Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Writer of Arthurian fantasy series subjected to homophobic reviews

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Infer? Surely the author meant imply? Doesn’t say much for her writing skills that she doesn’t know the difference.

    1. Depends if she was talking about people drawing a conclusion as opposed to suggesting.

      1. The context of the sentence, after “you can write pretty much anything these days, but…” suggests very strongly that she meant the latter.

        1. Not necessarily. It makes sense to me in the context that she used. It’s true that she COULD have meant ‘imply’ (and it depends on how explicit with the relationship it gets in her books) but ‘infer’ works in that sentence.

    2. erm.. actualy her use of infer is correct,

      to infer – to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence:
      They inferred his displeasure from his cool tone of voice

      to imply – to indicate or suggest without being explicitly stated

      people mix them up all the time, yourself included it seems lol

      1. She says “It seems that one can write about pretty much anything these days, but to infer that King Arthur and Lancelot were lovers is tantamount to flag burning”.

        Now, from that context I am fairly sure she meant to use imply. The reader of a work infers things from the work, the writer implies them in the work. If she really meant infer then she would be saying that a reader who takes away the idea from a book that Arthur and Lancelot were sleeping together is the one who comes under fire from popular prejudice, not the author who puts that idea in the book in the first place. She is clearly trying to say “you can write about what you like, but not this, apparently”, and isn’t saying “you can write about what you like, but if you read a book and take gay themes from it you’re going to be attacked”.

        The only way “infer” would be correct is if she was talking about her own reading of previous Arthurian legends, which just happened to be communicated through her books.

        1. She’s a historian. She’s inferred the link from the evidence she’s uncovered in the course of her work.

        2. I have not read the books, but from the article, it seems she does not imply a gay relationship, she depicts it clearly. Therefore, I assume she inferred such a relationship from her research.
          I agree, however, that the way the quotation reads (assuming it is correct word for word) she meant to say imply. A verbal slip of the tongue happens to the most erudite of us! If it occurred in her writing, that would be poor!

    3. Infer: Deduce or conclude (information) from evidence and reasoning rather than from explicit statements.

      Imply: Strongly suggest the truth or existence of (something not expressly stated): “the report implies that two million jobs might be lost”.

      Easy to mix up, just as you have, but takes someone who actually knows what they’re talking about to get it right. And before generalising about her writing skills, perhaps you should read the books in question?

  2. It’s not as if this is a new idea – Marion Zimmer Bradley (or Marion Bradley, as she was then) covered this already 30 years ago in The Mists of Avalon.

    1. Blimey just realised I have ‘The Mists of Avalon’ not read it yet. Is it good?

  3. *goes straight to buy Knights of Camelot*
    That’ll fill the void left waiting for new Game of Thrones, and give the middle finger to the ‘phobes.

  4. Mike de Fleuriot 14 Aug 2012, 11:12am

    Hell, you gays really have such power and kindness, you have never abused it and taken over the world.
    |
    Thanks for considering us normal straight folk.

    1. We have no choice but to consider you every day of our lives. We are surrounded by you all the time, including idiots like you who have been part of a bullying majority for centuries and scream that you are victims whenever we refuse to be invisible or accept your homophobic garbage. We are also generally not in the habit of sending hate messages to authors writing about straight relationships. The world is bursting at the seams with the latter, and quite frankly if we did bother to send them we wouldn’t have time for anything else.
      Get a life, or at least a realistic perspective on reality.

      1. Amen to that (not that I’m a Christian!) It’s particularly sad when homophobes pretend that THEY are the victims. Do they really think they’re fooling anyone except possibly other homophobes?

    2. Do you still beat your wife Mike de Fleuriot?

    3. Well when we’re given the power over your life to decide whether you can get married or not, or allowed to have straight sex mentioned in the school curriculum, when 3rd world dictators get to imprison or stone you to death for your straightness and preachers tell you that they ‘hate your straight sins but love the straight sinner’,or that ‘god hates straights’, be sure to call us back.
      What you actually suffer from is just a chronic case of straight entitlement with a dash of homophobia thrown in.

    4. Lynda Yilmaz 14 Aug 2012, 1:51pm

      I did not mean to ‘like’ your comment. I was ‘liking’ Harry’s post and clicked yours instead. Just so you know! I still don’t understand what idiots like you are doing reading pink news, Can’t you find anything to comment on where someone actually cares what you think?

  5. I’ve come across a number of homophobic reviews on Amazon. It seems that there’s a core of people ready to be outraged at any mention of love between people of the same sex.

    It’s the hate emails that sound more worrying to me. Seriously, get a grip – this is FICTION. If you don’t like the story, choose another book. Not hard, is it?

    1. When has rationality ever applied to people who like to show their outrage?

      Unfortunately if you write same sex relationships it comes with the territory.

    2. Not very often, Sue :D I once read a review of a non-fiction book that mentioned same sex relationships and the reviewer said that these were an invention of modern times and the people in question were clearly just friends! I almost felt sorry for him, living with his head in the sand like that.

      1. He clearly hasn’t studied his history, poor boy.

    3. I had to complain to Amazon about tags on Tom Daley’s autobiography. The Olympic (bronze medal winning) diver was 17, had just lost his dad, and in his book talks about his first girlfriend (sorry, guys!).
      Nevertheless, someone added the tags (BEFORE THE BOOK WAS PUBLISHED) “gay” “homosexual sex”, and other more offensive tags.
      What is the mentality of those who would actively seek out this book, just for such a pointless, offensive and time-wasting exercise?

  6. She should use the reviews as a promotional tool.

    ‘This book will SHOCK religious people and other stupid people.’

    1. Love it!

  7. Any form of publicity like this will be good for her sales figures. It’s a good ploy by her publisher to talk about the homophobic reviews. I hope she gets many extra sales.

    1. Indeed. I’d never heard of this book until this story appeared. But good on her for using every tool at her disposal for publicising her self-published books.

      I note that the first volume is being put out free as a loss-leader on Amazon.co.uk in the hope that readers will get hooked into the series; I wonder if this story coincides with the free offer?

      1. Don’t know, and frankly don’t care, it’s free, and I’m off to Amazon! Thanks, Joe!

  8. I just got this free from amazon kindle

    1. Thanks, Martin!

  9. In the caption under the photo of the stack of books, the author’s surname is misspelled “Luddigton.”

  10. The phobes don’t read they spew hate!

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all