What The Fuck Was I Thinking: a spoiler-licious deconstruction of Guttersnipe

This blog post is for two groups of people: those who read Guttersnipe and thought WTF? and those who DNFed Guttersnipe or would never even considering reading it because they've read slave fic before and they already know how these things go.

First of all, thank you everyone for participating in The Challenge. I have never received so many in-depth, thoughtful and fascinating reviews. I wanted to like every single one of the them … but then I decided that was probably creepy *lol* Those of you who chose to go there pulled no punches, let me get away with nothing, and it was very flattering to see people give up time and energy to really critique something.

So far on the blog tour I've talked about rebelling from the rape-as-love-story model, I've talked about writing in the gray areas beyond romance, and I've talked about rape as a valid (and awesome) sexual fantasy. Originally I had planned this final stop on the blog tour to be about comparing what publishers thought reader reaction would be to what your reactions actually were. But after looking at your reviews and seeing the same questions come up over and over again, I've changed my mind about that. (Instead I blogged a little about it earlier in the week. Cliff Notes: The pubs were right, I still don't care *lol*)

For those of you that are interested, I'm going try to explain what I wanted for Guttersnipe and why everything just had to be just so to accomplish that. This isn't meant to change anyone's mind, but I think a few of you that found elements of the story just didn't work for you might find it interesting to know that a lot of the problems you saw weren't accidents.

To begin with I like leaving things up to interpretation…
This is not the first time I've written something and romance readers have criticized me for not specifying every detail clearly. I'm still undecided about whether I want to adjust my style to accommodate the genre, and if so how much. Coming from fanfiction I like ambiguity, because I like to develop my own interpretations of the characters and I don't want any author telling me that my ideas are wrong. So on a personal level I prefer stories that leave things up to interpretation. Apparently many in romance do not.

As a result the motives of some characters in Guttersnipe are unclear in the sense that there is enough evidence to support multiple interpretations and you're never really told which one is the "right answer".

For example…

Is Marco a nice guy?
On one hand he is kind, protective and at times downright affectionate with Derek. He gives Derek many opportunities to make a good life for himself within the boundaries of the rules. He keeps Derek from falling apart when it looks like Derek is about to. He doesn't demand much from him and seems willing to let Derek dictate the terms of his enslavement (up to a point).

On the other hand there are a couple of scenes that call to question how much of this niceness is really sincere and how much of it is Marco manipulating Derek for his own benefit.

For example, why does Marco bring them to Louis's home? Sure, Marco is a bit of a pyorrhea, doesn't have many friends among the elite. But he's on good terms with Cornelius Fawn who's only interested in female slaves and could have been trusted alone with Derek. Why Louis?

You could argue that Marco knows Louis won't be able to resist the temptation Derek presents and that once Louis succumbs to that temptation Marco will have the leverage he needs to finalized his business deal.

But more importantly, you could argue that Marco knows the experience is likely to knock Derek off-kilter. He improves the odds of this happening by making sure that Derek knows as little as possible about slave protocol and what awaits him. Zach does his best, but Zach was only a slave for a relatively short period of time. It's Marco who should be briefing Derek on how to behave and he doesn't … why?

An off-kilter Derek is completely dependent on Marco. Completely. In order to win the game between himself and Evelyn, Marco needs to make sure Derek sees him as the lesser of two evils. Evelyn has a major head start: he's been feeding Derek's ego for years. If Marco's going to turn the tables he needs to foster some kind of connection with Derek. Reframing their relationship so that Marco becomes a source of security and protection from a hostile and cruel world is (at the time) the best way to do that.

You could easily read that part of the book as Marco offering Derek up on a silver platter to be raped because it helps advance his plans.

And what about Nick's gang rape? Marco knows exactly where Derek is and certainly knows the layout of his own house. He knows Derek is likely to overhear. So was it all Evelyn as Marco claims? Who benefits from encouraging Derek's infatuation with Nick more than Marco? What better way to keep the spark going than to hand Derek exactly what he wants: a broken, heavily abused subject with which to save and prove his own righteousness.

When it comes to Marco, I don't want to tell people how to think of his character. You can read his actions in Guttersnipe as genuine kindness or you can read Marco as someone who manipulates, rapes and abuses when it serves his agenda.

So why go out of his way to save Derek in the end?
His great master plan could be proof that he really did feel something for Derek, or you can read it as part of his self-righteousness (a characteristic he shares with Derek). Personally, I don't think Marco gives a damn whether Derek lives or dies (after all he's not there in the end to see which one it is) but Marco does see Nick as an innocent and deserving to be saved.

Marco is a true believer. Unlike Evelyn, Louis and to a lesser extent Cornelius, who support the rules because they profit from them, Marco actually believes in the rules. He might want slight modifications to them here and there, but he believes in the spirit of them. I don't think Marco is very comfortable with the idea of killing Nick for real, because-- unlike Derek-- Nick has done nothing wrong.

Still there's absolutely no way Nick would agree to Marco's plan knowing that Derek would be sacrificed so cruelly (more on this in a second). There's absolutely no way Zach would agree to assist in Marco's plan if there wasn't at least the theoretical possibility that Derek might come out of it alive (although Zach is in some serious denial about other elements of the master plan).

So, alternatively, you could also read Marco's motives as just pragmatism. He cannot get Evelyn without help and the people who he needs to be involved need Derek to be spared.

Which brings me to probably the biggest issue readers had…

The point I was trying to make with this book: Love is BULLSHIT
*lol* Okay … admittedly, this is sort of a strange theme for a romance novel to have. In truth I never thought of Guttersnipe as a romance in the sense that romance means "love story". Guttersnipe speculates on the nature of healthy -vs- abusive relationships and questions the idea that socially acceptable relationships are automatically healthy just because they take a form society approves of. I was not in any way interested in writing a love story, so-- yeah-- if you read the last few chapters under the assumption that I was trying to say Nick and Derek are in love and will live happily ever after … I can imagine how that notion feels unsatisfying and weirdly insincere. Because actually the point I was trying to make is the exact opposite of that.

There are so many many many romance novels out there that sell this idea that love cancels out everything. Abuse is okay as long as you're in love. Love will change your partner into the person you want. Love can heal people of trauma. It's all such bullshit and I'm sick of reading about it. I like reading about sex, about passion, about intimacy. I am sick of reading about love. I'm especially sick of reading about love in books that involve abuse, slavery, violence and rape. I'm sick of the bizarre, offensive and frankly completely unhealthy messages about relationships these books promote. We're all old enough that we can read them, roll our eyes at most of this stuff and go about nurturing our healthy relationships without any negative effects. What attracted me to the idea of a story like this was not publishing a "good" book to battle "bad" books, but just the opportunity to do something different.

Derek only feels the way he does because he's deluding himself. Most of the things Derek thinks about Nick are completely wrong. He doesn't know him and he can't possibly love him.

Although there's a lot less to go on in Nick's case, what we do know is that Nick is bewildered and at times baffled by Derek's attention. It doesn't fit any of the cynical, selfish motives Nick is used to dealing with and he's not quite clear what Derek wants from him. Remember that Evelyn says that Nick finds the way Derek stares at him creepy, it freaks him out.

At the same time, Nick appreciates the fact that Derek is kind to him when it would benefit him much more not to be. So he doesn't want to see Derek hurt. He doesn't want to see Derek crushed or broken in all the ways he knows slaves can be broken. I think Nick sees Derek as a little strange and ridiculous, but does not really believe he deserves the abuse he will undoubtably suffer.

For me the key to Nick and Derek's relationship is that when confronted with the fact that Nick's wishes are different than what Derek wants to believe, Derek backs off and respects those wishes. He doesn't pressure Nick to have sex with him even though that's what he really wants. He doesn't force Nick to escape with him even though he thinks that's what's best for both of them. This is something different for Derek, who has spent the entire book basically imposing his wishes on other people regardless of the consequences. But Nick he consults. He tries his best to consider Nick's feelings whenever he makes a decision that will affect him and he feels dissatisfied when he's put in a situation where he must choose for Nick (i.e. the swap). Derek's love is completely illegitimate, but his respect is real.

I did not want Derek and Nick to be "in love" because the point I was trying to make with Guttersnipe is that it's respect, not love, that is the most important element of a relationship. To me, the woods -vs- the city is a metaphor: it's easy to have the relationship that society tells you is "healthy" (monogamous, clear gender roles, preferably hetero, no kink, no porn, and please women don't like the sex so much) and just trust that function will automatically follow form. In Guttersnipe the socially acceptable relationships aren't necessarily bad, but they aren't automatically fulfilling just because they're encouraged. The point I was trying to make is that the form a relationship takes doesn't really matter, it's respect that matters. Gay, straight, trans, poly, celibate, whatever … if you respect your partner and yourself, you can survive the uncertainty and vulnerability of a real relationship and maybe end up with something more satisfying and freeing.

Nick's optimism at the end doesn't come from being in love, it comes from knowing for the first time that his wants and needs and feelings actually matter to someone.

I realize that many people like to read about love and that by removing it from Derek and Nick's relationship I was alienating all of you. But I really felt like it was important to express what I actually feel about romance: Love is bullshit, build a life with people who act like they give a shit about your feelings

Are they really going to survive in the woods?
I sort of find it really amusing that people fixated on the bird egg thing and overlooked some of the other elements of Nick and Derek's situation. I guess I should have either emphasized this more, or stated these details differently? In Derek's first attempt in the woods he is alone, he is completely cut off from society, without money, without food, knowing nothing about his surroundings.

At the end none of these things are true: he has someone to look out for him, he has money, he is still technically Marco's heir and still technically owes property in the city (though under a new identity), he has supplies and access to replenishing them. He has educated himself about the wilderness. Is everything going to be perfect and wonderful right away? No, of course not. It's a difficult situation, but not an impossible one.

But in the end Derek has just become a substitution for Evelyn with Nick. One controlling relationship has been swapped for another.
Hahah I actually really like this interpretation ^^ Derek/Nick definitely does have light D/S overtones to it. Reversible D/S because I think Derek enjoys being vulnerable with Nick just as much as he enjoys making Nick his, but still D/S.

Although my pub argued that a good story needs to have the characters grow and change … I didn't like what a fluffy true love Derek/Nick would have said about BDSM or how it muddies the message behind Guttersnipe. Marco and Derek's relationship isn't abusive because Derek wears a collar or is made to do kinky things. It's abusive because Marco doesn't give a crap what Derek thinks/feels/wants and is totally okay with putting Derek in terribly situations if Marco stands to benefit. The same goes for Evelyn/Nick, it's not abusive because Evelyn inflicts pain. It's abusive because Nick never consents, indeed cannot consent to it, and Evelyn doesn't really care that Nick doesn't want it.

I like the D/S overtones in Derek/Nick because I think it makes it clear this isn't an anti-BDSM book, it's an anti-"its okay to treat your partner like shit as long as you love them" book.

Derek wasn't as smart as I expected him to be
I've now read a couple different critiques on this matter and … honestly I'm not convinced. I understand that for many the book would have been more enjoyable had Derek been a bit smarter, but more enjoyable is not the same thing as more realistic. Hotel Rwanda would have been more enjoyable for me if Don Cheadle had a sawed off shot gun and there were zombies involved, that doesn't mean they should recut the movie.

I don't believe that a person who comes from the situation Derek is coming from would think the way people want him to think. Derek is not a middle class American, why on Earth should he think like one?

The difference between Marco and Derek mentally is partly age and experience, but it's also a matter of social class. Marco comes from a place where he had choices, Derek does not. Therefore Derek doesn't know how to identify the choices he does have and when he can identify them he becomes paralyzed by indecision, unsure of how to even make the choice in the first place. Derek has never had control of his own life. What Derek understands is obedience and resistance . The decisions that he can frame as 'me versus them' he can make easily, while the decisions where there is only a choice and not an enemy baffle him.

In terms of writing an enjoyable story and creating a sympathetic character … well, okay you've got me there. If you don't like Derek there are really no excuses or justifications that could (or should) change your mind. But I get the impression that many people read this book thinking to themselves 'if I was in Derek's shoes I would see through this' … and would you really? If you were raised in a system where everything was provided by the state, where you would never own a house or a car or anything really, where there was no point to advancing your education because you would never be able to pick your career, where the most complicated choice you had was which things on your plate to eat first … would you grow up to be a person who plans, who can see three steps ahead in the game, who is a good judge of character? Or would you be reactive, constantly looking for the oppressive authority that you have always known to be there?

There are hundreds of real life examples I can give of the impact that choiceless environments have on people's ability to make smart decisions: from the struggles ex-cons have adjusting to life outside prison to the attitudes of entrepreneurs in the third world. It's not so easy to teach yourself to think in a new way when society has discouraged you from doing so.

Why wasn't this book darker? I was expecting darker!!
The simple truth is: I don't find torture sexy (or interesting). When given the choice between being dark/angsty/depressing and being funny/snarky/sarcastic … I will always choose funny. Even when the topic is rape/murder/incest/whatever. There's always something funny about it. It's true, most people who are interested in these kinds of books want them to be brutal … but I don't find that sort of thing entertaining. Sorry :(

There's so much unclear! Will there be a sequel?
Yes and No. I've got a collection of short stories that fill in some of the more enticing holes. Guttersnipe is 90K words, there was no room to address issues not directly relevant to the cat-and-mouse game premise. But these will be released as a free anthology some time in the fall (hoping for November). So far it includes a Marco/Zach specific story, the whole messy business of how Nick went from Evelyn's adopted brother to his slave and a Nick+Derek post script told entirely from Nick's perspective (including a flashback to Nick and Marco's conversation during the swap weekend that clarifies Nick's motivation for the decisions he makes)

Let's play a game called Isa is kind of a pretentious twat ^_^
It's true. I'm never going to be one of those GR authors with hundreds of fans and my own discussion thread on M/M Romance. But that's okay … It's much more fun to write the Guttersnipes then it is to write the stuff that will sell. I don't exactly need the money. Give me the WTF? over the AWWW!! any day :D

I like to write books with a lot of room for interpretation, because it's so much fun to read other people's thoughts and to find myself going "Oh yeah… I never noticed that before" (To see this in action check out Emma's review *lol* Specifically the bits about Derek being a pawn because he's purely reactive. I didn't think so until I realized …. what a minute, isn't that exactly what Marco tells Derek in the beginning? Whoops~ Always interesting when my characters are smarter than I am)

So running with this for a minute here … consider the following passage:

"What do you mean 'whatever that role may be'? Are there options?"

"Of course there are."

"Like...for example?"

The book closed with an accusing snap. Here we go, Derek thought, a pulse of excitement he couldn't account for tickling his nerves.

"There are people in private service, like you. There are brothels and there are catch and release."

"Catch and release? Short-term enslavement?"

"Yes. Without the judge or auction, but the same idea."

"You mean people who the breaker just sets free? Just like that?"

"Yes."

There was something serious and fiery in Marco's flat stare. Something daring Derek to seek out the invisible line and cross it. He looked at Marco and felt the burn in his limbs like the restraints were already there.

"So you could let me go, then. If you wanted to," Derek said.

Marco snorted, a tough, amused puff of air that dissolved whatever aggression he had been carrying. Derek could not help being disappointed. There was an opportunity somewhere in there to hit a nerve and he had missed it completely. He had miscalculated.

What do you think Marco assumed Derek was going to say next? Because, to be honest, I only just figured out an interpretation that I think fits (I know this sounds stupid … you wrote it, how can you not understand what it means?!?!?! … but I write a lot on instinct, drawing on what feels right and figuring the significance out later. This particular moment didn't make sense to me until very recently)

There's no right or wrong answer (obviously since it was only about a week ago that I had any idea at all) … and I'm curious as to what your best guess is. Indulge me :D

In conclusion….
If you're annoyed at me because you read Guttersnipe and didn't see any of this, don't worry. This isn't English Lit class, it's pornography. If it wasn't there for you, it wasn't there. If it wasn't there for you, I guarantee you it wasn't there for many other people who will feel the same way you do (annoyed, frustrated, confused) because they wanted something specific and didn't get it. So, like I said before, I'm not writing this to change people's minds. I think all those reviews mentioning these elements as problems are GOOD because it means fewer readers will come into the story with the wrong expectations.

At the end of the day I write books that I desperately want to read. The problem with them is that usually I am the only person who wants to read them *lol*