Did you, of the vocal minority, notice a trend in these books? Richard was almost non-existent in CS, and I had to fight with my subconscious to get him into ID. And the sexual content? Is it going up or down? I think up, definitely up.
So it is MY FAULT that she's writing worse and worse and worse. (It isn't the sex, Laurell, it's the boring sex.)
As Dana noted, she can't spell her own stupid metaphysical concept, the
arduer .
And I have to wonder if the painful speculation isn't something to be expected, like "She has a husband. Wonder how he feels about AB always being in a guy sandwich." I mean is it so crazy, in that instance to wonder if that's what she likes in real life?ETA: And of course, I write mysteries...probably in most of 'em somebody will die. That doesn't mean I'm a killer...but if I write about the deaths in certain terms...eroticized them or something, that would say something about me.
So it is MY FAULT that she's writing worse and worse and worse.
Obviously. There was also a "lurkers support me in e-mail!" moment when she said that the vast majority of her fans liked the increased amounts of sex.
Good lord. That's just sad.
The early Anita Blake books, back when they included the four-letter word "plot," were quite decent.
Really? Cause if you took the sex out of CD, you take the story too. It was fairly interesting to me as a tourist to the verse but I was glad to have borrowed it, you feel me? And I would never buy a book knowing it was gonna be, just that.
Even bad ficcers have fans.
"Obsidian Butterfly" becomes more and more of an anomaly.
Maybe she had one idea, Connie, and tried to make it twelve.
Note to self: Never do that.
Anyone feel like making fun of LKH?
Oh, what's Anita Blake done now? And I mean that in more than one way.
...And LKH takes her seat next Anne Rice, and the two of them console each other with "OMG THOSE BEEYATCH READERS WOULDNT NO GUDE RITING IF THEY HAD INCREDIBBLY BORRING GRAPHIC SEX WITH IT!"