Crossposting a new story

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

Title: Hanged Man (192k)
Author: Speranza
Pairing: F/K, duh

He's in the middle of playing "bad cop" to Huey's "good cop" when he catches a glimpse of himself in the room's two-way mirror. He's wearing tan slacks, his own brown-flecked sportsjacket and Fraser's red tie, and maybe showing up at work in your partner's clothes ain't exactly a hot ticket to Inconspicuous-ville.

Comments

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

Thank you, thank you Jodie!!

Observation

[(Anonymous)]

Just about every dS word Speranza's every written is at the top of my favourites list, so ::no hope of not going overboard with the gushing here: the thing is - it's the observation of just how insidiously corrupting the need for secrecy is, in the face of prejudice - real or assumed - how it risks poisoning the very relationship you're trying to protect. Like when Ray feels he's killed Fraser a little when he laughs with Dewey about their being 'real' cops, unlike the Canadians. Like the way they have to deal in The Bodyguard. And then, the combination of that hard, hurting reality with equally real aspects that are funny, and that are hot. Thank a dozen deities there's a happy ending, they deserve one (and we need one)! Many thanks.
Heliophile

Re: Observation

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

I don't know if this comment was "meant" for me--I'm really wary of intruding on reader-to-reader conversations not meant for the author (yes, Anne Rice, I'm looking at you! *g*) but I wanted to say that this: it's the observation of just how insidiously corrupting the need for secrecy is, in the face of prejudice - real or assumed - how it risks poisoning the very relationship you're trying to protect. is one of my favorite comments ever. *g* Thank you SO much for that!

Re: Observation

[(Anonymous)]

well, um, yes, actually - comment intended for the readership in general and the author in particular (with great admiration); it's something that I've noticed you engage with very skilfully, and I love that you are able to address something so painful in the context of fiction which is often so affirming and joyful. Wierdly, I was listening to a radio chat show yesterday (the theme was the recent spate of violently homophobic music coming out of Jamaica) on which one of the callers said something that almost EXACTLY mirrored an observation of Fraser's in The Bodyguard - society just might 'let' you be gay, but only if you're completely celibate and your gayness completely invisible - except that the caller actually wanted it that way, and thought she was being very magnanimous at that. (tried to call the show, but they were closed for calls, dammit!) Rather live in your world any day.
So anyway, tempted to haver on and on about parallels between homophobia and other self-fulfilling prejudices but had better stop rabbiting and just say THANK YOU for your writing, I love it and can't wait for more.
all best wishes,
Heliophile

[merelyn.livejournal.com]

Eee! Something new from you! I'm such a fan of your dS stuff. Heck, I practically fell off my chair when I found out about this story. :) I loved it! It was gorgeous. Of course I loved it.

And maybe I'm just reading the wrong thing into it, but this story reminded me vaguely of Maurice. You know, with the suit and the hotel and the hair in the beginning, and the themes, and the Canada thing at the end. 'Kay I'm going to stop blathering now. :)

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

And maybe I'm just reading the wrong thing into it, but this story reminded me vaguely of Maurice. You know, with the suit and the hotel and the hair in the beginning, and the themes, and the Canada thing at the end.

LOL--well, okay, wow. First of all, I'm a huge fan of Maurice, novel and film, which I've taught about 150 million times. And in a way, ALL of DS is like Maurice--I've often wanted to do an exact AU with RayV as Clive, Fraser as Maurice, and Kowalski as Alec Scudder--i.e. Clive turns Maurice on to his own sexuality but then can't/won't follow through (and in the novel, Clive really is heterosexual, in that he "outgrows" his homosexual experimentation phase; his heterosexuality is really an intellectual/spiritual thing) and a desperate Maurice then is overwhelmed by Alec, and then they have to escape society to go be "woodsmen." So YES, TOTALLY, DS is Maurice!

That being said, I don't necessarily think that this story is more Maurice-like than my typical DS story, but I'm maybe not the judge of that. Like I said, to me there's a ton of overlap between Fraser-RayK and Maurice/Scudder, but in my perfect version, you'd have the RayV/Clive element too.

Still, I'm so thrilled that you see the confluence the way I do!! Or that I've got anything Mauricelike in my stories at all! Thanks SO much for this comment!

[merelyn.livejournal.com]

I really like what you said about Clive's "heterosexuality"- that was always the part in the book that's confused me the most. Even though in the movie it's more clear that Clive is bowing to societal pressures and repressing himself, for some reason that explanation never sat entirely well with me as regards the book. *shrug* I'm probably just be stupid about it.

I've often wanted to do an exact AU with RayV as Clive, Fraser as Maurice, and Kowalski as Alec Scudder...

*drools* Dear God, if you ever wrote this, I think I would probably be able to die happy.

I don't necessarily think that this story is more Maurice-like than my typical DS story

You're probably right. I guess since I just reread part of it, Maurice was kind of on my mind. :)

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

This is probably more than you want to know, but...

Vis a vis Clive, the movie's idea of him as a repressed homosexual reflects much more of an 80s mentality about biological homosexuality rather than Forster's early 20th century public school, homosocial environment in which LOTS of men might go though a "homosexual experimentation phase" but most "grow out" of it. This results in real heartbreak for the men who don't, in Forster's view. So in the book, Clive genuinely wakes up and isn't "homosexual" anymore. The film, made 60 years later, can't process that worldview and so makes up a rationale--closeting and repression--that will make sense to an audience more convinced that sexuality is fixed.

Me, I'm a post-biological theorist and I don't believe that sexuality is that fixed. So I tend to find Forster's original view--that people can have different sexualities in different contexts--more interesting than the flat, 1980s biological perspective.

More than you wanted to know, I'm SURE. *G*

[merelyn.livejournal.com]

Thanks! And no, it's not more than I wanted to know at all! I really appreciate that- it clears up a lot for me. I guess, when considering it, I sort of forgot to check my modern view of sexuality at the door. Very interesting, though. :)

Personally, I've always liked the movie explanation more, but not because I believe that sexuality is fixed. Rather, I have no problem with a more fluid view of sexuality, but, as a diehard slasher (and a gay one at that), I must admit what really bothers me is that Clive goes from being "homosexual" to being "heterosexual", instead of the other way around. ;)

One of these days, I'm going to stop looking at the world through slash colored glasses. I swear.

*Whew*

[keldaryth.livejournal.com]

Sweet. But then, your stories generally are top of the line :) I don't hang around waiting for one, really I don't!

I swear I'll write something to compare... Eventually...that's a goal...

Seriously, this is amazing, gritty, realistic and...well...damn inspiring.

Kudos to you - and thanks for a great read.