Books I Read in 2012

It seems like everyone's putting up their 2012 best-of lists, so I wanted to join in on the fun! Most of the books I read hadn't been published this year, but whatever. I decided to come up with my own categories and highlight the books that I found particularly memorable, whether for good or for ill. These are all my personal opinions based on my very particular set of pet peeves and preferences, so please don't take these mini-sort-of-reviews as assessments of quality — they're basically just me ranting and raving about my reading experience.

Let's start out with a good one:

The Only 5-Star Rating

Jellicoe Road by Melina Marchetta

So I guess this would be my favorite book of the year (and yes I am super stingy with 5-star ratings, and even 4-star ones). Unfortunately, since I read it in February (which was a long time ago and before I started writing status updates while reading), I don't quite remember all the details. But I do remember that it made me cry (which isn't hard to do), and that it impressed me (which is), and that I loved the unconventional story structure. I am such a sucker for nonlinear story lines. I don't think I really fell in love with the protagonist and the love interest, but they didn't annoy me, which is actually saying a lot considering how picky I am. I do remember being moved by the relationships and the way we found out more and more about the group of kids from the past. Great read.

Made Me Laugh the Most

Wyrd Systers by Terry Pratchett

Dude, this book made me crack up SO much. I've been slowly and haphazardly making my way through the Discworld novels (I'm fortunate my library carries many of them), and while some of them turned out to be duds (at least to me), this one was a blast. I laughed so hard that my friend thought I was completely nuts, and that just made me laugh more. And it happened more than once! Ahh, Granny Weatherwax is so badass. I liked her a lot in the Tiffany Aching series, which I'd read before (love that series, particularly A Hat Full of Sky), but in this one she was just absolutely hilarious, and definitely made me eager to pick up all the rest of the witch books in the Discworld series. (Incidentally, the runner-up for this category is a Discworld book as well: Going Postal, featuring Moist Van Lipwig.)

Pissed Me Off the Most

Stormdancer by Jay Kristoff

This year I abandoned 30+ books while reading, but this particular DNF probably annoyed me the most out of all of them. I ranted about the green eye thing on my blog and the cultural appropriation stuff on Goodreads (with some great input and discussion from my friends — their posts are very much worth reading, more so than mine, haha). The disappointment hurt, a lot. I'd hoped so badly for this to be an amazing YA Asian fantasy because we definitely need more of those, but instead we got an author who doesn't think "exoticism" and "appropriation" are real things and that it should be ok for him to make stupid mistakes about someone else's culture and language just because he wanted his novel to have an aesthetic that's not overdone. Sigh.

Favorite Series

Chaos Walking by Patrick Ness

I don't manage to finish many series, since I frequently give up after disliking the first one, or get too lazy to hunt down each book, or worry the sequel will ruin the first book, or whatever. But I managed to check out all three books in the Chaos Walking trilogy from my library this year, and I thought this series was great in spite of all those elements I usually dislike: cliffhangers, protags that annoyed me, a romance I didn't much care for, weird dialect. But the experience of reading these books is just so intense I couldn't put them down; I felt exhilarated by the roller-coaster ride despite the fact that my fondness for the protags deteriorated rapidly over the three books. I think this was because my increasing dislike for them was balanced by my growing sympathy for the villains, which amazed me. There were characters I'd absolutely hated at first who grew on me and earned my compassion. By the end of the series, I wanted happy, redemptive endings for the villains even more than I wanted the protagonists to stay alive. Ultimately, I loved the masterful characterizations and the edge-of-your-seat pacing. I definitely didn't expect to like this series so much.

Favorite Historical Fiction

The Evolution of Calpurnia Tate by Jacqueline Kelly

This book isn't for everyone, as there isn't much of a plot, and the voice of the main character didn't really fit her age. But I loved this book because I adored Calpurnia so, so much. I love science, and I love smart, strong-willed female characters, and this book had both. I very much enjoyed reading about Calpurnia's interactions with her family, her scientific outings with her grandfather, and the way she fought against the prescribed roles for women and girls. She is a feminist scientist in the making, which is AWESOME, and she completely won my heart.

Most Miserable

The Magicians by Lev Grossman

I don't even remember how this book made it to my to-read list, but I probably thought, "Huh, Harry Potter plus Narnia for grownups, sounds good," and made a note to look for it at the library. But I had no idea that it'd actually be about a miserable, selfish, hateful young man who makes a lot of stupid, self-absorbed decisions and mopes around being angsty all the time and then acts in such an jerkass way that terrible things happen to the one decent-ish character in the entire book. But it takes place first at a Harry-Potter-ripoff-magic-boarding-school and then in a Narnia-ripoff-fantasyland, so I guess that accounts for the description. It was so freaking depressing to read, and I hated pretty much everyone in the book (they mostly all hated themselves and each other, too). I was just like WHAT THE HECK IS THIS CRAP and was so disappointed and depressed and angry when I finished (plus relieved that it was over, I guess). Not to mention very, very miserable as well.

Favorite High Fantasy

Mistborn: The Final Empire by Brandon Sanderson

I've had this on my to-read for a while, but it was Maya's recommendation that really spurred me to get it from the library. And I really enjoyed it! Vin was a great protagonist — smart, capable, brave, had to work for her skills, and wasn't whiny. I rooted for her throughout the book, and it was great to see her inner and outer transformations and growing relationships with her co-conspirators. All the plotting, cons, secrets, and mysteries were right up my alley. Plus, it had an interesting and unique magic system. Over all, I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed this book, and I look forward to reading more by this author. (Also, I ended up recommending this book to a friend and we read it at the same time, so I'm relieved it was good and that we both liked it!) (Longer review for Mistborn: The Final Empire here.)

Most Relieved I Liked

The Raven Ring by Patricia C. Wrede

I bought the 5-book Lyra series bundle for Kindle because of a Cyber Monday sale, and also because I adore Patricia C. Wrede's Enchanted Forest Chronicles (particularly Searching for Dragons) and very much enjoyed her Mairelon series. The first four books were a little disappointing, though -- they weren't as good as her latter books, and the ratings for those ranged from 1.5 to 2.5. But I'd heard that The Raven Ring was the best, so I was hoping it'd be good. And I ended up liking it, even though it has a prophecy and a love triangle, both of which are usually things I don't like. But Wrede handled both those elements really well and while I didn't love those elements, they didn't frustrate me. Most of all, I loved Eleret — smart, sensible, capable, practical. Ah, definitely my kind of character. Seriously, I was so relieved after I finished this book and liked it, because I would've been so sad if I didn't like any of the Lyra books, given how much I enjoy Wrede's later work! (Longer review for The Raven Ring here.)

Everyone Loved But Me

Daughter of Smoke and Bone by Laini Taylor

It's kind of sad how many of the books I've read this year are contenders for this category. Ultimately I decided to go with Daughter of Smoke and Bone because of how popular it is and how little I liked it. I know a lot of people absolutely adored this one, but I just could not get over how the romance in this book turned the characters into people I hated. I found them to be shallow, stupid, and selfish, and I just couldn't bring myself to root for them. I know a lot of people like Taylor's writing, and I did like it in Lips Touch, but the descriptions of how enthralled these characters were by one another's beauty seriously put me off the prose in this one. I did find the worldbuilding interesting, but since characters and plot are what matter most to me when reading, in the end I did not enjoy this book the way most other readers did. I'm still very curious about how the series will end, though! I'm secretly hoping Karou and Akiva will actually not end up together, haha. (Longer review for Daughter of Smoke and Bone here.)

Favorite Fan Fiction

Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality by Eliezer Yudkowsky

I don't usually read fanfic, but I saw this review by Livia Blackburne and decided to give it a try. And guess what, I really liked it! In fact, I may have liked it better than the original Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (don't kill me!). I mean, this Harry is brilliant, and he's trying to turn Draco to the good side by teaching him about genetics, and he's doing experiments to discover the rules of magic with Hermione (both Ravenclaw, of course), and Professor Quirrell lets all the students compete in a giant mock-war with generals and traitors. The plot may not be the strongest element, and the writing isn't the best either, but the fanfic is full of nerdy goodness that I found incredibly fascinating and fun, so I was never bored. Plus, I liked the fanfic take better than the original take for so many aspects of Harry and the wizarding world. The story by turns made me laugh, made me think, and moved me to tears. Over all, a wonderful reading experience that gave me a lot to think about.

Side Character Who Stole My Heart

Vessel by Sarah Beth Durst

So for most of these other books, my comments tend to focus on the main character, because how I feel about the main character has a very good chance of determining what I feel about the entire book (although an amazing twisty plot or well-executed nonlinear story structure or laugh-out-loud humor can win me over as well). It's rare for me to latch on to a side character so strongly, so the last spot on this post goes to a character from the last book I read (and probably the last book I'll read this year): Raan, vessel of Maara of the Scorpion Clan. I love Raan so freaking much, you guys. She's spirited, clever, tricky, brash, and is fiercely determined to stand up for her own right to life when everyone else demands her death. I love that she rebels against the gods and tradition and the ritual of human sacrifice, and searches for a way to save her clan without the need for her own death. She drinks and swears and is always running away, struggles so much with her prescribed role of a vessel, somehow become friends with the other vessels despite their complete opposite views, and then, in the end, does what she thinks is best even though it costs her so much — and even then she never stops fighting. Just, love. (And best of all, she doesn't spend most of the book mooning over men when she has so much more at stake!) Anyway, Raan was the one who made Vessel a worthwhile read for me, and I so wish she had been the protagonist instead. Then this book would've been competition for Jellicoe Road! ;) (Longer review for Vessel here.)

So yeah, those are a few of the books I read in 2012 that made an impression on me, for better or for worse. I'm looking forward to reading more books in 2013 — and hopefully I'll be better at choosing books I like!

Feel free to steal one of the categories I've used above, or make up your own, and tell me about one of your 2012 reads that was memorable, whether in a good or not-so-good way!

End of August Wrap-Up

Whoa, this month just zoomed by! Here's how things went on the reading/writing for me in August:

Camp NaNoWriMo

Uh, yeah, that was kind of a... total fail. AGAIN. But I did write slightly more than last year, so that's something, I guess. At this rate, I should be able to win my first NaNo in, oh, about forty years or so. Sigh. Momentum is SO important! (Also, I got struck by another Shiny New Idea. Oops.)

Reading

These are the books I read in August: 

I was super excited about diving into this stack, but unfortunately I found most of them incredibly disappointing, including the two books I was most looking forward to reading. Turns out that reading them in order of ascending average Goodreads rating did NOT actually result in a similar increase in my reading experience.

Here's the books I read, average ratings on Goodreads, and my own rating with links to my status updates (may include spoilers):

1.The Pox Party by M.T. Anderson | 3.55 stars | DNF and 1 star from me
2.Dani Noir by Nova Ren Suma | 3.77 stars | 3 stars from me
3. Un Lun Dun by China Mieville | 3.78 stars | 3.5 stars from me
4. Wake by Lisa McMann | 3.78 stars | DNF and 1 star from me
5. A Fistful of Sky by Nina Kiriki Hoffman | 3.92 stars | 2.5 stars from me
6. The Evolution of Calpurnia Tate by Jacqueline Kelly | 3.97 stars | 4 stars from me
7. The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland... by Catherynne M. Valente | 4.06 stars | 1.5 stars from me
8. I Am the Messenger by Markus Zusak | 4.08 stars | DNF and 1 star from me
9. Inside Out and Back Again by Thanhha Lai | 4.09 stars | DNF and no rating from me
10. Ruby Red by Kerstin Gier | 4.14 stars | 2 stars from me

So yeah, like I mentioned in my Goodreads status update, it turned out that I didn't particularly like any of the books that had average ratings of >4 on Goodreads. Guess that means I have peculiar taste.

Anyway, this made me think about what kinds of things appeal to me or put me off in fiction. (Great post by Patricia C. Wrede on the subject!) The main categories that I think of when it comes to a book are: plot, character, writing, setting, and message. In order for me to enjoy a book, at least the plot or main character has to be stand-out excellent (by which I mean, a good match for my tastes) and the rest has to be decent-to-good.

So here's how my tastes usually run when it comes to books (though there are always exceptions):

PLOT
I can love a book for plot alone. I tend to like mysteries a lot, and time travel stories with one consistent timeline (none of that changing history crap, thanks). I get impatient if nothing seems to be happening, or if things are happening too slowly, unless the other elements are strong enough to capture my interest. And no insta-love or love triangles, thanks. (See my post on romance pet peeves.) Plot holes and and cliffhangers also bother me a lot, and so does predictability (I was great at annoying my sister during family movie nights because I loved to predict what would happen next). Most of all, I am a sucker for really intricate, clever, twisty puzzle plots. Those are the best.

CHARACTER
If the plot isn't mind-blowingly amazing, then I need to love the characters. I prefer to find them likable, admirable, intelligent, relatable, and engaging. I lose respect for protagonists that do stupid or hurtful things, and I tend to dislike feeling detached from the protagonist. I particularly despise characters who start doing dumb things because they've "fallen in love." I'm much more fond of sensible, capable, and funny characters who have a good grasp of logic. (No speshul snowflakes who whine a lot, thanks!) I also have a difficult time reading about characters who don't see the world, or social interactions, or themselves, the way most people do. For example, Jack in Room, Marcelo in Marcelo in the Real World, and Lia in Wintergirls. I think these are all worthwhile books that shed light on important issues, but they're just not enjoyable reading experiences for me. I know those characters don't see things the way I do, but it's frustrating for me to be able to see what they don't and not be able to do anything about it.

WRITING
I am not a fan of description, lyrical, or flowery writing. I tend to prefer writing that's straightforward and clear, and doesn't call attention to itself. I care more about story than word-smithing, so I definitely notice when the writing is so over-the-top that it distracts me from my reading experience. I strongly dislike narrator interruptions, awkward and stunted prose, and overly creative/nonsensical metaphors. I do enjoy a gorgeous turn of phrase here and there, but great writing isn't enough to make me like a book if the rest was only ok (unlike with brilliant characters or plots). I don't think I have any strong preferences for POV or tense, other than my dislike of second person.

SETTING
This, like writing, is something that would bother me if done badly, and best when it doesn't call too much attention to itself. I tend to skim description, I don't really notice if the details are on the sparse side, and I'd probably be bored by too much of it. I'm perfectly fine with filling things in myself, so setting only bothers me if there is so little there I have nothing to go on or if there are things that don't make any sense or if there is clearly a huge gaping hole that ought to be addressed but isn't. As long as the world building isn't too obviously lazy or implausible or unreasonable, I'll be fine.

MESSAGE
I don't think I would love a book solely because I agreed with its message, but messages I don't agree with can definitely kill a book for me. I think a lot of this has to do with characterization, as well — if the protagonist gets away with being petty, whiny, or useless, I'm not going to be happy about that. I'm not ok with misogynistic messages, either, and I'd be annoyed if superstition plays a positive part in the story (hate chosen one/prophecy plot lines). Also, I hate when authors attempt to bash me over the head with their messages. It pulls me out of the story and makes me feel manipulated, which will definitely cause me to think poorly of the book.

So yeah, I tend to be a pretty picky reader. I am also easily swayed by positive reviews. This usually results in me reading a lot of books I don't particularly like, which is unfortunate and why I adore negative reviews.

Blogging

I think part of the reason I didn't write as many words for NaNo is because I got distracted by blogging as a semi-acceptable form of procrastination (even though it isn't really). But still, I'm glad I got these blog posts out there. I still have some drafts in the works and ideas I'd like to blog about, but my motivation will probably decrease once I stop seeing blogging as procrastination and as what I'm supposed to be doing. XD

Life

I got a new bunny! And he is adorable! :D Meet Mochi:

Hope all of you enjoyed your August! :)

Portrayal of Science in YA Spec Fic

So, a (very long) while ago, I wrote a post on human cloning (which I put a lot of work into and think you may benefit from reading! :D *hint hint*) and promised a follow-up regarding my thoughts on science and YA spec fic.

Lest you think I'm a fiction-hater, let me say up front that I adore reading fiction, particularly fantasy. I love spec fic and think that imagination, creativity, and emotional resonance in stories are all important and valuable.

But I also love science and the way it allows us to understand the universe as it actually is, rather than viewing it through superstition or wishful thinking. In case you couldn't tell from my human cloning post, I am a big fan of rational thought.

Sometimes these two things come into conflict because people often confuse fiction for fact. I am all for writing about unicorns and elves and colonies on Mars,  because people, for the most part, do not confuse those as applicable to our reality. They're not going to read a book and start believing that we really do have unicorns and elves and colonies on Mars (at least, not yet), and that's why I'm perfectly ok with incredible, non-existent technology and other fantastical elements. But less obviously fictional elements can be more problematic. When fiction influences people's attitudes toward existing technologies or scientific concepts in such a way that contradicts reality as known through science, that's when I get annoyed.


Last year, I read a YA sci-fi novel and barely blinked at the alien or currently-non-existent technology. What really bugged me was when the author presented erroneous information about how mutations and genes work in a context that is relevant to issues today. (This really stuck out to me because, in college, I took a course on genetics and liked it so much I made it the emphasis of my molecular and cell biology major.) Not only was the explanation about how genes work not very relevant to the main plot, but it can be misconstrued as being scientific fact, thus encouraging unfounded fear of existing technologies. And this, to me, is both unfortunate and irresponsible.

And I'm not the only one who noticed this in the book. Here's a great post by Sean Wills about the importance of getting the science right, and I am in full agreement.

What intrigued me, though, was that the author chimed in in the comments section to say she didn't get anything wrong. Her statement of "genetically modified corn caused widespread sterility," as expressed in her novel, struck me as unscientific and incredible, so I was very interested in seeing her justification of her statement.

Ultimately, though, I found that her defense doesn't hold up to scrutiny. While the concepts she referenced were scientific, stringing up a number of truths does not necessarily mean that your conclusion is therefore also true and scientific, especially if each step in the argument is incredibly implausible and there are several missing steps.

If I were to do the same thing, here's how it'd look: "First of all, electromagnetic waves can affect the brain! Especially solar radiation. And frequent flyers are often exposed to solar radiation. And guess what, there's an area of the brain called Wernicke's area that controls use of speech! THEREFORE, in my sci-fi story that takes place in a future world where everyone's a constant jetsetter, it is TOTALLY PLAUSIBLE that a whole generation of people were exposed to excessive solar radiation that affected Wernicke's area in the brain, so they all got Wernicke's aphasia and walked around talking in a way that sounds totally nonsensical to us."

I hope that illustration conveys why her argument fell flat for me. All my links are "real science" too, but that doesn't make my conclusion any more scientific, due to the many gaps in logic, especially the lack of conclusive studies. While it is true that there are likely to be some risks to both genetically modified food and radiation exposure due to frequent air travel, negative portrayals of existing technology based on simplistic, implausible, and ultimately unrealistic cause-and-effect scenarios aren't helping anyone; rather, they merely spread misinformation and encourage unfounded fear. (No, you're not going to get Wernicke's aphasia through radiation exposure from frequent flying or become sterile from ingesting GM corn. Doesn't mean those things are perfectly safe (what is?), but there's no conclusive evidence about the negative effects. No reason for knee-jerk reactions, either.)


The funny thing, though, is that sometimes I don't even catch all the science!fails in novels. In another YA sci-fi novel, the author had character A give an explanation that defied the laws of physics and had character B accept it, no questions asked.

In my defense, it was incredibly obvious (to me) that there was no way any explanation character A gave at that point would actually be true, despite the fact that (or maybe because) it was set up to seem like a BIG SHOCKING REVEAL. (Due to my experience as a reader, I recognized that the reveal had to be fake for there to be somewhere for the plot to go for the rest of the trilogy. Plus, this novel in particular had an especially predictable plot.) So it's kind of funny that I didn't realize how unscientific the explanation was because I'd already dismissed it out of hand from a story perspective. It's possible the author meant for that exchange to showcase the lack of formal education/incredibly gullibility of character B, but I rather think that the author, like me, knew it was a fake explanation and so didn't think to check for scientific accuracy.

But still, fake science = BAD, because although I didn't notice it, a lot of other readers did, and for some of them, it interfered with their enjoyment of the book. And although it's not as horrible for people to have mistaken ideas about space travel as about genetic engineering (given the difference in exposure in most people's day-to-day life), it would kind of suck for some teen to get that wrong on a physics test, haha. (And yes, this author also had, ah, interesting ideas about genetics, and that bothered me WAY MORE than this physics slip up.)


So, even though it can sometimes be fun/funny to read about the fantastical science of writers' imaginations (recent read: Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake — not YA, but her ideas about genetic engineering are hilariously absurd), and sometimes most people don't notice, it's important to get the facts right. Most people can't tell fact from fiction in books and movies (I'm not always so great about it, either), and given the terrible state of science literacy in the US, I can't stress enough that I wish writers would be more conscientious about presenting science and technology as accurately as possible so as not to propagate unfounded fear/disgust of advancements.

Controversial scientific subjects like cloning and genetic modification should ideally have their merits and risks addressed scientifically and not according to writers' runaway imaginations. Fiction affects people's attitudes and thoughts, and I wish writers would take their ability to influence reader opinions more responsibly by not promoting counter-factual ideas (not to mention it really takes me out of the story when I notice scientific inaccuracies). Feel free to make up things and talk about technology that doesn't exist today if you're going to be all like THIS IS EVIL AND BAD in your book. (Also, read Sean Wills' post on genetics if you're going to be writing about that — yup, I discovered Sean Wills while researching for this post and I'm now a fan.) Fiction, creativity, and imagination should be celebrated and valued, but let's not be responsible for propagating lies and falsehoods about science and technology, mkay?

Part 2: Asian by Authorial Decree

This is my second post about some thoughts I had about YA Asian fantasy while I was half-asleep during last week's typhoon day. You can find Part 1 here if you haven't read it already. Also, quick warning: this one is LONG.


Part of my last post was about how to help readers identify characters in a fantasy as Asian without sticking to a mythical Ancient Asia as the setting. And when I was thinking about this instead of sleeping in like I'd planned to, I recalled a blog post by Malinda Lo that talked about race and Asianness in her lesbian Cinderella fantasy, Ash, which doesn't sound very Asian as far as the world-building. (Disclaimer: I have not read Ash. Curse you,  my sleep-addled brain, for prompting me to write blog posts about books I haven't read.)

Let's start out with some quotes from her post:

It’s been my experience that most humans in fantasy novels are white, and when you think about it, the descriptors that we Americans (or people of Earth) use about race simply do not apply in most fantasy fiction. There are no African Americans in fantasy because there is no Africa (usually). So what do you do?

I must disagree with what she's saying here about fantasy and race. Yes, most humans in fantasy novels are white. But just because everyone is white in most fantasies, that doesn't mean it's right or desirable. And I don't think the main reason for the overwhelming whiteness is because there are no useful words for race in fantasy fiction (for example, N.K. Jemisin does an awesome job writing about black people in fantasy). I think it's obvious that you don't have to use the word "African American" in your fantasy in order to include black characters, and I'm a little surprised she would think so.

So I guess I have two different rules. In a fantasy world where there is no racial distinction, describing race is unnecessary, although I see my characters through my Earthbound eyes as being Hapa. In Earthbound fiction, race cannot be left up to the reader’s imagination, because I believe it is fundamental to a character’s identity.

I absolutely do not buy her claim that there is no racial distinction in fantasy; there is no racial distinction only because EVERYONE IS FREAKIN WHITE. So yes, I agree, it's hard to do things differently from the way we've seen them done, and it's hard to figure out how to write PoCs in fantasy when there hasn't been tons and tons of precedents to draw upon, like there is for fantasies about white people. But that doesn't mean it's not possible. It just means it takes more work, and thought, and trial-and-error. (And I'm really glad that she did write PoCs into her second book, Huntress, which I'll cover later in this post.)

I also do not agree with her distinction between how things work in fantasy and how things work on Earth; fantasy is written by and for people who are "Earthbound." Which means there are real-life implications of how race is (or isn't) described in a work of fiction, and why I think it's so important that there are more characters in fantasy that are identifiably PoCs.

I want readers to imagine the Charming that they would fall in love with, because everyone has different tastes. But for me, she’s Asian. Except she has green eyes, because, frankly, I’ve always liked green eyes and she’s Charming, you know, and that’s how I see her. So I guess to be specific using terms we are familiar with, she must be biracial, or Hapa. And so is Cinderella, because she has brown hair.

(Aha, so here's where the green eyes start sneaking in.) In this paragraph, she's saying that she wants readers to cast her characters themselves, and that for her she sees Charming as Asian. But, you know, biracial — because of the green eyes. Which makes no sense, because how am I supposed to cast Charming as an Asian with brown eyes if that's what I'd want? So the whole "let readers imagine whatever they want" thing doesn't really work because the text still gets in the way (although some people, it must be said, have no problem reading characters as white no matter what the text says). And I find it interesting that she says the characters must be biracial due to brown hair and green eyes, since it IS possible for Asians to have brown hair or green eyes, even if not biracial, as a reviewer points out later in this post (though it's certainly rare).

Honestly, the whole "up to the reader to decide" thing is problematic, because we read so many fantasies in which everyone is white that most readers, even PoCs, will assume everyone's white as the default. Which is why the solution is not to just leave out all descriptions and let it be completely up to the reader, because colorblindness = no racial distinction = everyone is white, and we already have more than enough of that.

Can you imagine how bizarre it would be to insert the term “biracial” in a fantasy novel? 

Actually, no, I do not think it would be bizarre at all. It's better than "half-breed," which is not all that uncommon in fantasy.

(In case anyone is wondering, I am also of a mixed-race background, which may be why I started out with that as the default option for my characters. There are other characters in the book who are distinctly Caucasian, though.)

Huh. How nice that there are characters who are distinctly Caucasian, so we don't get confused and accidentally cast them as PoCs in our minds. How about characters who are distinctly Asian? I know there are Asian characters in Huntress, which is supposed to take place in the same world as Ash, but hundreds of years before. Are there any distinctly Asian characters in Ash or did they all disappear by the time of Ash, à la Firefly? From what she says about the lack of racial distinction, though, I'm not optimistic; but maybe someone who's read the book can tell me what's in the book.


Although that blog post was the one I thought of that morning, Malinda Lo actually wrote an updated post on race in Ash, which clarifies some of her points. Though I have to say I'm still not fully on board with the newer version:

When I wrote Ash, I had a mental image of what my characters looked like. In my imagination, they appeared to have Asian features. However, there is no Asia in Ash’s world (it’s a fantasy world), so there is no way they could actually be Asian. 

I fail to follow the logic here. What, people in Ash's world can't be Asian because there is no Asia, but they can be "distinctly Caucasian"... uh, because the Caucus mountains exist in Ash's world? What? That makes no sense. Why can there NOT be any characters who share physical resemblance with people who, on this world, would be termed Asian, but there CAN be characters who share physical characteristics with people who, on this world, would be termed Caucasian, when it's a fantasy world without either Asia or Europe? It is totally unfair that all fantasylands that are not explicitly modeled off a particular time and place somewhere in Europe still tend to have all white characters, since that's the fantasyland default, whereas the only way to get Asian characters is to specifically model your world on somewhere in Asia (or an amalgamation of everything you can think of that sounds semi-Asian, which is even worse).

But also — and this is very important: My opinion is only my opinion. I think that sometimes readers tend to give too much credence to an author’s thoughts about her own work. Every reader brings his or her background to a book, and a book’s meaning is always a negotiation between the reader (and her experiences) and the story itself. What the author says outside the pages of the book is largely irrelevant.

Oh good; I'm in full agreement here. Yay! :)

For those who are still confused about why I see the characters as having Asian features, though, I will say this: It probably stems from the fact that I’m Chinese American and I live in a diverse place (California). There are Asian American faces next to Latinos next to white people next to African Americans, and yet we are all (mostly) Americans. This is the world I live in, and it makes sense to me that this is also the world I envisioned in my fiction.

Can someone let me know if the characters in Ash can actually be read as racially diverse? Or are they just racially diverse by authorial decree? Because that, to me, still wouldn't fly. Racially diverse in the author's head but not in the text = white in everyone else's heads. Which is really sad, and says a lot about our culture, but it just means that not talking about race in fantasy is not the answer.

Just look at this AMAZING review of Ash by an Asian-Canadian, Yuan. Unlike me, she's actually read the book (XD), and here are some excerpts:

I’m not sure how much I was affected by the fact that I read this post by Malinda Lo wherein she said that she imagined her cast as Asian before having read the novel. I tried, and I tried to buy it, that the cast were Asian but I just couldn’t. I wrestled with this in myself and wondered why can’t I imagine this fairy tale world with people who look like me. It’s most definitely not because one of the girl has green eyes and the other girl is a brunette because I know Asians who have such features and they are most certainly not mixed. And I think, after reading Zetta Elliott’s review of Ash, a large part of it had to do with the way beauty is described in this novel. It felt to me like a very white standard of who is considered beautiful, from the “jeweled” glittering, awesomely coloured eyes to the “golden” silken hair to the “ethereal” paleness of the skin, all used as examples of beauty. This, plus the European-inspired pseudo-medieval setting made me equate the general populous of this novel as white. I’m so resigned and used to medieval fantasy excluding all non-white persons from their stories, and this novel failed to show a “medieval” fantasy that can include non-white characters. 

Though, as an aside, if I streeeeeeeeeetch my imagination, I can kind of picture Kaisa as Asian, due to her name and the bit about her being from the “South” which I may be reading too much into it. (Even I feel like I’m grasping at straws over this.) Though, any of these tiny little hopes were largely crushed by the eyes thing; her Very Awesome Green Eyes of Awesome is off-putting. (Not that I don’t think green eyes are nice, but it’s such a white beauty standard thing, to emphasize Awesomely Coloured Eyes.) 

YES YES YES, especially about what she says regarding green eyes and white beauty standards. ([spoiler alert] That's going to be the main point of Part 3 of my series, so keep that in mind, and stay tuned!)


So yeah, Ash is kind of a fail on the Asianness front, at least for me, based on her blog posts on the subject. But I kept looking for other mentions of race and fantasy on her blog after I read the previous two, and, believe it or not, read this awesome post on Huntress AFTER I'd written Part 1 of this series on my blog. (Good thing I found it, too, or I'd look like an idiot for criticizing her for Ash without giving her any credit for Huntress.) It's scary how much her post talks about the same things I talk about in mine.

I mean, look at this paragraph:

The Kingdom in Huntress is influenced by Chinese and Japanese culture, but it is not China or Japan. It is a fictional fantasy world that also must eventually become the fantasy world in Ash, because Huntress is set several centuries earlier. So it simply could not be the kind of “Asia” that exists in movies like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.¹Also, there were elements of the fantasy world in Huntress that were simply not Chinese: there is no homophobia, for one thing, and there isn’t nearly as much sexism as there was in imperial China.

And that's exactly what I said I wanted! A world that's not China or Japan, but still has Asian influences, and not so strictly that it makes it difficult to tell the kind of story you want to tell. (Although I do wish she hadn't made it set in the same world as Ash because of the problematic issue of all the Asian people somehow disappearing.)

But I'm not sure how I feel about this:

I know that if the cover had depicted a white girl or even no girl at all, probably even more readers would never have guessed that the characters look Asian.

Hm. I don't know if the characters were specifically described as Asian-looking in the book (since I didn't read all of it — shame, I know) and she's making a statement about how easy it is to whitewash characters in our heads, or if she purposefully didn't emphasize the Asianness of her characters and this is exactly the effect she was going for. I have mixed feelings if it's the latter. On one hand, sure, it's good not to make Asianness super obvious by exoticizing it. But on the other hand, if the only reason people realize the characters are Asian is because of the cover, then is the author somehow failing to convey her vision through the actual text? Or is it the fault of our white-centric culture? How obvious should Asianness be?

And also, what influenced her thoughts on race in fantasy? (And in a direction I can get on board with!) How did she come to change her mind about people being allowed to look Asian in a fantasy world that doesn't have Asia in it? What happened to her "let readers cast the characters how they like" idea — can they still do that with an Asian girl on the cover?

Lots of questions, as you can see. But I'm mostly just happy that there's another fantasy with Asian people in it and an Asian girl on the cover. Because that is AWESOME and necessary (regardless of my personal feelings for the actual story).

And I love what she says about exoticism:

What makes something exotic? It can certainly be philosophy or beliefs, but more often, I think exoticism resides in things you can actually see or hear. Clothing, food, music, architecture: these are the external markers of difference. So I decided to minimize, when possible, the descriptions of these things in Huntress, except when I was making a point. For example, when Taisin visits the royal palace, I describe some of the palace to show how luxurious it is compared to what she’s accustomed to. When Taisin and Kaede dine with the king, he has a very grand feast of delicacies that ordinary folks don’t get.

Otherwise, the things that might seem “exotic” to an outsider are actually considered “normal” to an insider. Kaede is an insider in her world, so she’s not going to find most of it terribly exotic. The clothes she wears and the way the students at the Academy do their hair are pretty ordinary to her. The spiritual and philosophical beliefs that provide the backbone to the magic that Taisin practices aren’t going to seem unusual to Taisin.

That's a great point about writing descriptions in general. It should be in your character's PoV, and people don't usually pay a lot of attention to things that are normal and ordinary for them. This is awesome advice about bringing in Asian influences without making them too exotic.

Hopefully, they don’t seen too unusual to the reader, either. This can result in a few different reactions, of course. There are readers who won’t see the Chinese influence at all because it’s presented as entirely normal, and besides, they’re reading a fantasy novel where magic happens — maybe it’s all made up. 

I'd have to disagree a tiny bit here, though. Just because something is normal to the characters doesn't mean it's going to be normal to the readers, since sometimes authors use this technique to shock readers with how desensitized or accustomed characters may be to situations that are disgusting or horrific to the reader.

However, I love the idea that Asianness doesn't have to feel exotic, because there's so much made-up and strange elements in fantasy anyway that readers are more accepting of unfamiliar concepts and influences, which definitely helps when you want to work in concepts or world-building that aren't already known to the majority of readers — which can be Asian-inspired.

But hands-down, here is my favorite excerpt from all three of her blog posts:

Ultimately, I think my project with Huntress was a fairly Asian American one. I am Asian American, and I move through the world as an Asian American. Kaede’s world has elements of both Asia and America in it, and I like that. 

And that is EXACTLY what I want for myself, too. I love that she's writing fantasies as an Asian American and admire her for the evolution of her thoughts regarding race in fantasy. I hope that I'll also be able to write fantasies that reflect my worldview and experiences as an Asian American. It's not easy, as there isn't a whole lot of precedent, but I'm excited that Asian-American fantasies featuring Asian characters have been growing in number, and I can't wait to read more of the novels in this category. And one day, maybe, I'll add my own to the number.

What are your thoughts about race in fantasy? Do you automatically cast everyone as white when you read, unless (or maybe, regardless of whether) race is otherwise specified/suggested? Or do you try to read all characters who are not specifically described as white as PoCs because that's how much you're hoping for PoC representation?

August Updates

Happy August, everyone! I know I said I'd write a post about science and YA to follow up on my post on human cloning, and while I did get distracted (for, oh, a few months), I've outlined it and wrote part of a rough draft. So, hopefully that will get done before the Apocalypse hits in December, ha.

But it's probably not going to get done during August, because, guess what, I'm participating in Camp NaNoWriMo again! I don't know why I keep signing up for these things when I always fail, but hope springs eternal, I suppose. And even though I didn't win last year, I still learned some valuable lessons that I will do my best to apply this time around.

This year I'm especially excited about my awesome cabinmates. Our camp counselor will be posting a feature on our cabin, so I'll link you once that's up so you can be envious at the amazing people I get to NaNo with. :)

Update: Find out more about all the members of the Tiger Tea Tent at Camp Counselor Sophia's blog!

Meanwhile, I'm showing them all up by being currently in FIRST PLACE with regard to word count. Eighteen words, baby! And yes, I am totally cheating because August 1st arrived for me 13-15 hours before it did for all my other cabinmates, and it is actually excruciatingly pathetic that I only managed eighteen words in that time. But hey, this is my one opportunity to take the lead, because in a few hours I will be very behind. Unless they all make the very wise decision of sleeping instead of pouncing on their NaNo projects when the clock strikes midnight, in which case I will get to keep my lead as I deviously write while they're all in bed! But somehow I really doubt that's going to happen, especially given our camp counselor's insomniac tendencies. At least that means there'll be someone to keep me company!

And I am definitely exploiting any advantages this time difference thing grants me, because it can be very annoying to deal with the rest of the time. Like that time when we were planning to submit our cabinmate requests at the same time, except the discussion took place from 4 to 8 a.m. in my time zone. Which I obviously missed due to my habit of waking up after 9 a.m. on weekdays. Oops. But I made up for it by waking up at 8:30 a.m. on my usually-reserved-for-sleeping-in Saturday (huge sacrifice, I'm telling you! nevermind that I went straight back to bed afterward...) and it all worked out, so YAY! :D

In other news, it's typhoon season! Typhoon Saola is likely to be passing through northern Taiwan later this evening, so there's a good chance we'll get the day off tomorrow (instead of snow days, we get typhoon days, whee). I've never encountered a typhoon day since I started working in Taiwan, so I'm really hoping we get the day off tomorrow. I mean, who wouldn't rather stay at home under nice warm blankets than have to go to work? Besides, it'd be the perfect time for me to get a good start on my Camp NaNo project. :)

That is, if I don't get sidetracked by this gorgeous stack of MG/YA hardcovers I've checked out from the Taipei Public Library:

I know, right? What was I thinking, checking out all these books when I'm supposed to be spewing words out like crazy? Sigh. Why does the library have so many awesome books?

The good news is that I'm on my fifth book already (I did abandon a couple of them part way through). I had a really hard time deciding which order I was going to read these books in because they all looked so good, so I decided to read them in ascending average GoodReads rating, haha. I was hoping that meant my reading experience would improve as I go, and it did seem to work for the first three books, but the fourth book broke the pattern. Ah, well.

Here are the books and the order in which I'm reading them:

1. The Pox Party by M.T. Anderson | 3.55 stars on GoodReads | DNF and 1 star from me
2. Dani Noir by Nova Ren Suma | 3.77 stars on GoodReads | 3 stars from me
3. Un Lun Dun by China Mieville | 3.78 stars on GoodReads | 3.5 stars from me
4. Wake by Lisa McMann | 3.78 stars on GoodReads | DNF and 1 star from me
5. A Fistful of Sky by Nina Kiriki Hoffman | 3.92 stars on Goodreads | currently reading
6. The Evolution of Calpurnia Tate by Jacqueline Kelly | 3.97 stars on Goodreads
7. The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland... by Catherynne M. Valente | 4.06 stars on GoodReads
8. I Am the Messenger by Markus Zusak | 4.08 stars on GoodReads
9. Inside Out and Back Again by Thanhha Lai | 4.09 stars on GoodReads
10. Ruby Red by Kerstin Gier | 4.14 stars on GoodReads

I'm particularly excited to read I Am the Messenger (yup, giving Zusak another chance despite not having loved The Book Thief as much as everyone else did) and Ruby Red (heard soooo many good things about this one!). Recently I've been writing more GoodRead status updates and ratings as I read, so if you're curious about my thoughts on these books, feel free to check out my GoodReads profile.

So yeah, that's what I'll be up to during the month of August — dodging typhoons, procrastinating on my NaNo project by cuddling with a book, and hanging out with my amazing cabinmates. (And, you know, writing. Hopefully.)

Got any exciting plans for August? Have you read any of the books I checked out, and what did you think of it?

Reading and Writing Negative Reviews

Recently I've been considering whether I want to do more with my Goodreads account. I made one a while ago for better access to some of the features, but I haven't added any books or friends because I'm not sure how, or if, I'd rate and review books.

The main reason is because I'm nervous about writing negative reviews and giving less-than-glowing ratings. Sure, I'm incredibly grateful for other people's negative reviews, since they can:

• help me avoid books with elements I know I won't like
• temper expectations for hyped books
• make me feel less alone in my dislike of certain books
• inspire me to read more critically
• educate me on issues in literature
• remind me that taste is totally subjective
• make positive reviews more meaningful
• provide lots of entertainment (ok, I admit it's a guilty pleasure of mine!)

Still, I'm not sure if I'm brave enough to write them myself. Here's a few obstacles I can think of:

1. Don't want to hurt the author's feelings
I know you worked that that book forever and totally poured your heart into it, but, no offence, I thought it was terrible.

This is really for my own peace of mind, since I have no idea which authors read their negative reviews and which don't, and anyway mine won't be the only negative review out there. But if I publish a negative review there's always the chance the author might come across it, and imagining it makes me feel kind of guilty because it's not like I would write a negative review to hurt an author on purpose but she would probably still be hurt, you know?

This is especially terrible when you "know" the author. I hate that feeling when I read a book by a writer whose blog/tweets I enjoy, only to INTENSELY DISLIKE said book. It's so awkward and makes me vaguely uncomfortable, and putting my dislike for it out on the Internet for everyone to see would just intensify that feeling.

2. Desire to be (or be seen as) a nice, positive person
I'm a NICE PERSON, dammit! Only unicorns and rainbows and sparkles allowed!

So I'm not really one of those "if you have nothing nice to say, keep your mouth shut" people, but at the same time I can totally understand the desire to not be or be seen as a jerk by keeping public criticisms of other people's work to a minimum. Also, some people are committed to positivity and prefer not dwell on negative experiences (e.g. a book they didn't like) by spending time and effort writing about how awful the book was. Plus, people might like you more if they know you only say nice things about others and so don't have to worry about getting on the wrong side of your snarkbazooka someday.

3. Karma
Ok, whoever's keeping track, I've written ZERO negative reviews in my entire life so I'm owed a little consideration when my book comes out, right?!

I can see how the concept of karma would affect someone's decision about writing negative reviews, even if I'm not a big believe in karma myself. Some people are strongly affected by criticism themselves and so, out of consideration to other people's feelings, refrain from posting critical reviews online, hoping that spreading a little goodwill will make a difference. For some, it's just the right thing to do.

4. Avoid backlash from fans or authors
How dare you dislike the best book of all time! You clearly misread the book and failed to appreciate its brilliance due to your inherent stupidity.

Sometimes readers take it personally if you criticize a book they like, since it can be seen as a direct criticism of their taste in books. People might even attempt to tear you down for daring to write about their favorite writers in a negative light. And if you're really unlucky, you might even hear from an angry author. Yeah, not fun.

5. Career considerations
I don't know why so many people buy your books, which are clearly awful, but I'm really desperate for a blurb by someone other than my mom.

I have no idea if I will ever pursue publication. But in the (unlikely) event that I do, it'd be better not to have burned any bridges with scathing reviews. Authors/agents/editors/publishers are more likely to be favorably disposed toward you if you don't bash their books, and they probably won't want to help you if you say their book sucked. So it could be safer to err on the side of caution and refrain from writing any negative reviews if you're working or hoping to work in the industry, just for the sake of your professional relationships.


Anyway, those are just a few I could think of. In the end, I think it comes down to your purpose for writing reviews. Some people write reviews to promote books they love, support other writers, sell books, share their opinions, or help others choose what to read next. Depending on what you want to accomplish with reviews, including negative ones may or may not be in your best interest.

For me, the appeal of writing reviews stems from my desire to express my opinion and join discussions about books I've read. I'd want to gush about books I loved and vent about ones that disappointed me. I'd want to talk about books that made me laugh and cry and books I wanted to throw against the wall. I'd want to analyze books as well as record personal, emotional reactions. I'd want honesty and openness.

This means that writing only positive reviews wouldn't be for me. After all, when it comes to reading reviews by other people, I give significantly more weight to the opinions of people who write both negative and positive reviews than people who write only positive ones.

But of course, all of this is possibly moot as I am most likely too lazy to write any reviews at all (particularly considering my track record with blogging). Still, it's something I've been thinking about lately, so I wanted to get my thoughts out there and hear what you think!

What's your take on negative reviews? Do you post both negative and positive reviews, positive reviews only, or neither? Why or why not?

YA Romance Pet Peeves

Some of my friends say I'm a cynic, but I say it's only because I am a true idealistic romantic at heart. I love reading about romance. I want to follow along on a character's love life and vicariously experience the thrill and giddiness and sweetness of budding love (probably because my own love life isn't so exciting). I want the romance to be something I can admire and aspire to — something that feels real and solid and steeped in truth, even if it is fiction. I want to root for the characters as they spend time together, find that they complement and strengthen one another, and commit to the effort necessary for the relationship to blossom. It makes me so happy and gushy when I come across a YA romance like that!

I suppose I love true romance too dearly to have much patience for the obsessive, lustful infatuations that frequently pass for romance in YA these days. And so I thought I'd share a few my pet peeves when it comes to YA romance. Of course, this is entirely based on my personal reading preferences, so your mileage may vary. It's not a particularly unique or ground-breaking list, but maybe you'll find yourself nodding along with a few of these points. Or shaking your head vehemently. (Feel free to speak out in the comments!)

Here are the things I'd want to avoid in my own reading and writing:

Love at First Sight
I know some people believe in love at first sight, but I'm not one of them. I don't think love is something that springs up out of nowhere the second you lay eyes on someone. Attraction? Intrigue? Fascination? OMG-I-think-this-person-might-be-The-One? Sure. But until the characters get to know each other on a deeper level and have a relationship built on something other than physical attraction and chemistry, I'm skeptical about their "love." True love, in my opinion, needs a foundation of trust and commitment, and that takes time to nurture.

Lust-Based Relationship
This is part of the reason I'm not sold on love at first sight. Physical attraction is a wonderful thing in a relationship, but it shouldn't be the only aspect. After all, appearances can be deceiving, and people are so much more than their looks. Sure, I've harbored crushes on guys who had more looks than substance, but I never kidded myself that it was love. I prefer reading about protagonists who are more self-aware and realistic. If a heroine declares herself in love with a guy because he is just soooo incredibly hot, fails to mention any other reason, and never realizes how shallow she's being, she will lose major points in my book for being superficial.

Obsessive Mooning
Another reason I hate reading about purely lust-based relationships is that I don't want to read the protagonist talk about "his dark, brooding eyes" or "his ripped muscles" or "this inexplicable connection between us" or anything else along those lines FIVE MILLION TIMES in the same book. And if she must think about him, why can't she think about something else besides his looks or how she's so mysteriously drawn to him? Why can't she be blown away by his kindness? His integrity? His courage? His intelligence? Why can't she admire those traits and be inspired to cultivate them?

Lack of Personality
Because some protagonists can really use a bit of self-improvement. I know some authors write with an everygirl in mind so the reader can slip herself into the place of the heroine, but personally I prefer reading about heroines I can admire and learn from. Sometimes I wonder why every guy in certain novels is infatuated with the protagonist when she doesn't seem to do much of anything. I want to know that the guy loves the protagonist for her strengths and personality and admirable traits. I want to see these traits in her thought process and actions, not by authorial decree.

Excessive Angst
One major tip-off that the protagonist has no personality would be if she spends all her time angsting about her relationship(s). As much as I love reading about romance, I'd prefer if the heroine has other things going on so she's not spending every. waking. moment. thinking about her love life. I'm not particularly interested in spending time in the head of a character who lets thoughts of a guy take over her entire life (particularly if she just met him). Even worse if it's a constant reminder that her relationship is made of nothing but lust and insta-connection.

Love Triangles
Protagonists in this category are the most likely to be guilty of the previous point, because two guys = double the angst. I know lots of people like to indulge in the fantasy of being fought over by two hot guys or cheer for a favorite team, but I'm not a fan of love triangles. It can be done well, I'm sure, but it's been overdone to the point that I'm relieved when a novel doesn't boast one. There are so many things that can go wrong with love triangles (and by "go wrong" I mean "annoy me to death"). I think it's awful when the female protagonist leads on two guys. I hate finding myself on Team Other Guy because I want to see him happy but I know he's doomed by the author not to be. And when compounded with other things on my list, the entire situation is likely to make me want to destroy something in frustration.

Betrayal
To me, this is the worst part of love triangles. I cannot stand reading about betrayals of a friend or a significant other and, worse, being expected to root for the guilty party. I know people make mistakes, but I wish there were more characters who did the right but difficult thing by telling the truth and facing the consequences, rather than giving in to their passions and then trying to hide it by lying to loved ones. I am a big believer in the importance of commitment, honesty, loyalty, and communication in relationships, and I find it hard to apply the label of "love" to anything that lacks those elements. That goes for friendships, too.

Selfish, All-Consuming Passion for No Reason
Basically, this sums up my gripe with many YA romances. Characters meet, fall in lust, become entirely obsessed, and throw everything else to the wind. They can't see anything else but each other, and make decisions without considering the bigger picture of other things going on in their lives, or caring if they will hurt the people closest to them, or taking into account the consequences of what they're doing. Or maybe they do think about it, but selfishly decide that their "love" trumps all. I get so annoyed with these characters I want to shake them and tell them to open their eyes and think about what they're doing. But I'm sure they wouldn't listen anyway. Sigh.

Examples of Classic Romances I Can't Bring Myself to Love
Since I don't want to bash any recent YA novels by name, I decided to list classics as examples (ok, I may have cheated on the last one). I know these are all widely-beloved stories and have heavily impacted our culture, but I cannot stand the romances in these works. Of course, you may feel differently about them, and if you do, I'd love it if you share why in the comments!

• Romeo and Juliet: I have no idea what they saw in each other besides physical attraction, and their double suicide was tragic in its wastefulness and not my idea of romantic at all.
• Tristan + Isolde: OMG I hated the movie version. I yelled at the characters for being so selfish and superficial and for betraying their king, who adored both of them. (I think I kind of alarmed my friends with the intensity of my frustration.)
• Arthur/Guinevere/Lancelot: Similar to the above. Another love triangle and betrayal of someone loved and admired by the lovers (well, depending on the version, I guess). Anyway, just not the kind of story I enjoy. 
• Twilight: I think this is enough of a cultural phenomenon to count as a classic. Plus it's the one that spawned all the paranormal angsty love triangles so popular in YA right now. I neither liked nor hated the first book, but I couldn't get myself through New Moon without wanting to strangle Bella multiple times. So I never read the sequels.

Further Reading

• Enjoy reading long rants? Here's one I wrote on my personal blog called In Defense of the Good Guy, in which I complain about how the romance plays out in the DreamWorks animated film, Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas (contains spoilers).
• Here's a great post from Beth Revis about obsessive love versus true love. She makes thoughtful points about both, and I definitely recommend reading it for an interesting perspective on romance in YA.
• Rachel Stark at Trac Changes talks about how YA romances affect teen girls and the kind of romances she'd want to acquire as an editor.
• Sarah Furlong Burr at Starving Novelist writes about her pet peeves in Harlequin romances. Not about YA, but some of her points still apply.
• Lisa Shroeder gave tips for writing great YA romance with the acronym CUPCAKE in this vlog for WriteOnCon 2010. Spot-on points for how to write amazing romance.
• Want to know what guys think of YA romance? Here's a fun post by Bryan at Boys Don't Read on love triangles. (Thanks for the great link, Adam!)
• I can't seem to stop myself from adding more links! Fun post by Nicole at WORD for Teens on Disney princesses and love. It's DISNEY! How can you not go check it out?

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the subject. Now I'm really curious about what you think! Do you also get annoyed by the issues and examples I've listed, or are there some you actually quite enjoy, and why?

Villains

I'm a little bit (ok fine, a LOT) behind on Camp NaNoWriMo, but since I'm dying from my self-imposed Google Reader ban, I thought writing a post would help take the edge off blogosphere-withdrawal. At least I'm producing words, right? Can't wait until the weekend when I'll let myself catch up on blog posts (all several hundred of them — yes, I peeked a few times) regardless of word count!

I'm always on the lookout for great articles about villains and antagonists since I have such a hard time with them. I really liked the amazing Jodi Meadows' post about Villains You Like because it resonated with me and got me thinking more about the different types of villains out there. Here are some of my thoughts:

Generic Villainous Overlords
When I was in elementary/middle school, this was the kind of villain I thought up with my friend and sister. We'd play pretend and spin stories where we were magical princesses rebelling against an evil stepmother (so original, I know). I think she also had an evil sorcerer ally.

I've since discovered that evil villains out to take over the world for no good reason tend to fall flat and be utterly boring, so I'm glad I know better now. Imagine my surprise when I came across one in a recent debut! The one-dimensional villain actually claimed "I'm evil" as sole motivation for world domination, dashing all my hopes for an interesting and nuanced antagonist. It was hard not to groan or roll my eyes. (Oh well, the book pretty much nosedived into terribleness halfway through, anyway.) So yeah. No cliché, boring evil villains, please!

Sympathetic Villains
I guess it was so shocking to encounter such a lackluster villain because it seems that sympathetic antagonists are all the rage these days. And for good reason — characters that the reader can relate to are so much more engaging than cardboard cut-outs, no matter where they fall on the good/evil spectrum.

One way to add complexity to a villain is to give him or her a redeeming quality, vulnerability, or troubled past. A villain with motives that are understandable, or even almost noble, would make the protagonist's inner struggle that much more difficult (and who can say no to more conflict?). And who knows, maybe the villain actually thinks he or she is doing the right thing, even if the protagonist strongly disagrees. Jodi's example was Magneto from X-men: First Class; he's a likable character with an understandable motivation, but he's a villain because he wants to exterminate normal people (something I imagine most people would frown upon).

We (as in magical princesses) did later try to do this for our evil stepmother character. We decided she was our late mother's adopted sibling (heaven forbid we're related to her by blood!), jealous of our mother all her life, in love with our father, and basically out to take for herself everything her gorgeous, saintly sister ever had. Oh fine, I guess our attempts to bump her up to "sympathetic" wasn't all that successful, but we did try to give her some personality and motivation. (I think evil sorcerer remained irredeemably evil, though.)

Villains You Love to Hate
I think this might be where our poor evil stepmother ended up. These sorts of villains are dastardly, selfish characters who, through some twist of fortune, ended up with more power than is good for them to have, and then proceeded to annoy the heck out of everyone else. And you can't wait until this villain is defeated because he or she is just so despicable and pathetic. Not to mention rather useless once stripped of power. (I think they tend to be pretty wormy. You know, like Wormtongue from Lord of the Rings and Wormtail from Harry Potter. What is it about worms?)

These villains are probably best as irritants in the path of the hero and not as the Big Bad. I think I'd get pretty frustrated if the protagonist is fighting someone like that for an entire book. But maybe it's all in the execution?

Villains with Flair
These characters are not-very-nice people who become fascinating on the strength of their personality. Not a literary example, but I adored Regina George in Mean Girls. She's a lying, cheating, manipulative b— ah, witch who insulted and played everyone around her. But her confidence, charm, and determination to get what she wanted made her a lot more fascinating than Cady, the actual protagonist. (Plus, Rachel McAdams is gorgeous!)

Or take Artemis Fowl. He's a kidnapper who exploits the fairies for money and amusement. But because he's so brilliant, we can't wait to see what he has up his sleeves, even kind of hoping he'll succeed despite the fact that what he's doing is so wrong. It also helps that he's the main protagonist.

[*EDIT: Thanks to lovely comments from Mike and CanaryTheFirst, I think I'd put Artemis and their examples in a new category: Villains as Protagonist. What do you think?]

Villains can become attractive despite their moral flaws if they have personality traits the reader can admire. The danger with these villains is that they may steal the spotlight and become more interesting than the protagonist, so you'd have to make sure your protagonist is up to the challenge! I think it'd be a lot of fun to write such a character. :)

Villains that Give You Nightmares
These are the sadistic, genius serial killers of pure unadulterated evil. The crazed monster from the underworld who delights in bloodlust. The creepy clown, or alien predator, or that girl with the long hair crawling out of the TV... ok, I seriously need to stop before I scare myself witless.

Why? Because I am a total wimp. (I assure you, it pains me to admit it.) I avoid horror flicks and books as much as possible; even thrillers might be too much for me. I have an overactive imagination and do not appreciate having images of menacing evilness roaming my mind at night. So while others might love reading or writing about this sort of villain and enjoy the thrill of being thoroughly scared, I'm afraid (har, har) they're not for me.

Not-a-Villain
Of course, not every book has to have a villain. Some stories have antagonists that are made of sunshine and loveliness, and so sweet you want to gag — except their goals happen to conflict with that of the protagonist. Or maybe the antagonist isn't quite that innocent, but more morally ambiguous than outright evil. A lot of antagonists fall into this category, but it's fun to think about evil characters once in a while and consider how to make them interesting to the reader.

What other types of villains can you think of, and which ones are your favorite?