our romance novel covers.

Best Long Historical Romance
Shadowheart
Laura Kinsale

Sarah: Is this a stepback? I couldn’t find a secondary image online. Anyone? Otherwise? Get the Crusie/Cast team of cover designers on over to Kinsale’s house, stat! We need some fabulous iconic designs for Miss Kinsale asap! Because for a great book, that cover is seriously yawnful!

Candy: Laura Kinsale is cursed to have either really awful covers (see: every original cover for every Avon novel) or really, really boring ones (see: every Berkeley release). Ah well, at least we are spared Fabio’s bountiful bosom. This book deserved a cover featuring a detail from a painting from the Italian Renaissance to do it justice. But y’all know what a freakin’ Laura Kinsale fangirl I am.

Best Short Historical Romance
A Wanted Man
Susan Kay Law

Sarah: At first I dug this cover, as it’s not usual that you see the waist-down perspective (huh huh) of a heroine. Not to mention that the title and the image are at odds - sure looks like she’s walking away and that there man is not so wanted after all.

But the shadow on the ground? Is he stalking her? Is it creepy? Is she running away because he’s a wanted man for being a creep? Is he going to start lurching down that path after her?

OK, now I’ve officially creeped myself out.

Candy: Eh. Pretty bland. But Sarah called it: kinda creepy with the shadow and all.

Best Romantic Suspense
I’m Watching You
Karen Rose

Sarah: Dude. DUDE. KICK ASS COVER! Deliberately creepy, and what a totally innovative angle for a cover. The fat gloved hand, the rearview mirror image? KICK ASS. WHOO!

Candy: OK, from the shrunk-down cover, it looked as if the person’s wearing oven mitts, which, as you might well imagine, drove the “What the fuck?” factor way, way up for the book. But upon looking on a bigger version, I now see that it’s not an oven mitt.

Anyway, pretty nice cover. It’s nice to see a cover that’s actually intentionally creepy, instead of hilariously creepy (see: just about every cover for Sandra Hill’s Viking series).

While we are not an RWA site solely, we had a lot of response to the discussion regarding the awards ceremony, and the direction RWA should move in from this point forward.

I thought, since permission to forward was granted, y’all who had a great deal to say on the topic would like to see the response of Gayle Wilson, President-Elect and one classy lady in my opinion for reasons separate to this issue, and what appears to be much of the board.

It had to happen, of course.

There are apparently rumblings and murmurings about how the RITA awards ceremony fiasco shouldn’t have been publicized. That it shouldn’t have been discussed outside RWA loops, and that there’s no point in determining who wrote the script, and who gave it the greenlight so proper blame can be assigned.

My first thought was: y’know, this was a big ceremony with hundreds and hundreds of attendees, not all of whom were RWA members. Get a grip.

My second thought was: it’s almost always best to have things out in the open and publicly discussed. A lot of shit gets flung this way, but when it’s in the open, you can at least see the shit coming and duck. Or toss the shit back. Or whatever. Hot damn, this metaphor is HORRIBLE, but I hope y’all get what I’m trying to say.

Ah well. For Selah, who broke the story on Tuesday, massive props to you, lady.

For those of you who are curious, here’s the original discussion of the topic--the comments are where all the real juicy bits are.