Hi all,
I've just finished "Crisscross" (I'm in Australia, and our publishing cycle is a wee bit behind North America), and I have to say -- as usual, it was fantastic. So well written, great entertainment, and FPW does a great job of weaving together stories that you can't imagine will interlock. Looking back from having completed it, it's so perfect -- the stories went exactly where they should; but from the start, you couldn't have foreseen it. (Well, I didn't foresee it, anyway !!)
That's all on the positive side. But there's one that is starting to niggle me through the RJ series, and in "Crisscross" it's really started getting distasteful. And that's FPW's attitude -- not RJ's, so much -- towards gay people.
Look, I know that those who aren't gay will either not have noticed a problem or think there isn't one and it's all in what I'm reading into it; some may even get angry and tell me to get over it (which, in my experience, usually masks an attitude equating to Eddie Murphy's "Why do I ridicule gay people ? Because they're faggots, they deserve it !!"); and yes, I know that women and dark-skinned people and a whole lot of other specific groups of humanity have suffered similar finger-pointing and condescension and occlusion over the years, but that only adds to the weight of why this shouldn't (in my self-interested view) be happening in an RJ book.
Let me get it straight -- as it were ! -- what I'm objecting to. Okay, the character of Preston is an irritating cliché -- jeez, are we back to 70s ? He's straight out of "Fortune and Men's Eyes" -- and I can almost accept it as simply a character FPW wanted Jack to have to negotiate, something outside his norm. Although for my money it's very lazy writing and he's relied on those old, old clichés to draw his character and manipulate his reader's response to him, something that FPW doesn't usually do.
And the whole point of Jack taking up the Louis persona is to make Cordova uncomfortable; fair enough as far as the character goes. But that whole section of the book smacks of a sniggering attitude behind the writing, a kind of rugby-club "bums to the walls, boys !" mentality that invites the reader to squirm right along with Cordova when Jack deliberately moves too physically close. We aren't supposed to like Cordova, we want to see him suffer, so we're supposed to identify with his discomfort at having to chat with and sit with and share a car with a poofter. Ye gods, FPW even makes a point of saying during the scene in Cordova's office that their sitting down means that their butts are in the seats -- I half expected him to have Cordova say something along the lines of the old "don't anyone drop the soap!!" Jeez, FP, that's old Benny Hill-era stuff !!
When we get to Luther Brady, it starts getting really unpleasant. Being gay is not only pretty clearly linked to the Otherness, which is friggin' insulting, but to paedophilia. Bloody hell !! The other old, gross flying-in-the-face-of-facts cliché about gays gets crammed into the same book. Pretty hard to swallow.
And towards the end, when we're told Luther Brady was having nightmare visions of all the big black men lining up in the shower block to gang-rape him ... I nearly threw the book across the room.
Let me be clear: I have no problem with ignorant attitudes being exposed in a character for the audience to scoff at them, but here we're being asked to share the characters' point-of-view as if it's reasonable -- hey, anyone would squirm if a faggot put his hand on their shoulder, right ? -- and respond accordingly.
It comes down to the same sort of attitude that was unwittingly displayed over "Brokeback Mountain", where so many people lamented loudly, and in some cases angrily, that they couldn't go and see it because people might think they were gay. (Hey, walk a mile in my shoes !) I never quite got who they were angry it, because it certainly didn't seem to equate to any sense of how difficult it is for gay people in everyday life, and didn't seem to result in any consciousness-raising. But they just didn't get that their distress over the idea that someone might think they were gay really spoke volumes about their own view about what they thought of gay people and what it meant to be gay.
OK, I've overspent my $0.02. Pardon my soapboxing, but these "he's a real man 'cause he's uncomfortable with gay people" implications have been building up over the last few RJ books, and I find it really pretty ... disappointing.
Not a trolling, just a point of view.
regards all,
Bran