Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site birtch.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!psuvax1!burdvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!scgvaxd!felix!birtch!oleg
From: oleg@birtch.UUCP (Oleg Kiselev)
Newsgroups: net.books,net.sf-lovers,net.motss
Subject: Re: Should book ads disclose sexual slant?
Message-ID: <244@birtch.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 7-Jan-86 16:27:33 EST
Article-I.D.: birtch.244
Posted: Tue Jan  7 16:27:33 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Jan-86 07:09:57 EST
References: <4729@hlexa.UUCP> <223@birtch.UUCP> <783@unc.unc.UUCP>
Reply-To: oleg@birtch.UUCP (Oleg Kiselev)
Distribution: net
Organization: The Real Estate Conspiracy
Lines: 67
Xref: watmath net.books:2742 net.sf-lovers:11831 net.motss:2422
Summary: Are you SURE you understand what we are talking about?

In article <783@unc.unc.UUCP> oliver@unc.UUCP (Bill Oliver) writes:
>In article <223@birtch.UUCP> oleg@birtch.UUCP (Oleg Kiselev [ME] ) writes:
>>>2) Should it make any difference? In other words, should it have
>>>   mattered to me?
>>I don't see why... Sex is sex....
>
>As a case in point, all sex is not just sex. Whether it be heterosexual(1),
>homosexual(2), or autoerotic(3), there are a wide class of sexual activities
>which either represent profound emotional disease or are simply evil. To
>fear to express disapproval of an act for fear of appearing intolerant is
>a form of moral cowardice.

We are talking of fairly staright forward gay sex here - NOT anything "EVIL" or
emotionally sick ( unles you call homosexuality and autoeriticism  "SICK" and/or
"EVIL"). If the characters in the book are gay - I'd expect them to practice
gay sex. If the characters in the book are slimy slugs - I expect THEIR sexual
practices to be slimy slug ones. If the book unnecessarily overemphasizes the
erotic and sexual aspects and becomes pornographic - that's one thing. If the
author has included an erotic scene as a means to better define the
characters and their relationships - that's a totally different situation.

>[ A LENGTHY PARABLE TO SHOW THAT THE ***REVIEW*** SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED ]
>[ THE HOMOSEXUAL SLANT OF THE BOOK ]
>It is not your responsibility to keep tabs on the sexual proclivities
>of all those who put pen to paper.  An adequate book review should have
>reflected the contents of the book.

It's NOT book review we are talking about - it's the blurbs on the cover and
the back of the book.( OR *WAS* it a review ? If it was - ignore this paragraph)
The cover blurbs usually give you a GENERAL idea about the GENERAL direction
of the book. Since I have learned to read English (I still have not learned to
wright ;-) I have bought close to a dosen books based on their cover blurbs and
a quick scan of the wrighting stile - and found them very dissatisfying and
boring to the point where I could not bring myself to finish them. Out of
250-300 books - that's not a bad ratio! Those WERE paperbacks, tho'. If they
were hardcover editions that I have payed $14-$18 for - I'd be upset too....

>To claim that an adequate book review is censorship is to argue that
>we should buy and read books randomly - a waste of time, effort, and
>money.

I agree to some extend - but who's responcilbility is it to seek out the
reviews? The reader's or the book distributor's? Adequate book review is a
great thing. Expecting an in-depth review from a short blurb is absurd.
Most often the book and record clubs grace only the "selectio of the month"
items with reviews. (I could be wrong - I have not joined ALL the clubs out
there :-)

>>>5) Was the book such a work of creative genious that it transcended
>>>   such considerations?
>>Don't know, have not read it (yet?).
>
>A book rarely transcends its content.
>
>Bill Oliver
>Asst. Chief Medical Examiner
>State of North Carolina

HUH? Tell that to the readers of the Bible - it has a few VERY graphic sex
scenes in it ( and a large number of mass slaughter and mayhem scenes). Then
again, on THIS point I ***AGREE*** with you.
--
Disclamer: I don't work here anymore - so they are not responsible for me.
+-------------------------------+ Don't bother, I'll find the door!
|   STAY ALERT! TRUST NO ONE!   |                       Oleg Kiselev.
|     KEEP YOUR LASER HANDY!    |...!{trwrb|scgvaxd}!felix!birtch!oleg
--------------------------------+...!{ihnp4|randvax}!ucla-cs!uclapic!oac6!oleg