Gay Patriot Header Image

Gay Books For Grownups

It seems that every winter, a number of publications release their lists of recommending holiday reading, assuming their readers will be in a book-buying mood when they shop for holiday presents. Indeed, it the National Review’s Symposium on Christmas shopping, that journal’s editors noted that its list (collated from “regular contributors and friends) “as often is the case . . . is book heavy.” The folks at Powerline linked the Claremont Review of Books Christmas reading list. But, it doesn’t seem the Weekly Standard has offered such a list since 2004.

Doubting that there exists a gay conservative reading list, I thought I’d offer my own list of gay books that I recommend. Some of these writers’ might be surprised to find their books on the reading list of a gay conservative. Indeed, one of the authors raises money for the Democratic National Committee.

Back when I was trying to publish my novel, I used to read gay novels with great regularity, feeling it my duty to familiarize myself with what was out there. But, I found that most of them were self-indulgent, without focus, theme or moral, except to blame society in general and conservatives in particular for the plight of gay men. One novel even took infidelity as a matter of course in gay (male) relationship.

And that said, I did discover some gems. I’ll get to those in due course.

i wanted to start with the book (that I believe) is the most important book on gay culture or as its author subtitled it, “The Gay Individual in American Society.” That book is of course Bruce Bawer‘s, A Place at the Table. It was the first gay book I read which addressed concerns I had as I was coming to terms with my feelings. I underlined numerous passages, scribbled notes in the margin, noted important passages in the flyleaves.

Among the many insights Bruce offers is this observation on “professional gays,” among whom “there has been too much invective and too little effort to explain and clarify.” Seems like some of these people have turned up in our comments section.

He suggested that the “vociferous emphasis on ‘gay pride'” was a sign “that, deep down, many subculture-oriented gays don’t really have very much pride in themselves as individuals; for it would never occur to an individual with pride in himself to feel a need for group-oriented pride.” And this wonderful line: “I hate to see people cocooning themselves in victimhood and straightacketing themselves in stereotype.” For that and other insights, I highly recommend Bruce Bawer’s, A Place at the Table.

I have only read a few of the essays in Bruce’s BEYOND QUEER: Challenging Gay Left Orthodoxy. For those essays alone, the book is well worth the cost.

While most readers who have read both of Andrew Sullivan’s first two books prefer the first published, Virtually Normal, I found that tiresome and repetitive. I think his second book, Love Undetectable: Notes on Friendship, Sex, and Survival, is the superior, largely due to his essay on friendship. There he observes:

For a gay child or adolescent doesn’t really have a friend in the true sense of the term until he has a gay friend who knows and accepts the fact that he is gay. When he finds this friend, who is almost always gay himself, the relationship has a significance often far deeper than the first friend a heterosexual child discovers. Because, in a way, it is only when the gay child finds his first true friend that he can really exist at all. Until then, only a part of him exists, the public part, the part that has learned to act and portray a real person, while the essential person, his deepest self, remains hidden from view, even, in many cases, from himself and almost always from the people he cares about the most, his family.

Indeed. Now, just get the book to see that while Andrew’s latest writings may be angry and unhinged, he once had something to say and said it quite well.

I found Chris Bull and John Gallagher’s Perfect Enemies: The Religious Right, the Gay Movement and the Politics of the 1990s a thoughtful book on how social conservatives and gay activists were made for each other. Gabriel Rotello’s Sexual Ecology: AIDS and the Destiny of Gay Men considers how gay culture facilitated the spread of AIDS. In this post, I agreed with Larry Kramer who called this “one of the most important books ever written for and about gay men.

Last year, I called Mary Cheney’s Now It’s My Turn: A Daughter’s Chronicle of Political Life a “must-read book for anyone who wishes to talk honestly about the Bush Administration’s record on gay issues.” In this short book, the vice-president’s daughter shows her father to be a far more decent compassionate than he has been portrayed in the media.

While most of the books I have read on gay marriage don’t deal with the meaning of the ancient and august institution, at least one writer understands that marriage is more than a right. In the first chapter of Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America, Jonathan Rauch addresses the key question, “What is Marriage For?” For that essay alone, the book is more than worth its cover price. Unfortunately, I found the second half of the book a bit sloppy. All that said, Jonathan addresses most of the key issues in the gay marriage debate and does so quite well. I don’t always agree with his points, but do value his insights.

(I have not read all the essays in Andrew Sullivan’s Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con, but those I have read suggest this is a solid collection.)

In this post, I republished a review I had written of Eric Marcus’s Together Forever: Gay and Lesbian Marriage, a study of gay and lesbian couples which shows that most of them have the same aspirations — and very often even the same lifestyle — of their straight counterparts.

From ancient institutions, I move to ancient (but enduring) ideas. When it comes to my field of study, I recommend a book by one of the nation’s authorities on feminine images in myth, Christine Downing (who just happens to be my dissertation advisor). Her Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love explores same-sex relationships in Greek myth, poetry and philosophy as well in Freudian and Jungian psychology. As you read this book, you’ll find that some of the gay issues we’re considering today have analogs in the ancient world.

While I mentioned earlier that I found most gay fiction disappointing, I have discovered some gems. Back when I lived in Washington, I enjoyed the books of Jim Grimsley, particularly Dream Boy. While still a sweet novel, Winter Birds was not nearly as touching). In almost elegiac prose, Grimsley recounts an teenage boy’s first love in the rural south. The adolescence he evokes is so real, we believe he has lived this story. His words often remind us of the tenderest yearnings of our own youth when we were first becoming aware of our feelings for other boys. And how those longings often sustained us when our home life seemed bleak.

While most readers of this blog might avoid Gore Vidal because of his anti-American politics, I often approached his work because of his powerful prose. That said, whenever I read one of his books, I found it difficult to finish either because the story didn’t engage me or because he showed little regard for facts inconvenient to his conclusions. I did finish his gay novel, The City and the Pillar, a delight to read even if the ending was unsatisfying. And the book did offer some words of wisdom: “Since they did not understand one another, each was able to sustain an illusion about the other, which was the usual beginning of love, if not truth.”

From Gore Vidal’s well-written book, I move to two more light-hearted novels. I found Stephen McCauley’s The Object of My Affection a delightful read, sustaining me, as a recall, on a train trip from Washington, D.C. to New York. Another book which I could hardly put down was Louis Bayard’s Fool’s Errand, a delightful tale about one man’s search for a man who had appeared to him as if in vision. And what he discovers serves as an important lesson for all of us.

Earlier in the post, I mentioned a book by a man who raises money for the Democratic National Committee. That man, Andrew Tobias, published under the pseudonym of John Reid a book that some consider a classic of coming out. While you may not share his politics, I dare say you’ll find that in his book, The Best Little Boy in the World, he recounts a journey with which many of you can easily relate.

To be sure, these are not all the gay books I recommend, but some of the best. The non-fiction books raise serious issues about gay culture and modern society. The novels, even the comic ones, address important issues of the human heart. Those gay readers of this blog will find that these authors often say things that we are struggling to express on our own while the non-gay readers will find in these books ideas and images which will enable you to better understand your gay fellows.

To my readers, I encourage you to chime in with your own recommendations. Should you mention a book which I also enjoyed, I will update this post accordingly.

Share

28 Comments

  1. Here’s one you forgot. Or, maybe it’s just *too ghey* to make the list.

    Comment by V the K — December 20, 2007 @ 8:06 am - December 20, 2007

  2. As a gay guy , I’ve spent the past 10 or so years learning about the greatest force on earth that threatens my existance (and also as an American, a Christian, a freeman, a thinker, an individual).

    This is my book list

    (Links to amazon at this link)
    http://home.comcast.net/~vincep312/books.html

    The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy

    Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East 1776 to Present

    While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within [by the same Bruce Bawer above]

    Because They Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America

    Infidel

    Knowing the Enemy: Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror

    The West’s Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?

    The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Londonistan

    Inside the Jihad: My Life With Al Qaeda: A Spy’s Story

    The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to Islam (and the Crusades)

    Why I am Not a Muslim

    America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It

    The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion

    Al Qaida Reader

    The Cube And the Cathedral: Europe, America, And Politics Without God

    Comment by Vince P — December 20, 2007 @ 8:55 am - December 20, 2007

  3. There’s something to be said for staring in the face (homo)erotic literature of excess, of gloom, of morbidity – even (especially) of death:

    Euripides The Bacchae
    Thomas Mann Death in Venice
    Melville Billy Budd
    Wilde De Profundis, The Ballad of Reading Gaol

    A little de Sade and Genet doesn’t hurt, either….

    Comment by Jeremayakovka — December 20, 2007 @ 9:04 am - December 20, 2007

  4. I think I have read everything on your list. You left off David Brock’s Blinded by the Right, though. Or maybe that was intentional. 😉

    Sullivans early writings are indeed interesting especially about gays and the various strains of politics in America and how they all ultimately fail us. (For a novel that weaves all of that skillfull into the narrative I suggest Christopher Bram’s Gossip. It’s very 90s in its politics –Colorado 2 was still fresh on the writer’s memory obviously–but the depictions of activists left and write and how they exploit individuals for their own purposes was IMHO dead on. Highly recommended.)

    Comment by Houndentenor — December 20, 2007 @ 10:12 am - December 20, 2007

  5. #4 HT – If ever there was an example of the empty “public man”, the individual who has no identity or morals or convictions outside of the latest thing that will earn HIM attention and group approval (from his latest-desired group), it’s David Brock.

    What I came to say: GPW, you approvingly quoted Sullivan:

    …in a way, it is only when the gay child finds his first true friend that he can really exist at all. Until then, only a part of him exists, the public part, the part that has learned to act and portray a real person, while the essential person, his deepest self, remains hidden from view, even, in many cases, from himself and almost always from the people he cares about the most, his family.

    But the quote is a perfect example of the psychology of “professional gays”, or “subculture-oriented gays [who] don’t really have very much pride in themselves as individuals” (Bawer)!

    Sullivan is saying in effect that, until **other people** see you and approve of you, you don’t exist (psychologically or morally). He’s saying that if your deepest self is “hidden from view” of some mirroring / affirming others, you “can[‘t] really exist at all.” That’s infantile. It’s the point of view of a toddler.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 20, 2007 @ 11:57 am - December 20, 2007

  6. Why would anyone read David Brock.. has anything been shown to state that he still isn’t a degenerate liar?

    Comment by Vince P — December 20, 2007 @ 12:32 pm - December 20, 2007

  7. Good list. I’m hoping that next years list includes your own self published novel. Promotion starts at home.

    Comment by Leah — December 20, 2007 @ 12:40 pm - December 20, 2007

  8. Another great gay-themed non-fiction classic (well, according to my own literary canon) to put in the stocking stuffer is Paul Monet’s “Becoming a Man.” Excellent, excellent book…

    Comment by Andrew (Los Angeles) — December 20, 2007 @ 1:00 pm - December 20, 2007

  9. that’s not what Sullivan was saying at all. The point is that until you can be honest with someone, you can’t really love them nor can they love you. If someone doesn’t really know you, especially if you are lying to them, what is it that they love? You? or the lie?

    Comment by Houndentenor — December 20, 2007 @ 1:02 pm - December 20, 2007

  10. Thanks for the reading suggestions. I’ll plan to give most of these a look in the upcoming year.

    Also, any fans of gay mysteries might like Greg Lilly’s Fingering The Family Jewels and Devil’s Bridge. Light, fast and PG. (Shameless plug because he’s a pal of mine. Democrat, but truly decent fellow & up-and-coming writer.)

    Comment by MikeInSedona — December 20, 2007 @ 3:20 pm - December 20, 2007

  11. So you all loved Brock when he was making up smears against Anita Hill but when he felt bad about that and fessed up he’s evil incarnate. I have to admit that his book make me want to puke. But mostly because he kept making excuses for people who totally used him to do their dirty work. The very same people who would trash him once they were done with him. Those are some nasty people he was playing with and he should have seen it coming except as a self-loathing closet queen he just couldn’t stop loving the people who hated him.

    Comment by Houndentenor — December 20, 2007 @ 3:30 pm - December 20, 2007

  12. So you all loved Brock when he was making up smears against Anita Hill but when he felt bad about that and fessed up he’s evil incarnate.

    I’m so sick of assħoles like this guy who just makes up stuff and then expects people to defend themselves.

    Screw off.

    Comment by Vince P — December 20, 2007 @ 3:43 pm - December 20, 2007

  13. So you all loved Brock when he was making up smears against Anita Hill

    Nope. Never, never, never. Never given that guy the time of day. Always seen through him.

    I have to admit that his book make me want to puke.

    I call bullshit! It didn’t make you want to puke, Houndentenor, or else you wouldn’t have been the one to bring it up in this thread.

    You thought you were going to score a cute point by bringing it up – and, as usual when your stereotypes about this blog come into play, you were just wrong.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 20, 2007 @ 3:58 pm - December 20, 2007

  14. #9 Am I to infer you do not believe a gay man can have a straight male friend until he finds a gay man first?

    Comment by The Livewire — December 20, 2007 @ 4:39 pm - December 20, 2007

  15. Liverwire, I think the point by Houndentenor, Dan, Sullivan, and others that you don’t have a true friend until you can be fully honest about yourself with them. In most cases, when growing up, a gay person does not tell their straight friends that they are gay, until they meet gay people. And in most cases, when a gay man begins a friendship with another gay man, at least they are honest about their sexuality with their friend. How good friends can one be if they can’t even tell them who they are attracted to, who they date, etc.?

    Of course, I’m sure there are people who have opened up with their (straight) friends before ever having gay friends, and I’m guessing it happens more and more now.

    As for David Brock, I did believe most of the “smears” against Anita Hill, because I found her story, and the circumstances behind it, unbelievable. Even though Brock has distanced himself from his own “findings,” I still conclude re: Hill/Thomas that either she only lied, or they both (Hill and Thomas) lied.

    It’s been a while since I read A Place at the Table, but I found it to be an excellent book.

    Comment by Pat — December 21, 2007 @ 7:12 am - December 21, 2007

  16. Liverwire, I think the point… was you don’t have a true friend until you can be fully honest about yourself with them.

    I agree with that universal point 100%, and it would have been nice if that had been Sullivan’s point. But, again, it wasn’t.

    Following Sullivan’s own text (as quoted by GPW), his point was that until and unless other people affirm the gay person’s sexually-gay self (that Sullivan posits the gay person to be hiding), the gay person “can[’t] really exist at all” – in whatever sense ‘existence’ counts, for Sullivan. That’s not a universal point about friendship. It’s more the viewpoint of a needy child, and/or of… well… of someone who defines his identity or personhood by his sexuality.

    Please note that (as quoted) Sullivan said,

    When [teh ghey] finds this [affirming] friend… the relationship has a significance often far deeper than the first friend a heterosexual child discovers.

    That’s not a universal point about friendship. He’s subtly implying that gay people feel it and need it more than those brute breeders who have so much more going for them. That’s the envy-ridden, non-universal and unfair viewpoint of “professional gays”, or of “subculture-oriented gays [who] don’t really have very much pride in themselves as individuals” (Bawer).

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 21, 2007 @ 11:24 am - December 21, 2007

  17. P.S. And my own point is this: Life is tough for everyone. Everyone has problems. Everyone has a ‘deepest self’ that they feel a need to hide: some from shame, some from unjustified pride, and some from virtue or justified pride. Everyone’s first real friend is extremely significant. Long story short: Real gay people grow up, get over their personal drama and stop trying to sneer (however subtly and ‘artistically’) at non-gays.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 21, 2007 @ 11:50 am - December 21, 2007

  18. As for David Brock, I did believe most of the “smears” against Anita Hill, because I found her story, and the circumstances behind it, unbelievable.

    I didn’t believe the “smears”, because (dirty secret) I was a fairly liberal Democrat at the time. I never had an “I Believe You, Anita” bumper sticker, but I thought they could have a point. (Barf!)

    I did understand that Anita’s case was weak / unprovable. But I also recognized that somebody was being overly sloppy and personal in his counter-attacks on her. Later, I learned it was Brock. It’s no surprise to me, then, that Brock is still at it (being overly sloppy and personal in his attacks) – just for the other side, the subculture he presumably gets sex from now.

    I still conclude re: Hill/Thomas that either she only lied, or they both (Hill and Thomas) lied.

    My present view. Great summary, Pat.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 21, 2007 @ 2:46 pm - December 21, 2007

  19. I discovered this site a few years ago deliberately, from a search for gay conservative blogs. I visited fairly often for a time, but only rarely do I drop in today. I’m a liberal gay, and in principle I see nothing wrong with being a conservative gay. However, there seems to be an attitude which informs the opinions of the authors of this blog which I find repulsive. This attitude is summed up quite well in this direct quote from above, about a book by Bruce Bawer:

    “He suggested that the “vociferous emphasis on ‘gay pride’” was a sign “that, deep down, many subculture-oriented gays don’t really have very much pride in themselves as individuals; for it would never occur to an individual with pride in himself to feel a need for group-oriented pride.” And this wonderful line: “I hate to see people cocooning themselves in victimhood and straightacketing themselves in stereotype.”

    I live in the Deep South, a place where it’s not at all difficult to find conservative gays. Of the ones I know I’d say that most, but certainly not all, share Mr. Bawer’s views about Gay Pride.

    I don’t get it. What’s wrong with the word “pride”? Why would anyone assume it’s used pretensiously, or even literally? Is it possible to be aware of the gay pride movement and be unaware of the religious right movement and its attempts to portray gays as shameful and immoral? If you find our use of the word “pride” so objectionable, what other available antonym of the word “shame” would you have us employ?

    I appreciate the inclusion of the Andrew Sullivan quote, and from what I remember of this blog I don’t find it at all surprising that the writer appears to make no connection between it and the gay pride condemnation just above. In the quote, Sullivan gets to the heart of gay identity. The gay rights movement is often criticized as being somehow less important than the African-American civil rights movement of the 1950s and ’60s. The observation is often made that gays (or white gays, anyway) were never forced to endure the indignities of segregation, they were never denied service at restaurants and hotels, they were never denied the vote, they were never enslaved, etc., etc. While all of that is true, the only thing it proves is that whatever the similarities might be, the black liberation movement and the gay liberation movement each evolved in response to different injustices. Certainly, gays have not been subject to the same sort of public indignities that have been suffered by African-Americans. But I daresay that any black child who was ever ridiculed, belittled or otherwise shamed because of his or her race could, at the very least, count on a sympathetic hearing of his experience from his mom, dad, sisters, brother and friends. That’s not true for gay kids. Not at all. Not until, as Sullivan points out, they find that first gay friend. And even when the child finds that friend, he or she will likely still feel great anxiety over what might happen when his or her family discovers the child’s secret.

    But finding that first true friend is crucially important. For many – but obviously not all – of us, finding that friend begins the process by which a gay person learns that, with regard to homosexuality, there is absolutely nothing to be ashamed of. And thus we begin looking for ways to counter the shame with which society wishes to tag us, because we’ve discovered that we do indeed have just as much right as anyone else to feel pride in ourselves!

    Comment by berberry — December 22, 2007 @ 8:29 pm - December 22, 2007

  20. Because, burberry, what a “gay pride” parade shows is that what gays are proud of is their ability to dress and act lewdly and have public promiscuous sex.

    And if that’s not what being gay is all about, why in the hell are you putting that out as “gay pride”? Call it what it is, which is a sex and lewdness fair, and leave gay out of it.

    But without the sex and lewdness, “Pride” wouldn’t be much use; it would be just a bunch of everyday normal people, and that wouldn’t do at all for the people in the “gay community” who need being gay as an excuse to cover up their socially-unacceptable behavior.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 22, 2007 @ 9:13 pm - December 22, 2007

  21. “Because, burberry, what a “gay pride” parade shows is that what gays are proud of is their ability to dress and act lewdly and have public promiscuous sex.”

    People have promiscuous sex in Dallas’ Gay Pride parades? I’ve been to the one in Atlanta and I didn’t see anyone having sex, promiscuous or otherwise, so I guess things are different in Texas.

    Also, you seem to have missed the fact that I was responding to an assertion that gays are somehow lacking in pride because they embrace “group pride”. The blog post that spawned this comment thread didn’t mention anything about people having sex in Gay Pride parades.

    Comment by berberry — December 22, 2007 @ 9:28 pm - December 22, 2007

  22. The “pride” phenomenon draws flack from the Left, too. When I was a Marxist, my uh comrades (don’t laugh!) belittled the concept. Gay freedom – a raw, unapologetic self-assertion that demanded more than the right to merely sexual liberty – was what we postured for. The “elders” to whom I apprenticed myself in the early 90s had apprenticed themselves to the most radical gay activists of the early 70s. (This was a Marxist complaint against “pride,” mind you, not a “queer” one – but that’s another story.)

    Comment by Jeremayakovka — December 23, 2007 @ 5:38 am - December 23, 2007

  23. Following Sullivan’s own text (as quoted by GPW), his point was that until and unless other people affirm the gay person’s sexually-gay self (that Sullivan posits the gay person to be hiding), the gay person “can[’t] really exist at all” – in whatever sense ‘existence’ counts, for Sullivan. That’s not a universal point about friendship. It’s more the viewpoint of a needy child, and/or of… well… of someone who defines his identity or personhood by his sexuality.

    ILC, I didn’t get that from the quote given in that post. But even if it was, I don’t fully disagree with it. I look at it this way. If a straight kid or adult was belittled by his “friend” for being straight, and for expressing his interest in the opposite sex, I could see the straight person no longer wanting to be friends with the individual in question, while at the same time saying the straight person doesn’t necessarily define his identity by his sexuality. I haven’t read Sullivan’s book, so maybe he goes well beyond that, as your later quote suggests.

    P.S. And my own point is this: Life is tough for everyone. Everyone has problems. Everyone has a ‘deepest self’ that they feel a need to hide: some from shame, some from unjustified pride, and some from virtue or justified pride. Everyone’s first real friend is extremely significant. Long story short: Real gay people grow up, get over their personal drama and stop trying to sneer (however subtly and ‘artistically’) at non-gays.

    I agree that we all have our crosses to bear. I just believe being gay shouldn’t be one of them any more than it is for being straight. In reality that’s not the case yet for most people still while growing up. And I agree that wallowing in victimhood doesn’t help, while striving to succeed in spite of it is the way to go.

    I didn’t believe the “smears”, because (dirty secret) I was a fairly liberal Democrat at the time.

    I’ve always been somewhat of a moderate, but back then I leaned more to the right. And even then I believed back then that Thomas was not a good choice for the Supreme Court and should not have been confirmed. However, I was opposed (and still am) with the shameful way the proceedings occurred.

    Comment by Pat — December 23, 2007 @ 8:15 am - December 23, 2007

  24. “He suggested that the “vociferous emphasis on ‘gay pride’” was a sign “that, deep down, many subculture-oriented gays don’t really have very much pride in themselves as individuals; for it would never occur to an individual with pride in himself to feel a need for group-oriented pride.” And this wonderful line: “I hate to see people cocooning themselves in victimhood and straightacketing themselves in stereotype.”

    Berberry, I think the key word here is “vociferous” in your quote of Bruce Bawer. Personally I have no problem in “gay pride.” However, as Bawer suggests in the quote, too much of it becomes problematic. But by not placing too much emphasis on gay pride while also having pride in oneself, one can look at gay pride events and take what good they can from it, and discard the things that one may not agree with or find distasteful. I think the ultimate goal is to reach the point where gay pride parades are no longer needed. I don’t believe we reached that point yet, but we’re getting there.

    Comment by Pat — December 23, 2007 @ 8:22 am - December 23, 2007

  25. Having pride in oneself seems so artificial and inauthentic.

    I mean when have you ever heard of other people go “I’m going to have pride in my self today”

    No… forget that . you want to have authentic pride in yourself?

    Get over your childhood. Realize it* wasn’t your fault. And in most situations, it wasnt your parents fault either. Realize that nobody owes you a damn thing. And other people are not as obssesed with you faggotry as you are.

    * it = the traumas/dramas/ordeals that you’re still holding onto as you simmer in anger and resentment

    Comment by Vince P — December 23, 2007 @ 9:04 am - December 23, 2007

  26. my use of “you” in my last statement was not directed to anyone in particular.

    Comment by Vince P — December 23, 2007 @ 9:06 am - December 23, 2007

  27. To get back on topic – some of the best gay fiction I’ve read in a while includes the following titles (sorry, can’t remember the authors):

    California Screaming

    Blood Moon

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — December 23, 2007 @ 10:31 pm - December 23, 2007

  28. […] save for the works of Jim Grimsley (which I discuss briefly here), I don’t recall finding the characters of many gay novels going on any kind of interior […]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Bad Gay Fiction & the Absence of Introspection — April 24, 2009 @ 7:17 pm - April 24, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.