I really wish I could say that I liked this book, which is an anthology
of Charnas’ short fiction. She writes well, and the stories kept my
attention; there’s certainly no lack of quality here. So why did I find
them so uncongenial? I’ve been pondering this, and I’ve come up with a
number of reasons.

To begin with, there are the vampires. I like a good monster as well as
the next person, but I’m not really down with the whole psychosexual Anne
Rice vampire thing. It does nothing for me. For what it’s worth I
suppose I like Charnas’ vampires better than Rice’s.

Next, there’s the style. Although work of book-length fiction is
commonly called a “novel” these days, there’s an important distinction
between the novel proper and the romance. I don’t want to go into it in
detail here, but simply put, in a novel the action is largely internal
and in a romance the action is largely external. Many books work in both
ways, of course, and those are the ones I tend to prefer, but otherwise
I’ll take a straight romance instead of a straight novel most days of the
week.

Anyway, in my view Charnas is using romantic conventions (vampires,
werewolves, and so forth) to write stories which aren’t romances at all.
All of the important action is inward, inside the characters. I don’t say
that this is bad; but I do say that it’s not to my taste.

The third problem is exacerbated by the second, and that’s the worldview,
Charnas’ model for how the world works and how (consequently) people can
change. She and I clearly have different assumptions about some basic
things, enough that her characters feel somewhat alien to me, and the
manner in which they evolve is unconvincing. I kept founding myself
saying, “But the world isn’t like that. People aren’t like that.”
It might seem silly to lay stress on this over stories that are overt
works of fantasy, but the internal component is so important to the story
that it typically overwhelms the plot. If it doesn’t work, the story
doesn’t work. And in this case, it doesn’t mesh with my own experience
of life.

All that said, there’s some striking storytelling going on here. The
first tale extends the Phantom of the Opera; what if lovely Christine
chose the ugly Phantom over handsome Raoul? Why would she, and what
would follow from it? Another tells of a girl on the brink of womanhood
who discovers that the full moon brings out the wolf in her–and that this
offers the means to a highly desired end. Another takes place at a
performance of Tosca at the Opera House in Santa Fe, New Mexico,
during which Puccini’s music drives a vampire wild; the description was
crystal clear and almost made me wish I was there–though the plot itself
was negligible and not very interesting.

I suppose my least favorite moment comes during a story called
Peregrines, which was written just last year; its background is so
clearly a liberal nightmare of post-Bush America, and yet it’s just too
absurd. Let’s see. In this future America you need a permit from
Homeland Security to travel from one of the 50 states to another. Anyone
who looks or speaks differently than their neighbors is liable to be
taken away by Homeland Security for “questioning”; such people don’t come
back. This is all due to the victory of the Fundies, who got control
after terrorists bombed the Status of Liberty.

Now, this is all background, and most of it is superfluous to the story.
The essential thing is the specter of the secret police, which is used to
add suspense; the rest is gratuitous. The only reason I can think of for
why Charnas included it is because it seems like a real threat to her.
She really thinks that the “Fundies” want to turn to turn America into a
police state where immigrants are harassed and oppressed merely for their
looks and language.

The kicker, for me, was the reference to the terrorists bombing the
Statue of Liberty. Dude, the Statue of Liberty is a major American
landmark, sure. But the significance of September 11th isn’t that a
pair of landmarks were bombed and subsequently collapsed. The significance
of September 11th is due to the 3000 people who didn’t get out in
time–or who tried to fly.

Frankly, it rubbed me the wrong way.

Anyway, those are the reasons why I can’t say I liked the book. On the
other hand–if Charnas’ style is the kind of thing that appeals to you,
you should check it out; she definitely knows her craft.