Book Review: Aspen Meadows, by Mila Kerr

Sistren, we have an exciting announcement to make: we are going to start reviewing lesbian romance novels from time to time! YAY!!! This combines several of our favorite things: lesbian romance novels, judging things, and commenting on stupid relationship choices! Woohoo! Because some people think that their lives should be like a romance novel, and we're here to tell you that that is never going to happen. And now, on to the review! (This comes to you courtesy of Not Allured, but the review that follows is by Indigo Labrys).

IL: And I want to be very clear about the fact that I NEVER WANT MY LIFE TO BE LIKE THIS "ROMANCE NOVEL." My subtitle for Aspen Meadows is Aspen Meadows: From Kiss to Cult. I'm sorry this is so long, but on the bright side, now you never have to read this book.

Aspen Meadows - Mila Kerr

I received a copy of this book through NetGalley. Because it affected how I read this book, I think it is worthwhile to mention that it was categorized there as a lesbian romance, not as lesbian erotica, and heads-up – if you are looking for a lesbian romance, I might look elsewhere. If you are interested in f/f erotica with some D/s elements, welcome.

The premise of this book is really intriguing. Lesbian love in a planned community (::cough:: commune!) styled after 19th-century America and focused on family values? I’ll bite. Tell me more about the crazies who are building this town and why anyone who self-identifies as a lesbian would want to live in it, please! 

Unfortunately, this never really comes through in the book. The world building in Aspen Meadows could have been much stronger. It’s an interesting idea for a book that goes … absolutely nowhere. I mean, yes, they live in a crazy 19th-century style town, and it has the appropriate trappings (she has to learn how to start a fire! The word “dowry” is used, albeit incorrectly! Someone mentions bears!), but there’s nothing that really establishes why all these crazies want to relocate here, why *precisely* an open lesbian would be allowed to lead this rag-tag bunch of misfits, and what the actual realities or hardships of trying to turn back time are like. 

The same is true of the character development. We’re given seemingly contradictory information about Luna from the start; at the novel’s opening, she “told fortunes, possessed visions of the future, and swindled the average Joe. As scheming and dishonest as it may be, she convinced people she was gifted in a spiritual way.” So, she’s using people for her own financial gain and is relatively successful at it. Check. But then, a few pages later: “They wanted it [her spiritual advice] all for free, and Luna usually didn’t have it in her to push the hard sale. … Luna tried her best to give them their money’s worth. She didn’t see it as a con. She saw it as a way to give them hope.” So, I’m fine with either of these – (a) con artist with crystals or (b) soft-hearted hippie – as a basis for someone’s character, but I need to know which it is. 

Then there’s the problem of her relationship with Rylie. Even if (worst case scenario) Luna is a heartless con artist, I still wanted her to stay far away from Rylie. Here is a brief summary of the initial phases of their romance: they meet; Rylie tells Luna to stay away from her niece or else; Luna responsibly communicates this to Jade, Rylie’s niece, when she next appears at Luna’s shop; Rylie comes back, drags Luna into her truck, and starts the make-outs; heated passion ensues; Jade continues to see Luna; Rylie threatens to sue Luna and take away everything; Luna shows up at Rylie’s house, they make out, Rylie drops the law-suit and says, “Hey, so I need a caretaker for Jade, want to drop everything and move to this weird 19th-century community I’ve been planning? It’s not a cult (just an tiny little ranch without “television, media, corporations, technology, and all the things that muddle with today” that will “bring back the purity of long ago”), and I’m not going to kill you in the woods, but I need to explore this passion between us!” 

And Luna says “yes.” WTF, girl? Run away from the crazy, not towards it with open arms! (And yes, I get it’s that her passion for Luna makes her crazy, but I don’t want her to be an actual threat to Luna. That is unsexy to me.)

So their relationship really confused me. I think part of the reason for this is that hey, this isn’t actually a lesbian romance, it’s more about the sexytimes, so character development gets shortchanged. Fine. What the erotica wants to establish instead of character, I think, is a power dynamic between the two leads, and this is where the story very quickly goes. 

And let’s be clear, the power dynamic here is not in Luna’s favor. She has basically signed up for a D/s relationship without … any of the actual signing-up. I’m fine with Rylie and Luna engaging in a D/s relationship, but I want a clear articulation of both the rules and Luna’s consent to those rules. Instead, we get this:

Rylie: You read your welcome packet, right? This is old-timey America, and even though we don’t have corporations, you realize I’m technically your boss, right?

Luna: I understand that you want things “like the way they were.” (Again, a bad choice, but I get that she’s consenting to old-timey America. What is she NOT consenting to, though? See as follows).

Rylie: COOL. Welp, just so you know, you can never leave this house until I feel it’s safe. There are dangers. Like … poison ivy. And bears. 

Luna: WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, but I’m so turned on right now.

This very much sets the tone for their interactions. There’s a power dynamic at play! Rylie mentions she has demands and expectations, Luna’s all like, “Well, show me, girl!” and they make it. If the demands were just sexy-time demands, I’d be fine; Luna is pretty actively consenting to the sexin’. However, because their power dynamic is a quality of their relationship in general, I had serious issues with the fact that the rules aren’t clear for Luna from the beginning. And that sometimes, this means she gets unfairly punished. 

Let’s go to the tape, folks. For example, that time Luna rushes into a burning barn to save Rylie and maybe some animals who are there. Rylie is really upset about this – even though she does the same thing by rushing in to save Luna – and says, “It’s my job to protect you, care for you … it’s also my job to make sure you never do something so foolish again.” Rylie proceeds to berate Luna for rushing into a burning barn, but she’s also simultaneously initiating sexual intimacies with Luna, coupling a verbal punishment with a sexual one. (Luna is game for the sexy-times, but her sexual punishment is about being disciplined for breaking rules she didn’t know she was breaking at the time. Unfair.)

Also, Rylie says, “You’re lucky to be alive and not have any injuries. You could have been burned.” Buuuuuut then she begins introducing Luna to the pleasures of anal sex and says, “But after tonight, you’ll definitely feel a burn.” WHAT. THE. FUCK. The emphasis there is not even mine, let me be clear.

Let’s rephrase this.

Luna: I almost died in a fire!
Rylie: Did I hear you say “fire”? Just WAIT until I set your ASS ON FIRE.

And then Rylie proceeds to do just that. And again, let me be clear, I am not kink-shaming here, but I do want to question the use of language that recalls Luna’s near escape with death. Here is how that language functions for me as a reader as a result: it is the equivalent of watching Luna rush into that burning barn while seductively screaming, “Did somebody here order a pizza?” Because that is how that scene functions.

So those are my thoughts on Aspen Meadows. It is not a terribly good romance novel, but that is mostly because it isn’t a romance. As erotica goes, it was not for me, in that consent for me is dependent on knowing what precisely it is that I’m consenting to, and I don’t really think Luna does in the beginning. (She gets there at the end, though.) And here is another thing - while I was reading, I had two sneaking suspicions: one, that this had been originally written as a het novel, and two, that this het relationship was a clearer D/s. (Clearer because a male-protagonist’s desire for a 19th-century lifestyle complete with 19th-century morals is going to involve a desire for a different articulation of gender roles than a female-protagonist’s desire for a 19th-century lifestyle; it’s more clear what “old-fashioned” morals are going to look like for a heterosexual couple than a homosexual one.)

My suspicions that this was originally a het novel: there’s nothing about either Rylie or Luna that indicates any sort of established lesbian identity. (There’s one scene where they fight about it.) Not that this is a thing I need for a lesbian romance novel, but lesbian romance novels usually involve some focus on identity development, and that just wasn’t here. Rylie read (to me) as someone who had been written initially as a heterosexual dude and who was changed into a lesbian in a later draft. And, as it happens, I’m pretty sure this is actually what happened; the author’s alter ego (which she is very open about, so I don’t think this is a secret by any means) published a book earlier this year which is … basically the same as this book. (http://www.amazon.com/Of-Yesterday-eb...).

I found this out by reading through Alta Hensley’s (alter ego!) blog and seeing an excerpt that mentioned a character going for a night-time run (something that struck me as a particularly unlikely thing to do in Aspen Meadows, so I was surprised to see another character in a separate novel also go for a midnight run by shimmying out of her bedroom window on a sheet ladder). I’m posting a link to that here (http://altahensley.com/2013/02/love-s...). The scene is kinda the same thing, and from what I can tell, these books are remarkably similar. 

Again, not a problem, because people can do what they like, though it does strike me as slightly disingenuous. Using the word “pussy” a lot + scraping off the male pronouns from your het BDSM does not a lesbian romance novel make. But I do think that the comparison helps to articulate some of the problems I had with the book – mostly, why some of the work around consent in a D/s relationship is unclear to me & why it didn’t really feel like a lesbian romance & why the world-building really needed some work for me (like why the hell two lesbians would fantasize about a return to family values).

I didn’t really like the book, but people who like f/f erotica might.

In other news, I didn’t think the writing was particularly good (“the truck smelled like country charm, causing desire and arousal to build inside of Luna’s body;” “she wanted to feel and taste and bathe in Rylie’s sexual essence”), though, nor did I really understand Luna and Rylie’s relationship. I was also mildly creeped out by Jade’s sudden transformation from broken manic-pixie dream-girl to mature adult woman, but this was the least of my problems.