I read whenever I get the chance. I go through a book a day, at times. So recently when The Dollar Tree had a bunch of paperbacks for only $1 a piece, I snapped them up. If something's not worth reading, I can always give it to charity or throw it away if it's a true piece of garbage.
Most of them are true pieces of garbage.
I read a wide variety of books, with the exception of autobiographies: Spare me from autobiographies. But at The Dollar Tree, I found a huge amount of horror and Sci Fi novels, and bought about ten of them.
As yet, I've skimmed through all of them because they're simply not worth reading.
There is one author that stood out among the rest: His name is Ray Garton.
Garton apparently won The World Horror Convention Grand Master Award. Did they honor him with this award after reading his novels? I hope not. Because these novels are violent porn, disguised as literature.
In one novel that I've skimmed so far, Garton has anally raped two heroines, followed by gang raping them (using thirteen men). In the coup de grace, he viciously decapitated one and mailed her head to her husband. The other was then repeatedly raped by a woman. Oh, and did I mention that Garton is highly descriptive?
In another of his novels, a victim is brutally raped by a werewolf in the first chapter.
Garton attempts to take no responsibility for these actions by portraying the men in these women's lives as being very sympathetic. It's almost as if he's saying "See? I'm on the good guy's side!" while he's relishing the details of the vicious rapes. This also allows the male reader to say and do the very same thing.
This literature should hardly be on The Dollar Tree's shelves. In my youth, it would have been hidden in the back of the bookstore, in the Adult section (at best). Now it's available to anyone who accidentally picks it up, believing it to be a "bargain".
Garton mentions his wife at the beginning of his books. He extols her praise and thanks her for her support. Really? She's supportive of this? She should not be supportive of this, or any other such garbage which relishes the brutalization of women.
Shame on Garton, shame on his wife, and shame on The Dollar Tree for selling such evil.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Either I'm getting more selective as I age, but I rarely find used books anymore that I can stand to read unless it is at a used book store. Garage sales, auctions and such are full of romance novels and books like what you just mentioned. Rarely do they have any good fiction and almost never do they have non-fiction. In fact, it is becoming too common that the only books I find are cook books. I fear that by the time I'm old and gray, reading will be lost and what does occur won't be called literature anymore.
I've come across authors like that before. Usually what I find offensive is not the detailed descriptions (though I do find those disturbing), but rather the loving tone in which those descriptions are delivered. Depictions of violence are often necessary to the story, but the almost poetry that some authors invest in these depictions are what make me wonder about their own personal (perhaps distasteful or even illegal) private lives.
"The scenes are brutal, but not lovingly* so. The rape victims are clearly not having fun. The author seems to go to great pains to covey how awful the experience is for these women. "
This doesnt actually prove anything, as for a rapist (or a rape fantasist) the awfulness for the victim is part of the pleasure. The more real the anguish, the greater the pleasure of the rapist.
But of course, you cannot say for sure that someone is a rapist (or a rape fantasist) simply because they write detailed descriptions of rape. I recently read the "Dexter" series, after which I found myself wondering if the author was himself a serial killer, so sympathetic was his portrayal.
Then, of course, rational thought kicks in, and I decide (for the most part) that he's just a talented writer. After all, I dont think that science fiction writers are aliens or from the future when I read them.
And really, Peggy, it seems inconsistant to chastize someone for making a personal attack by attacking them personally.
(* "lovingly" was my word, though I suppose you werent directing your ire exclusively at Saur)
Peggy, Sorry, but I won't allow a plant to take over my blog. If you can't be objective, you have no home here.
Post a Comment