Rough Canvas by Joey W. Hill
Jan. 29th, 2008 06:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jmc_bksWhy this book? ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
sarahf recommended it when I lamented the fact that I had no erotic romance on my AAR ballot.
ETA: I thought I included this - it was in my draft - but it seems to have disappeared. I read Hill's Natural Law and loved it. Holding the Cards was a B for me; Mistress of Redemption was DNF in an "It's Not You, It's Me" kind of way. Hill's NY pubbed trade paperback release The Vampire Queen's Servant is on my TBR pile; when I skimmed the first few pages back upon its first release, it didn't grab me, so I set it aside. /end ETA
What do I think of the cover art? Well, the art itself would not have induced me to buy the book.
Check here for an excerpt.
What did I think? I bought the book on Friday. Uploaded it to my ereader on Saturday, spent Sunday reading and re-reading it instead of doing chores or my income taxes.
My first thought: Wow! It was a totally engrossing read, very much in line with Natural Law’s theme about breaking through resistance and preconceptions about D/s relationships. Except it was better than NL, because it didn’t include the weak suspense subplot.
Ultimately, the book is about communication, and what happens when a couple experiences a failure to communicate. [Query: Should I be attributing that to Cool Hand Luke or is the phrase common enough that it is not necessary? ;)] The D/s and M/M are layers on top of the larger relationship issue, I thought.
Superficially, Thomas had accepted that he’s submissive to Marcus – he wore the waist chain marked “Mine”, but the reality was that while he trusted Marcus in terms of sex and art, that trust and willingness to share did not extend to the rest of his life. The idea of change and compromise was alien. At the same time, the lopsided flow of information between the two of them made it clear that Marcus didn’t completely trust or share himself with Thomas. The heart of the conflict of RC is expanding the boundary of the trust between them beyond sex to the intimate details of the rest of their lives. The sex scenes, while hot, are really derivative of the other conflict going on between them. Which is a good thing – the story isn’t overpowered by pointless boinking; when it happens on the page, it has a purpose toward furthering the plot.
Some of the themes or ideas that Hill touches on within the break down and re-establishment of the relationship between Thomas and Marcus are: family and community expectations; surface acceptance vs. actual acceptance; duty vs. inclination; and, trust vs. control. And within an established relationship, how important are The Three Words? I was especially impressed with this last; so often in erotic romance, they are tossed in, either h/h using them thoughtlessly. Here, both Thomas and Marcus were hyper aware of their use and their absence within the relationship.
On re-reading, a couple of things nudged at my pleasure. First, Thomas’s family was just horrendous, and his unwillingness to stand up for himself in light of their behavior made me respect him less. If either his mother or his brother had been miserable, I could’ve accepted it, but both together were too much. Their lack of respect for who he was as a human being (as an artist and as a gay man) made me question his utter devotion to them. Yes, he internalized his frustration with their disregard, he didn't just pretend it didn't exist, but his complete sublimation of self for them really bothered me. Second, the use of the poor abused friend as a beard? Offended me immensely once I thought about it. Because someone who has been abused deserves better than to be used once again and stuck into a role that asexualizes them after they’ve already been damaged. That says to me that you (the character) think of this damaged human as being or deserving less than their whole self. I’m not expressing myself well, just suffice it to say that I thought Daralyn would’ve gotten the short end of the stick if Thomas had married her out of pity and out of some twisted sense of obligation to his family and his community.
Still, this book blew me away. A- from me.
Any other thoughts? RC was especially striking to me because I just finished a re-read of an old Penny Jordan Harlequin Presents, Shadow Marriage. In RC, Marcus wields power and control over Thomas and is very conscious of it and careful in its use within the bounds of their relationship. Any “punishment” that occurs is fully consensual. In SM, the hero exercises his power over the heroine carelessly (IMO) and rather cruelly, without mercy, without her consent, and without consideration of the ramifications of that exercise…until he sees the light and realizes that the heroine was Innocent and Pure and Misled by the villain.
sarahf recommended it when I lamented the fact that I had no erotic romance on my AAR ballot. ETA: I thought I included this - it was in my draft - but it seems to have disappeared. I read Hill's Natural Law and loved it. Holding the Cards was a B for me; Mistress of Redemption was DNF in an "It's Not You, It's Me" kind of way. Hill's NY pubbed trade paperback release The Vampire Queen's Servant is on my TBR pile; when I skimmed the first few pages back upon its first release, it didn't grab me, so I set it aside. /end ETA
What do I think of the cover art? Well, the art itself would not have induced me to buy the book.
When his father dies, Thomas is forced to abandon a burgeoning art career in New York. As difficult as it was to give up his lifelong dream, it’s nothing next to walking away from the man he loves. Marcus taught him to embrace who he is, a sexual submissive who responds to the touch of only one Master. But why would the sophisticated Marcus need some farm kid from the South?
Then Marcus shows up and offers him a way to continue his art career and help his family. There’s only one hitch – he asks Thomas to spend a week with him in the Berkshires. Thomas knows he should refuse. But he’s never been able to say no to his Master.
Check here for an excerpt.
What did I think? I bought the book on Friday. Uploaded it to my ereader on Saturday, spent Sunday reading and re-reading it instead of doing chores or my income taxes.
My first thought: Wow! It was a totally engrossing read, very much in line with Natural Law’s theme about breaking through resistance and preconceptions about D/s relationships. Except it was better than NL, because it didn’t include the weak suspense subplot.
Ultimately, the book is about communication, and what happens when a couple experiences a failure to communicate. [Query: Should I be attributing that to Cool Hand Luke or is the phrase common enough that it is not necessary? ;)] The D/s and M/M are layers on top of the larger relationship issue, I thought.
Superficially, Thomas had accepted that he’s submissive to Marcus – he wore the waist chain marked “Mine”, but the reality was that while he trusted Marcus in terms of sex and art, that trust and willingness to share did not extend to the rest of his life. The idea of change and compromise was alien. At the same time, the lopsided flow of information between the two of them made it clear that Marcus didn’t completely trust or share himself with Thomas. The heart of the conflict of RC is expanding the boundary of the trust between them beyond sex to the intimate details of the rest of their lives. The sex scenes, while hot, are really derivative of the other conflict going on between them. Which is a good thing – the story isn’t overpowered by pointless boinking; when it happens on the page, it has a purpose toward furthering the plot.
Some of the themes or ideas that Hill touches on within the break down and re-establishment of the relationship between Thomas and Marcus are: family and community expectations; surface acceptance vs. actual acceptance; duty vs. inclination; and, trust vs. control. And within an established relationship, how important are The Three Words? I was especially impressed with this last; so often in erotic romance, they are tossed in, either h/h using them thoughtlessly. Here, both Thomas and Marcus were hyper aware of their use and their absence within the relationship.
On re-reading, a couple of things nudged at my pleasure. First, Thomas’s family was just horrendous, and his unwillingness to stand up for himself in light of their behavior made me respect him less. If either his mother or his brother had been miserable, I could’ve accepted it, but both together were too much. Their lack of respect for who he was as a human being (as an artist and as a gay man) made me question his utter devotion to them. Yes, he internalized his frustration with their disregard, he didn't just pretend it didn't exist, but his complete sublimation of self for them really bothered me. Second, the use of the poor abused friend as a beard? Offended me immensely once I thought about it. Because someone who has been abused deserves better than to be used once again and stuck into a role that asexualizes them after they’ve already been damaged. That says to me that you (the character) think of this damaged human as being or deserving less than their whole self. I’m not expressing myself well, just suffice it to say that I thought Daralyn would’ve gotten the short end of the stick if Thomas had married her out of pity and out of some twisted sense of obligation to his family and his community.
Still, this book blew me away. A- from me.
Any other thoughts? RC was especially striking to me because I just finished a re-read of an old Penny Jordan Harlequin Presents, Shadow Marriage. In RC, Marcus wields power and control over Thomas and is very conscious of it and careful in its use within the bounds of their relationship. Any “punishment” that occurs is fully consensual. In SM, the hero exercises his power over the heroine carelessly (IMO) and rather cruelly, without mercy, without her consent, and without consideration of the ramifications of that exercise…until he sees the light and realizes that the heroine was Innocent and Pure and Misled by the villain.
