Ho. Ho-bag. Whore. Skank.
Which is why last year, and I know I've probably told this story before, when I smelled perfume in the classroom and wrinkled up my nose then sotto voce'd "skanky!", the student was offended. I innocently (rapid eye-blinking and everything) explained the adjective, but I definitely meant to make an impression. (I hate a noseful of unsolicited perfume even more than I hated my job last year.) Ah, denotation and connotation! It's my favourite lesson!
(Well, not really, not anymore. We're making ball*ds out of news stories and ads this week, and it's going well. I wish I could share a bunch of Bob Dylan songs with the kids to make my point, but the time to be that kind of cool teacher was 25 years ago.)
(And let us not remember four years ago, when I tried to teach ballads and travel literature using the comedy of Weird Al. I don't often jump on the "EPIC FAIL" bandwagon, but I'm pretty sure I was the cover story for EF Monthly at the time.)
(I know better than to even try The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald. As a Michigander of the 1970s, I can't listen unscathed, but damn Superior and her ice-water mansions.)
So, one of the books I'm reading right now is Stop Dressing Your Six-Year-Old Like a Skank, a collection of essays, and while it had me at the opening chapter (an account of visiting Walt Disney World), the chapter from which the book gets its name is the one I want to photocopy and keep in my purse to hand out as needed. I don't actually carry a purse, but I would start, just to share this.
I wouldn't have found this book without the Visual Bookshelf application on Facebook and its "recommendations" feature. Normally, "recommendations" are completely useless to me. (Hello Amazon. Netflix. Etc.) But Visual Bookshelf has somehow managed to cough up the goods, and at this writing they're responsible for seven of the books I have out from the library.
(The others are comprised of a Pratchett, three "walked by and the cover looked interesting", something I stumbled across online I-forget-where, and then this romance book that is supposed to be funny-as-hell, but it's just... um... not. Am I doomed to never like romance? What about Outlander? What about Gone with the Wind? Okay, forget all of the rich historical paperweights, what about all the chick-littie Sex and the City wannabes? Or do I read those for the laughs and camaraderie? Hm. All I know is that this book is supposed to be funny, sexy, and full of Vikings. It's not that it isn't quite these things, but it's full of that samey convenient foot-stomping miscommunication between the two main characters that I just can't abide. Unless it's in Pride and Prejudice. Dangit. I'll learn to articulate the difference someday. Until then, my lusty, laughing Viking desires go unsatisfied.)
(And maybe I'm being incredibly unfair, because it was the book in the trailer below that I first saw lauded, but somehow I ended up checking out a different Nordic ripper from the author.)
Even though I still feel parenthetical, I'm going to type normally. Even though I say, year after year, disappointment after disappointment, that I really can't get into romance novels, I still love the Smart Bitches, Trashy Books site. It must be love, because otherwise I could never forgive how at least one of the site's two writers dislikes Harry Potter. Harry Potter! I won't even read Harold Bloom because of his low opinion of HP.
(And also because of his high opinion of himself.)
But, that's her choice, and I can accept it (after a few deep breaths). It has nothing to do with the funny, insightful commentary on romance novels. It's probably because this site is so good that I keep trying to enjoy the irritating misunderstandings that characterize so many of these books.
However, I do semi-disagree with the site and many of its participants on one point: the term "bodice ripper."
I understand why it makes people cringe. Those two words dismiss the whole genre. They are outdated. They imply unempowered, tedious sexual fantasies of the pre-Cinemax era and not, well, romance.
But I still like the words. Maybe because I'm not wholly opposed to the ripping. Maybe because, if I do like a romance, it's a historical one? (The ultimate escape?) Maybe because of that scene with Rhett carrying Scarlett up the stairs? Or Jamie, um, showing Claire who wears the kilt in the family? In proper context, the ripping can be... hot?
So, if I refer to any romance novel as a ripper, it's really a compliment. I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt that it will be passionate and compelling (to me). But, since there are apparently whole lines of romance books where nothing gets removed, let alone ripped, it seems I'm in the minority.
(Not to get all parenthetical again, but please don't suggest that what I actually like is erotica. Nope, not really. I know that some erotica is story- and character-driven, but it is harder to find than a lusty, intelligent, perceptive romance. Plus, erotica tends to be rather blatant. I don't need diagrams. I'll engage better if my imagination has to share some of the work.)
Annnnyway. To get back to an earlier point, this Celia Rivenbark is pretty funny so far. Her book titles alone are fabulous, and, since I don't carry a purse, I'm sharing this link instead.
(Okay, here we are, back in the parentheses, and it's embarrassing because I already signed off and everything. If you just saw a post about a trip to Spain pop up then disappear, ignore it. See, while searching the archives for the word "bodice," to make sure I haven't had this rant out loud before, I found an old transcription of one day I spent in Spain in 1994. For some reason, the post has been in draft status all of this time. Maybe it's skanky and I should re-read it, but I hate re-reading anything from that time period, a time of especially stilted writing, so I'm not going to. So I just hit "Publish" and hoped for the best. But then it showed up as a new post. Oops. I think I fixed it. If you've always wondered what I was up to 15 years ago, minus 61 days, now you know.)
"1952 Vincent Black Lightning" by Richard Thompson
Posted by: Reese | 28 January 2009 at 07:48 AM
Richard Thompson! Someone I always mean to listen to a lot more of...
Thanks for the idea. This makes me think we ought to return to the Laughlin River Run this year after all. HmmMmmMmmVroooooom.
(Now go make your Facebook account already, Reese!)
Posted by: Shari | 28 January 2009 at 04:45 PM