Right, so this is my two cents worth (lengthy, sorry), which you can take or leave, as you please. Yes, like the others, I'm reading because what you write is not only different, but interesting. You've taken a tack, and dealt with issues, that are quite different from the generic themes that are prevalent in much of the fanon, and I find that very refreshing, particularly since I'm well beyond the 'maiden' cohort of your readership.
As you doubtless already know, I'm one of your "read everything" readers, and to be perverse, I like your Golden Age stories just as much (and in some parts, better) than your Spare Oom writings. If I had to nail down my preference between Part 1 and Part 2 of TSG, I'd probably also say Part 1, but not for the reasons you might expect.
I like the light-heartedness of some of the interactions, which thematically didn't fit quite so well with Part 2. As a general comment, you write the witty repartee very well indeed, and there's a bit more scope for that in Part 1. We also saw more of the 'genuine' Good Beasts in Part 1 than Part 2 (where they were more part of the cypher, than themselves), and that, too, was part of the attraction.
I think for me, it's simply that I don't channel Susan nearly as well as the other Friends, so I find it harder to empathise with her character than any of the others. That said, I prefer your characterisation of Susan to any other that I have read. I am absolutely delighted with the way that you've thrown many of the fanon conventions about Susan (and to a lesser extent, the other Pevensies) straight out the window. The stupid, vapid, (sometimes) victimised, party-girl annoys the crap out of me, and I'm not a fan of Suspian either.
I don't have a problem with Susan/Tebbitt, nor with anyone else/OC, provided the OC is well-written and fits the tale (which yours undoubtedly are and do). Yes, there was an initial 'squick' factor, given the age difference, but it didn't become a big problem, particularly given the fact that you had Susan take ownership of herself, her desires and emotions. I can see how this might become a hot button for some of the readership, but I'm delighted to find an assertive women, not a rag doll. Intellectually, I do understand the 'morality' complaint - I think it's rubbish, myself, but I won't answer for anyone else.
Maybe it's partially the subject matter. Issues like the Holocaust and the nastiness of wartime intelligence work still cause quite a lot of squirm factor seventy years after the event, and even fictionalised, I can see that it may be uncomfortable for some. Is it just that it's not as 'fluffy' as Part 1? I don't know - I wish I had a better handle on it, and could give you better insight, but I haven't. Don't know whether there's anything here that's of any use to you, but that's my thoughts...
At any rate, I'm here for the long haul, and I do hope that you decide to continue. : )
no subject
As you doubtless already know, I'm one of your "read everything" readers, and to be perverse, I like your Golden Age stories just as much (and in some parts, better) than your Spare Oom writings. If I had to nail down my preference between Part 1 and Part 2 of TSG, I'd probably also say Part 1, but not for the reasons you might expect.
I like the light-heartedness of some of the interactions, which thematically didn't fit quite so well with Part 2. As a general comment, you write the witty repartee very well indeed, and there's a bit more scope for that in Part 1. We also saw more of the 'genuine' Good Beasts in Part 1 than Part 2 (where they were more part of the cypher, than themselves), and that, too, was part of the attraction.
I think for me, it's simply that I don't channel Susan nearly as well as the other Friends, so I find it harder to empathise with her character than any of the others. That said, I prefer your characterisation of Susan to any other that I have read. I am absolutely delighted with the way that you've thrown many of the fanon conventions about Susan (and to a lesser extent, the other Pevensies) straight out the window. The stupid, vapid, (sometimes) victimised, party-girl annoys the crap out of me, and I'm not a fan of Suspian either.
I don't have a problem with Susan/Tebbitt, nor with anyone else/OC, provided the OC is well-written and fits the tale (which yours undoubtedly are and do). Yes, there was an initial 'squick' factor, given the age difference, but it didn't become a big problem, particularly given the fact that you had Susan take ownership of herself, her desires and emotions. I can see how this might become a hot button for some of the readership, but I'm delighted to find an assertive women, not a rag doll. Intellectually, I do understand the 'morality' complaint - I think it's rubbish, myself, but I won't answer for anyone else.
Maybe it's partially the subject matter. Issues like the Holocaust and the nastiness of wartime intelligence work still cause quite a lot of squirm factor seventy years after the event, and even fictionalised, I can see that it may be uncomfortable for some. Is it just that it's not as 'fluffy' as Part 1? I don't know - I wish I had a better handle on it, and could give you better insight, but I haven't. Don't know whether there's anything here that's of any use to you, but that's my thoughts...
At any rate, I'm here for the long haul, and I do hope that you decide to continue.
: )