2009 Rainbow Awards: Best Overall Lesbian Novel

[reviews_and_ramblings]

And the Rainbow Award goes to:

1) Barking at the Moon by Nene Adams, P.D. Publishing

"Setting well done. Very believable characters, well conceived. Main character speaks well with a slight twang and then later in the book begins speaking like a back woods uneducated character, however it did not take away from the story or the character. This story was excellent, good tension and plot development, as well as an intriguing romance." Julie

"I really liked a lot of the characters and the author did a good job of making me hate the bad guys. I did like Annalee a lot though and really wanted her to get closure after what happened to her father." Rose

While investigating the murder of a preacher with dark secrets in his past, Sheriff Annalee Crow stumbles upon another secret, this one involving the pale-furred wolves that roam the eldrich forest known as Malingering Deep. When Annalee encounters a woman belonging to the mysterious family who lives side-by-side with the wolves, she is plunged into a deadly world where science and superstition clash, and one man's greed for immortality may destroy everything and everyone she loves.

2) Queer Wolf edited by James EM Rasmussen, QueerEdFiction

"This collection of queer werewolf stories covers just about all the different worlds in which werewolves could live and interact with humans and others. The fan of werewolf stories will enjoy these writers, the characters, and this editor's well balanced selections for this book." Julie

Their world lies between the shadows and the moonlight, between man and animal...and in the city under neon moons and through on-treed streets, the queer wolves run. Bound within QUEER WOLF is an exciting collection of contemporary, urban and sensual werewolf tales; a gathering of queer wolves presented by exciting, new and established authors. Stories by: RJ Bradshaw; Naomi Clark; Charlie Cochrane; Laramie Dean; Moondancer Drake; Ginn Hale; Erica Hildebrand; Michael Itig; Lucas Johnson; Andi Lee; Charles Long; Stephen Osborne; Robert Saldarini; Quinn Smythwood; Jerome Stueart; Anel Viz; Cari Z "The debut anthology from James EM Rasmussen's QueeredFiction is an entertaining and varied collection, boasting such talents as Charlie Cochrane and Ginn Hale. Lovers of the lycan will find much to slaver over here: from the werewolf wanabee to the lovers-through-time, to waifs and strays. From the carnal to the violent to the passionate, this anthology will wag your tail, I guarantee it." Erastes author of Standish

3) Blood and Mint Chocolates by Adrianne Brennan, Freya's Bower

"Interesting setting that went well with the story. I thought the characters here were developed nicely for such a short story, and quite believable. Well written." Julie

Merideth, a vampire and librarian, spends most of her nights researching and book collecting for Clan Gladius within the Order of the Dragon and the Rose. Much to her surprise, the head of Clan Gladius unexpectedly presents her with a luxurious gift: a trip to stay at Hotel Paradisio at Crystal Island! The heat is on at the island resort under moonlit skies and palm trees. The tropical heat quickly transforms into a scorching hot time that will be seared into Merideth's memory forever when she runs into her long time crush, Kalia. Merideth is presented with a gift from a goddess that allows her to experience in reality her deepest fantasies...which existed before in dreams alone. But can their passion survive the intrigue and potential dangers that await them, or will it only last as long as her vacation?

Comments

Thank you

[queeredfiction.livejournal.com]

For all the effort placed into these Awards by you Elisa and your panel of judges and the readers who started all the nominations and voting off--thank you!

Congratulations to Nene Adams, Adrianne Brennan and all the Queer Wolf authors.

Re: Thank you

[elisa-rolle.livejournal.com]

And congrats to you James :-) Elisa

[adriannebrennan.livejournal.com]

I--wow. I'm extremely honored, thank you so much! I'm very glad that my book was so well enjoyed. :D Again, thanks!

[elisa-rolle.livejournal.com]

You are more than welcome Adrianne :-) Elisa

[evecho.com (from livejournal.com)]

Not to take anything away from the other two books, and I shouldn't have to point this out, but No.2 is not a novel, it is an anthology, and it contains mainly gay male content rather than being all lesbian or even predominantly lesbian. On these fundamental points, I'm of the view that this award misses the point and is therefore, sadly, irrelevant.

[elisa-rolle.livejournal.com]

Everyone has the right to have an opinion. I'm a Gay Novel reviewer but I asked, almost begged, people (authors, readers, publishers) to submit every genres of the LGBT spectrum. If the L component was not so active as the G, well, maybe you should make your (as L reader I suppose) own mea culpa. Did you submit books? I didn't ask anything if not give me a title, I did all the work related to contact the publishers and provide the judge with books. I even bought books that I will probably not read, since they are not my genre, to provide it to the judges. Instead of come here and said that what I did was irrilevant, next time, please, be more active yourself. Then you will be entitled to come here and said that what I did was irrilevant.

And BTW the Lesbian part of that anthology is from very good authors, I would not badmouth them.

Elisa

[stacia-seaman.livejournal.com]

This is complete nonsense, and insulting nonsense at that.

If you don't have enough books in a category, you do not shoehorn in a book that does not belong in that category. An anthology, by definition, is not a novel, and 3 of 17 stories (that is, 17% of the whole) does NOT make it a lesbian anthology. At best it's queer-themed rather than gay-themed. You especially do not put that anthology as the second-place finisher.

What you do, in such a situation, is explain that there were not sufficient entries for the category, and you present a single winner, or you decline to name a winner at all.

Nobody is badmouthing the authors in that anthology. We are simply stating a fact: An overwhelmingly m/m anthology with only 3 f/f among its 17 stories has no business being named the second-place finisher in a Lesbian Novel category, as it is neither lesbian-focused in content, nor is it a novel.

[elisa-rolle.livejournal.com]

First I accepted submission, and Queer Wolf was submitted in the Lesbian category, and in the Gay category for that matter, in the first phase it was possible to have multiple submission cross categories. The Lesbian category had enough title (at least as overall category) to have is own category, and I specifically gave the title to read to judge who specifically asked for Lesbian titles. I did it, and the judges asked for it, to have a good and well thought ratings. Yes, it's true, I'm sure that out there there are better ONLY Lesbian titles, and I hope next time to reach them. But if we don't start from a point, we don't start at all. I don't think it would be fair for the authors involved to have the category suppressed, I prefer to have the category in a small spotlight hoping for next year to be centre stage.

[stacia-seaman.livejournal.com]

For next year, you might consider renaming your categories. Instead of "Best Overall Lesbian Novel" perhaps you should have "Best Overall Lesbian Book" or "Best Overall Lesbian Title."

Part of my problem with the current structure is that the category is for NOVELS, which by definition excludes an ANTHOLOGY.

A NOVEL, per the Oxford English Reference Dictionary, is "a fictitious prose story of book length" (emphasis mine).

An ANTHOLOGY, per the Oxford English Reference Dictionary, is "a published collection of passages from literature." where "passages" is defined as "a short extract from a book." ANTHOLOGY is also used to refer to a collection of short stories, usually with a common theme.

What you've done with your "Best Overall Lesbian Novel" category is to combine books that fit the category--long-form lesbian-themed works (book-length stories) with books that do NOT fit the category--collections of short stories, the huge majority of which are not even lesbian-themed. Not only that, but you've named a book that does NOT fit the category as the second-best finisher!

Please try to look at this from a lesbian reader's perspective. If I come to this award category looking for the best full-length lesbian-themed books (because that's what novels are) and instead see a recommendation for a book full of m/m stories with just three lesbian stories, that does have an effect on the credibility of the awards.

Nobody's saying you have to combine the lesbian category with the bisexual or transgendered categories. Nobody is saying you even have to have lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered categories. What people are saying is that IF you are going to have a lesbian category, you have a responsibility to see that the winners in the category are actually LESBIAN THEMED. You have not done this. Three short stories out of seventeen, in a short story collection, named as the second-best lesbian-themed book-length story? I'm sorry, as I know you mean well, but there is no way to spin that to be a lesbian novel. There just isn't.

You can call it the second-best book with lesbian content, but it just plain is not a lesbian novel.

[evecho.com (from livejournal.com)]

As a first year, and late call, for LGBT book nominations within a limited network (especially since it is in its first year), a limited response is to be expected. It's not good enough to say there were not sufficient entries. Look at it from the other side: did you contact all or most LGBT presses, did you provide sufficient information about the process and quality of the judging experience? Lack of information/marketing about the awards and the eleventh hour organising are more likely to blame for lack of nominations.

However, the issue I am concerned about here is that a predominantly gay male anthology made it as a top finalist for a Lesbian Novel award. As has been mentioned, the anthology does not fit the category description and to have it up there not only dilutes the definition of the category but also places an unfair disadvantage on other lesbian novel nominees. It would have been better to place the winning anthology in the Anthology category, or select the best for an Individual Short Story category, or not include the anthology at all in this category. As it is, next year awards will be fraught with confusion.

Finally, I fail to see where I have criticised any of the authors in the anthology. Please show me where I have said so if you disagree.

[elisa-rolle.livejournal.com]

I did contact a lot of publishers, LGBT publishers. P.D. Publishing was willing and ready and very kind in providing the books for the judges to read. Some lesbian authors working for mostly lesbian devoted publishers posted in forums and yahoo group asking for people to vote for the books. Some did, some didn't. I manage to have a small amount of Lesbian titles, and for this reason I decided to have also a specific category for them. I don't think it would have been right to loose them in the bigger Gay category (bigger for number of submission, not for importance). Again, as I said above, Queer Wolf was submitted ALSO as Lesbian category. I can agree with you since I wondered how to consider that submission, but again, it was submitted specifically for the three Lesbian stories in it, and I was open to all submission.

Again, I think it's better to have something than to not have nothing at all. It would have been simple for me to have a Gay Romance awards, only Gay, only Romance, but it would have been not fair. It's not my Award (I read Gay and Romance), it's an award for the authors of LGBT from the readers of LGBT. My friends are mostly on the G, some on the B&T, very few on the L. It was expected, it was my first concern. People helped, the submission lasted more than 1 month, it was the first year, again I think it was a good result for a first year.

And maybe you didn't specifically badmouth the authors in the Anthology, but saying that the result was irrilevant, or maybe you mean the Award in general was irrilevant, well for me it's like saying that their weight and the work of those poeple who put them there, was irrilevant. Maybe I'm wrong, for sure I'm wrong, but I read that in this way.

[evecho.com (from livejournal.com)]

"Again, I think it's better to have something than to not have nothing at all. It would have been simple for me to have a Gay Romance awards, only Gay, only Romance, but it would have been not fair. It's not my Award (I read Gay and Romance), it's an award for the authors of LGBT from the readers of LGBT."

You may not be aware of this but you've not only contradicted your actions but also added insult to injury. First of all, these are your awards as you initiated them and you managed them. Secondly, if these awards were about authors and readers then you needn't have had individual categories. That you did showed that you were aware that separate categories were desirable. But then you flubbed by considering an anthology as a novel. It is actually unfair to consider the former as the latter and, as I said before, this confuses and disadvantages relevant entries. As the organiser, it would have been better if you had informed the nominating party that the anthology did not belong in the Novel category and then perhaps consider an Anthology category next year. Finally, to have something rather than nothing at all even and especially if it's in the wrong place is tokenism, something offensive to proper representation.

"Maybe I'm wrong, for sure I'm wrong, but I read that in this way."

You are wrong. My comments were related to categorisation, not literary merit. And because the placing was clearly wrong, it casts doubt on the whole category, and by extension, the entire judging process of the awards.

[elisa-rolle.livejournal.com]

I decided to have separate categories since people told me that it would have been better, that Gay and Lesbian authors would have not liked to be together in the same category, or worst with the Bisexual/Transgender... it was not my choice, so it wasn't neither my merit, I would have preferred to have only "genre" categories, not "gender" ones. So see, even in that I would have been wrong if I didn't have people advice me.

But I don't feel to have "flubbed" anything considering an Anthology with Novels. I don't want to list other Awards, not since they are not worthy, but since it would lead to polemic, but other Awards decided in the last years to have Anthologies and Novels all together. The mistake was, probably, that this Anthology in particular was in the middle, and with an unbalance tendency to Gay. But see, if there wasn't gender, it would have been not a problem. Creating separation is always a problem, even if you do that with good intention.

Elisa

[evecho.com (from livejournal.com)]

First of all, gender does not equal sexuality, so to classify gender as sexuality already starts you off on the wrong foot.

I would be interested to see which other award considers anthologies and novels in the same category, and if they had the same award definition as yours.

You say "Creating separation is always a problem, even if you do that with good intention.", then I might ask why you bothered having separate genre and LGBT categories in your call for nominations. To request and receive nominations which are then not properly honoured is at best bad management, or, at worst, fraud.

[elisa-rolle.livejournal.com]

> I might ask why you bothered having separate genre and LGBT categories in your call for nominations

But do you read my comments before replying? It was my first statement in the previous comment:

"I decided to have separate categories (gender category) since people told me that it would have been better, that Gay and Lesbian authors would have not liked to be together in the same category, or worst with the Bisexual/Transgender"

I asked for advice on which categories I should consider, I started having only "genre" category (Contemporary, Paranormal...) and the first thing people adviced was to have beforehand a "gender" category, to divide Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender. I replied that, knowing the audience I can reach, it would be difficult for the LBT to have enough submission, and a Lesbian author (quite famous I should say) told me to give a limit to 5 titles per category, and if I didn't reach that limit, the Category would have been deleted. And so it was, only the Paranormal and Contemporary Lesbian categories reached Phase 3 since all the other had less than 5 titles submitted.

These are the winner and finalist of a 2009 Awards (and it's quite easy to find out the name):

GAY EROTICA (Category)
Winner: Best Gay Erotica 2009, Richard Labonte & James Lear, Cleis Press
Finalists: The Secret Tunnel, James Lear, Cleis Press
Hard Working Men, William Maltese, Victor J. Banis, Jardonn Smith, & J.P. Bowie, MLR Press

2 are anthology, 1 is a novel and if I remeber well, also the finalist were mixed.

[evecho.com (from livejournal.com)]

I say again that by equating gender with sexuality, you are confusing the issue.

I point to you again that you don't seem to understand the difference between novel and anthology. Please refer to the definitions provided above for future reference.

As for the unnamed award, the category you refer to is Gay Erotica. There is no mention that it had to be in novel or anthology form, whereas your Lesbian Novel category specifically states that entries must be in novel form.

This will be my last comment on this issue as the matter is not getting any closer to being resolved. I wish you well on your future processes.

[stacia-seaman.livejournal.com]

This is my point exactly. The category is Gay EROTICA. Not gay erotic anthology, not gay erotic novel. The category is based on the content (gay erotica), not on the form (novel or anthology). Therefore, both are acceptable.

When you create a category for novels, the winners should all be novels. And in the case of this award, for this category, the winners are not all novels.