Gentle Readers, have you ever wished that someone would write a modern Pride and Prejudice tale in which Mr Darcy and Colonel Fitzwilliam are very masculine and commanding and convince Elizabeth Bennet to engage in a threesome with the approval of her entire family? No? Neither have Miss Kenton or Oofy Prosser. And yet, here they are, reviewing One Good Man or Two by LisaKZ.

Modern, Explicit (sex), AU, WIP at The Bloom and Quill

Oofy Prosser: You know, Miss Kenton, when we received the email request to review this story, I thought (in a masculine and commanding way): We have a fan! And then almost immediately after I began reading the story, my reaction changed to: Our fan hates us! Still very masculinely and commandingly, of course.

Miss Kenton: Oofy! Our fan could never hate us! Presumably, this individual is seeking like-minded readers who will have a comment on this story that does not use an emoticon of a giant fan and which refrains from requesting more sexy bits. I think we can provide that!

Alas, being female, I’m not able to contribute very much to this review. Though I will obviously agree with everything you say, you dear, strong, commanding man. Why, I suddenly have a feeling that you might even know me better than I do! As it is, I barely have an original thought! Oh! My brain! The thinking! It hurts!

OP: There, there, Miss Kenton. Once you come to understand that I know what it is you need and desire better than you do, all the pain will go away. Allow me to make you some tea, and let me reassure you that it contains absolutely no mind-altering substances whatsoever!

MK: Wow, I’m not sure what came over me. It was like the very idea of being assertive was offensive to my femininity. I wonder if that’s how that character named Elizabeth Bennet felt during this entire story?

OP: I believe you might be right. Then again, that character named Elizabeth Bennet didn’t seem to have much of a personality of any sort, let alone an assertive one. I admit that I did have a little more sympathy for her after learning that her entire life experience had consisted of controlling men who treated her like a child. Still, I think that says more about how the author views women than anything else. If this were written by a man I would almost understand it. I’d still be enraged, but I’d almost understand. As it is, she reminded me very much of one of the ‘dolls’ from Joss Whedon’s series Dollhouse, in her ‘doll’ state: vapid, placid, and extremely creepy.

MK: Actually, I think those dolls might have more personality than “Elizabeth”.

You know, that leads pretty well into the Why people might like this story: This is not a romance. This is the (poorly written) screenplay for a horror film. So if that is your thing, this story is for you! It really would make SO much more sense that way. We could all just wait for the masks and chainsaws to come out. Maybe the title should have been “One Good Man or Two Serial Killers”? Wait, I forgot about the other two guys. Which of her four creepy stalkers is going to kill Elizabeth Bennet?

OP: A very astute observation. I admit that I frequently felt the urge to shout, “Run, Elizabeth! Don’t go into the house/get in the car/drink that beverage he just gave you! Get out! Get out now!”

MK: Well, unfortunately, despite reacting to it like A Nightmare on Elm Street, the author has decided it is an “erotic romance”. I’m not sure I know what that means. So, Oofy, if you were going to summarize this plot in one sentence, what would it be?

OP: There was a plot? Oh, you do like to challenge me, Miss Kenton! How about: Like a modern version of Gigi but without Maurice Chevalier to give it a hint of whimsy.

No? You’re right, Gigi was actually a lot less creepy. Let me try again: William Darcy, rich, powerful, and hung like an ox, fixates on a young Elizabeth Bennet, stalking her for several years before ultimately entering into a coercive, manipulative, and infantalising relationship with her (and his cousin!) until she succumbs to Stockholm Syndrome. In mind-numbingly tedious detail. (That’s a sentence and a half. Do forgive me.)

MK: Considering that “Elizabeth” overlooks a lot more than elaborating on a plot in this story, I think you can be forgiven for that minor offense.

OP: Thou art a gracious lady. But, see, it’s actually a very post-modern deconstruction of the ways in which male sexual predation is normalised into ‘romance’ in society at large and particularly in narratives aimed at women, who are socialised into believing that passivity and accessibility to men are two of the most important traits they can possess!

Either that or it’s just really, really gross and bad. Difficult to tell.

MK: Interesting. I thought you’d delve more into the sexual-fantasy-as-plot realm and mention that it seems like this story is trying to both fulfill the goal of making female pleasure the object of every sexual encounter (without bothering to create an assertive female protagonist who understands her own sexuality) and creating an atmosphere in which a woman must rely on male protagonists to not only inform her that she is allowed to take pleasure in sex, but also orchestrate these encounters and control her via that sexuality.

Of course, I also think an alternate title for this story could be: “Watching Main Characters Make Poor Decisions Regarding Personal Safety and Healthy Relationships”.

OP: I think you’ve hit the proverbial nail on its proverbial head, Miss Kenton. One of the (many!) problems of the story is that while it purports to be all about “Elizabeth” and her sexual desires, we are constantly reminded that she apparently doesn’t know about or understand those desires. At least not until Darcy shows up and starts telling her about them. So, while we’re told that the object of the story is female sexual pleasure, what we’re shown in the narrative is that female sexual pleasure is only definable by a man. In the guise of “caring for” Elizabeth, what these men actually do is strip her of her agency and treat her like a child.

And so, I put it to you: why is it that when writers try to create a hero they so often end up with a dude who regards women as creatures (dolls, playthings, choose your own noun!) who must be cared for and whose needs and preferences he knows better than they do? As a masculine and commanding man, I am affronted by these representations of my gender!

MK: I don’t know the answer to that riddle, Oofy, but I do know that there were no fewer than four, no, five, of those men in this story. Including a father-figure.

Right, though, we haven’t actually mentioned What Happens In This Story. That is because nothing happens.

Okay, I’m lying! A lot of stuff happens, but not much of it makes sense. Don’t say we didn’t warn you!

1. We are introduced to some characters. We are not told much about them, but we are given their backstory in nonsensical fragments all the way up until (at least) the middle of the narrative.
2. Women engage in questioning Elizabeth Bennet about four men she (and we) have just met. These four men engage in various criminal activities ranging from breaking and entering to sexual harassment (and you could make a case for sexual assault if you define that pretty broadly).
3. There is a fancy party! There is almost some kind of conflict, but alas, no. Darcy and Elizabeth do the Argentine Tango. No, we are not joking about this.
4. Then there are some other Manly Responses To Things (and possible use of mind-altering substances to coerce a female into sleeping with a man).
5. A (possibly) consensual sexual act occurs, during which “her mind looking deep into its recesses to visually see in her head what he was doing, like so many romance novels she had read.” (Yeah. Our minds looked deep into our heads to see why we were reading this story.)
6. Mr. Bennet says some creepy shit.
7. Oofy and Miss Kenton give up on trying to make sense of anything and start writing this review.

 

OP: We stopped at the end of chapter 14 because we simply couldn’t take any more of the horror without gouging out our own eyes!

The story features a complete lack of any kind of conflict that would make this a real plot. Instead, the author tries too hard to manufacture drama, invents plot after the fact, and succeeds in serving up melodrama rather than convincing motivations amongst the characters.

MK: Speaking of those characters, we’ve mentioned them briefly, but we should probably tell people why this story isn’t just made up of a bad plot. It also has terrible characters!

OP: Indeed it does. It’s a veritable smorgasbord of terribleness. And while it’s ostensibly about Elizabeth, in reality it’s much more about teh menz. Allow me to introduce you. Firstly, we have William Darcy: protagonist, sexual predator, doer of some undisclosed business (perhaps the mafia? It would explain so much!), and whisperer in every circumstance. Next, Richard Fitzwilliam, cousin, also a sexual predator, super secret (and super shitty) investigator of things; possibly a CIA agent, we’re not sure. Both men are the requisite gorgeous, manly, commanding, strong, and incredibly well hung specimens.

MK: I think they are supposed to make us swoon? Isn’t that what manly men do? Cause mass swooning? Also, is this “worldly experience” of Darcy’s a code for polyamory? Because I didn’t get that memo. I thought it meant he liked sushi. Or hookahs.

OP: Or has been outside of Texas, or wherever-the-hell this story is set? Your guess is as good as mine, Miss Kenton!

Moving on to slightly less worldly men, we have George Wickham, a long-time crush of Elizabeth’s and serial dater. He has a shady past that’s hinted at but never revealed. He’s relegated to loserdom by Elizabeth after one encounter with Darcy, presumably in which the latter exercised some sort of mind control.

In a daring change of pace from the original, the William Collins of this story is a former lover of Elizabeth’s. Although they’ve broken up, he’s determined to have her for his bride so that he can take over the family business (which is never actually described, so I’m still going with mafia) upon the death of Papa Bennet. While initially a Voice of Reason, his behaviour ultimately forces our heroine into the creepy arms of her would-be lovers.

MK: I actually felt sympathetic to Bill Collins in the beginning of this story. Actual empathy for him, because he seems to be the only one making a rational plea for Elizabeth to not go off with Stalker Pants and the dialogue seems at least semi-genuine compared to the train wreck of words going on everywhere else. Then, he inexplicably became Evil, and I was forced to hate the only character I actually liked. Le sigh.

OP: It’s very perplexing. I also initially thought Wickham was a fairly sympathetic sort of character. Obnoxious, I grant you, but nowhere near as awful as Stalker Pants.

Anyway, back to Mr Bennet, he is also, and by now unsurprisingly, creepy, controlling and manipulative. There must be something in the water there. His role appears to be to provide context as to why Elizabeth does not notice how creepy all the other men in the story are.

Lastly, we have Charles Bingley. And we can’t quite work out why he’s here at all.

MK: We can’t forget about the fairer sex! Elizabeth is supposedly a professional woman who has graduated from college, at which point she apparently lost all ability for independent thought and became the unwitting pawn in the romantic and political games of the men in her life. Also, she is completely unaware of things going on around her. This happens throughout the story: she is surprised when people touch her, she doesn’t realize when she wakes up in the same bed as two other people. (And really, who wouldn’t notice that after sleeping alone?) Most people know when someone comes up behind them! Isn’t it some kind of evolutionary mechanism that keeps us from getting killed? Apparently Darcy overrides evolutionary behavior. Just another one of his awesome abilities.

OP: This facet of her personality (and I use that term loosely) reminds me a lot of how Reasoning with Vampires refers to the main character of the Twilight Saga: “least observant narrator ever”. In fact, a lot of the tags over at RwV could be applied to this story. Mayhap the author here has been to the Stephenie Meyer School of Authorship and Fail.

MK: Add some fangs and you’ve got it, Oofy! Aside from just being clueless, Elizabeth has no agency as a character: she makes no decisions and goes along with whatever Darcy or Fitzwilliam suggest. As a reader, I can’t understand her, I’m not sympathetic to her, and I don’t agree with her attraction to any of the men in the story.

Let’s see, other women… there must be some, right? This story can’t only be about men, can it?

Oh, yes! Jane! A character who is usually sensible, sweet, and believes the best of people. Apparently, that means that she’s ignorant of warning signs leading to sexual assault. Failing that, Jane’s just a real bitch for pushing her sister to become involved with men who are harassing her. She consistently advises her sister to pursue unhealthy and potentially dangerous relationships. She’s also engaged to Charles Bingley.

OP: Oh, so that’s why he’s in the story!

MK: There’s also Elizabeth’s Best Friend, Lacey Wickham. She is, unsurprisingly, George Wickham’s younger sister. In this story, she: makes several phone calls, appears in club scenes, and then is never heard from again. She is, however, referenced occasionally.

Mrs. Bennet shows up, mainly to “flutter around” which could mean that she has wings. Also, she’s an alcoholic, at least at fancy parties, which is (obviously) a source of amusement. Let’s all laugh at her!

Lastly, Lydia Bennet. She pops up to serve as a plot device by kissing (kissing!) that nasty George Wickham, to the horror of her sisters, who are either engaged to a non-entity, or unaware that they are in relationships with not one, but two, sexual predators.

OP: Also, Lydia is moving to California, which clearly means that according to the guidelines in the Good Father Handbook, Mr. Bennet will have her followed by a private investigator.

MK: This family seems completely unable to look past inconsequential problems in order to identify actual criminal behavior.

OP: They prefer to engage in criminal behaviour instead. Mafia. I’m telling you.

Okay so now let’s talk about romance! A subject near and dear to my (manly, commanding) heart. And by “romance” I mean the thing that propels this story that is not actually romance but the conflation of love with a man’s absolute control over everything a woman is doing, even down to what she wears, and that woman’s acquiescence. Whew, what a mouthful.

Listen up, people. That is not romance. In fact, unless that situation occurs in the context of a D/s relationship in which both parties have agreed on the parameters and a safeword (or have discarded the use of a safeword in cases of couples who choose to live a completely D/s lifestyle), it is completely unhealthy.

In relationships there is this thing called consent. It means that each person in the relationship gets to decide the level of his or her participation in said relationship. Consent is important! What makes this story horrifying is not simply that Elizabeth never explicitly consents to anything. It’s that she’s never even given the opportunity.

Now, I am fully on board with consensual M/F/M threesomes because that is some sexy right there. But this whole scenario here is icky, not necessarily because it’s non-consensual or dubious-consent, but because the idea of consent never even enters into it. It’s just assumed that, of course, Elizabeth will want this, whatever “this” is, because the sexy mens know her so well and love her and only want to take care of her and give her everything she deserves LIKE A DOLL OR A PET.

And another thing! Masquerading this twisted, creepy behaviour on the part of Darcy and Richard as “romantic” and then trying to sell it as the basis for a polyamorous relationship is wrong on so many levels. To be fair, the author doesn’t explicitly state that’s what she’s aiming for, but it’s all I can conclude based on the information we’re provided. Apart from being repeatedly told that Darcy isn’t bisexual, all we know is that he and Richard “share” relationships with women and engage in sexual acts with said women. Together. But they’re not into each other sexually. Right.

MK: I think we should call it what it is: misogyny. It’s misogynistic not just because of the violence and invasiveness of what Darcy and Fitzwilliam are doing (though, it’s that, too). I think one of my biggest objections is how their “romantic actions” are cloaked in being “for Elizabeth”, while their entire attitude and what passes for a plotline consists of persuading her into sex. They seem to view the sexual aspects of their relationship as transactional. The two of them (Darcy and Fitzwilliam) have decided Elizabeth will be in a sexual relationship with them, and now all that remains is to convince her to agree with that decision. I’m not reading this into the story, mind. It’s very much a part of their interactions with each other and thought processes when they are with Elizabeth. Maybe the author actually believes that wrapping it up nicely by providing things for Elizabeth, or giving her opportunities to “relax”, makes this kind of behavior perfectly acceptable. It isn’t! It is all a means to an end, really. These men want sex, and they are using these pseudo-romantic methods to get it. Elizabeth is simply an object, then, and isn’t that the essence of misogyny?

OP: Precisely. This story is actually a beautiful example of the male gaze combined with benevolent sexism. Not to mention a whole hell of a lot of various privileges. And by “beautiful” I mean appalling, obviously.

Basically, after reading this I feel like I need to go take a shower. So maybe it’s time to wind things up with some of the more technical aspects of the writing?

MK: Yes! First, let’s talk about setting. Each place the author sets a scene is just more and more improbable. A nightclub where you can whisper? Where people can see each other clearly from across the room? A spa where Darcy works on his computer and which comes equipped with outfits to buy for Elizabeth? I think my favorite is the steakhouse. The author describes it like this:

The smell of beer, peanuts, and char grilled meat assaulted their senses while the rowdy sounds of the live band on stage filled the room.

The very idea of this place (especially the smell) makes me want to throw up. Also I like that the “live band” is “on stage” just in case you thought they were roaming the restaurant like a pack of wild musicians.

OP: Or that they were a dead band. Or an undead band. A pack of wild zombie musicians! Now that would be an interesting plot twist.

Alas, no.  Because even when it’s not appalling and scary, this story is simply boring.  And badly written. It’s one thing to write a terrible story. It’s another thing to terribly write a terrible story. It might almost be called an achievement if it weren’t such a harrowing experience for the reader.

A lot of my reactions as I read this story boiled down to, “What? What? This makes no sense!” I don’t think the goal of any story is to create confusion and disbelief in its readers, and yet that’s just what this story does.

The dialogue lacks anything approaching real human speech, let alone sense. It’s full of freakishly-without-contractions monologues. I’m serious, there are almost no contractions in speech at all. Are these people all androids? Wasn’t that a plot in Star Trek: the Next Generation, that the imposter!Data used contractions and real!Data didn’t? Trying to remember the plot of an episode of a TV show I watched when I was in high school is far more interesting that actually reading this story.

MK: Some of the things the characters say to each other are completely random, even as they are meant to reinforce the Ultimate Example of Romance provided by Elizabeth and Darcy. (oh, and Richard!) For instance, this quote from Jane, on the day following her engagement to the ever-absent Charles Bingley:

“He is in love with you and I think you are falling for him. Remember that card he sent you with the flowers? God, what I wouldn’t give to have a man say those words to me. Oh, and then the dance at the Gala last night, everyone in that room saw you both. It was spellbinding to watch, like a movie. You are the luckiest girl I know, Elizabeth. Do me a favor and don’t let this man go.”

Um, Jane? Didn’t you just get engaged? What, did Bingley throw the ring at you and say “Fine! Here!”? Because one could assume that you did just have a man treat you nicely and say nice things to you. Why is Elizabeth the lucky one?

OP: There is much unintentional hilarity to be found! One of my favourite lines is courtesy of Elizabeth:

Would he think her wonton?

Would he think her a small dumpling or roll with a savory filling, often of minced pork, usually eaten boiled in soup? I don’t know! It seems strange and nonsensical, but what doesn’t in this story?

MK: Along those lines, please, dear author, learn to spell champagne. It is an entire region of France. Also it is not capitalized unless you are spilling the whole region of France on someone. I would like to see that, actually.

OP: So would I. I would like to see almost anything other than this story.

Aside from the many truly egregious spelling errors, possibly the worst aspect of the writing has to do with anatomy and incidents of sex acts. For a story that’s so focused on telling us how erotic and romantic it is, there’s (un)surprisingly little eroticism to be had. Anything that might be the slightest bit sexy (if you’d had a lobotomy and could ignore everything else) is ruined by the author’s total lack of understanding of how bodies work. Not only does it make me question whether or not she’s actually had sex, it makes me question if she’s even human.

Many of the scenarios described sound likely to result in injury at best and seem physically impossible at worst. Nerves do not work that way. Nor does the penis. Everyone has too many hands and body parts that seem to be able to detach themselves at will. It’s quite frightening, really. Also, protip: people do not find it sexy to think of their fathers when they’re supposed to be having the best sex ever with their dream woman. Just saying.

MK: Apparently this story has been proofread by at least one person. Do you think that individual just picks out the worst errors and lets the rest go? Maybe she (assuming it is a her) prints out the pages, throws a dart at them and then only fixes the paragraphs with darts in them? I am also picturing her doing this with a martini in hand. I don’t know why, but it sounds more fun that way.

OP: I don’t know why it didn’t occur to me to approach this review with “one alcoholic beverage or two”. Now that we’re done, perhaps we should go and celebrate with some champaign?

MK: Oh, Oofy, you manly, romantic, commanding man. I just love it when you offer me alcoholic beverages laced with GHB. Promise you’ll pick out some outfits for me later? I wouldn’t want to wear anything you don’t approve of!

Er, I mean, yes. I think we’ve said all we can say without repeating ourselves. Let’s go have a drink and hope it erases the effects of this atrocious story. Which, Gentle Readers, is our first to earn zero quills.