When I interviewed Seanan, I was totally impressed by her meticulous research. I mean, she has the CDC on speed-dial.

What makes it feel like Violence Against Women as opposed to violence with female victims?

Yeah, I'm curious about this, too. I liked the story, and it didn't ever strike me as misogynistic or anything. A touch understated and wonderfully creepy for that, but not Violence Against Women.

And our own P-C is in the dedication. I teared a teeny bit and squeed when I saw it. Yay, P-C!

Yay!

I'm so excited about the movie option for the trilogy. Dan and I were playing "Cast the Book" last night.

And who are your picks? Seanan wants Allison Scagliotti for George and Jason Dohring for Shaun. There's some damn good photomanips for it.

I was at a scifi/epidemiology panel over the weekend where the Newsflesh trilogy was specifically called out as "getting the medical science right." Thought you'd enjoy that.

Nice!

I mean, she has the CDC on speed-dial.

They actually fangirled her when she called because of "The Black Death."

In other news, I don't understand the appeal of The Dark Is Rising and I hope the series gets better?

I've been trying to work out why I'm having such a strong response. Part of it is definitely the unpleasant surprise of finding something so ugly in a story I'd enjoyed, by a writer I admire.

Beyond that, a big part of it is that we have so little context for what happens in LA, and what little we do casts it in a definitely sexual light. There's the fact that Tink is the one who contacts the narrator, making what happens implicitly her fault. There's the parallel it's implied we should draw with what happened in the Silver City, where the person who left their lover was killed for it.

And there's the fact that, unlike the angel murderer, the act of killing seems to have no effect on the narrator. Either he's in a fugue state, or this literally means nothing to him, and he's lived ten years since with no indication it's something he thinks about.

Is it possible for necrophiliac rape to be non-political?

EFformatting

And there's the fact that, unlike the angel murderer, the act of killing seems to have no affect on the narrator. Either he's in a fugue state, or this literally means nothing to him, and he's lived ten years since with no indication it's something he thinks about.

I always assumed the narrator was in a fugue state. (Caveat: it's been a few years since I read Murder Mysteries, so I may be forgetting something.)

Is it possible for necrophiliac rape to be non-political?

Speaking as someone who reads a LOT of horror fiction, I think so.

I always assumed the narrator was in a fugue state.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the implication is that he didn't remember it at all. Hence why the newspaper article doesn't register for him. Or me, the first couple times I read it.

Is it possible for necrophiliac rape to be non-political?

I didn't realize necrophilia was political to begin with.

I'm not familiar with Allison Tagliotti, but Dan watched W-13; I'll run the idea past him.

We were thinking Chris Pine for Shaun, but Dohring is AWESOME. I was thinking Taissa Farmiga, based on her work in American Horror Story for George, though she's a touch young. I also like Emma Watson for George.

Emma Thompson or Julianne Moore for Stacy Mason. Not sure about Prof Mason, but I like Liam Neeson.

Josh Brolin or John Barrowman for Ryman.

Tate, Terry O'Quinn

Buffy — Kristin Bell, if she were younger. Although I would be fine with her. Or Chloe Moretz.

Rick: Bradley Whitford

Steve: I know Steve is blond, but Dwayne Johnson.

Mafir: Sendhil Ramamurthy or Naveen Andrews

I always assumed the narrator was in a fugue state.

It certainly reads that way to me. But that just raises the question, what does that say about him? There's no indication, in the section with Tink, of the sort of emotion that led to murder in Sarasquel's(sp?) case. So....this is a guy who kills three people because one of them dumped him years ago and then just goes on with his life?

I didn't realize necrophilia was political to begin with.

In a case like this, it's objectification of the completely literal sort: A human being is transformed into an inanimate object, which is then used for sexual pleasure.

Ugh Ugh Ugh. That is really foul. Foul enough that I regret ever recommending the story to anyone, and I think it's been permanently tainted for me.

I'm not sure I understand this reaction to the title. I know not everyone likes puns but... there are multiple mysteries, in multiple senses.

Either he's in a fugue state, or this literally means nothing to him, and he's lived ten years since with no indication it's something he thinks about.

I will read it again when I'm back at home because it's been a long time, but my recollection is that the angel removed those memories from him. It's a plot point, not a "hey, murdering women is no biggie, right?" message.

I'm not sure I understand this reaction to the title. I know not everyone likes puns but...

Oh, I wasn't talking about the title, the wordplay is just fine. I was reacting to P-C confirming that what happened in the story was what I thought it was.

my recollection is that the angel removed those memories from him.

Oh, I missed that reading. I think you're right, too. And if Raguel had gone back to Tink's apartment and miracled the three of them back to life, I'd say, "Okay, someone made a terrible mistake, but it was erased by extreme good fortune." But at the end of the story, there are three dead people, all female, and the murderer hasn't been caught for ten years, and again, the killing is cast in a clearly sexual light.

It's a plot point, not a "hey, murdering women is no biggie, right?" message.

It can't be both?

EFclarity