Queereaders discussion

Hi, my book Jalendu will be free on Amazon Kindle store on the 24th of May 2015.

"Jalendu" is historical fiction set in medieval India which incorporates a love story involving two young men.

It has an Apollonian Dionysian dichotomy subtext to the love story. I hope readers will see that and appreciate its spirituality or psychological insights.

The book is about 220,000 words, so it is quite read. I hope it will appeal to the more thoughtful intellectual (gay) reader who may identify with Adinath.

It is very sentimental in places. I often cried reading it, even though I wrote it (hahaha).

The book is set in North India, and the story is interwoven with real historical events between the battle of Orchha in 1594 (after which Vir Singh Deo became an ally of Prince Salim, later the Mughal Emperor Jahangir) and the execution of Abul Fazl ibn Mubarak, the Imperial vizier.

The book includes a glossary of Hindustani (Hindi/Urdu) words that are scattered throughout the book as well as a list of all the characters mentioned by name. In the eBook, I have put in links to the Wikipedia articles for the non-fictional characters which may be of interest to students of Indian Mughal history.

Jalendu can be downloaded for Kindle from the Amazon Kindle store.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00X2L4TBA

Remember, FREE on Sunday the 24th of May 2015.

Thanks Mark. I met you in the HF group and had this to-read. Have just finished an essay on Akbar so feel I've earnt a novel with him in my holidays.

I'm glad you're doing 'thoughtful, intelligent', weighty historical fiction with gay mains. I have a gay main love story in my Mongol books, that aren't adventure-style either but at the weighty end. How have you found the journey, with publishing, audience and other issues?

Hi Bryn. I would be very interested in your essay on Akbar. Do you ever edit Wikipedia? I noticed some time ago that the Wikipedia article on Akbar has had a large section inserted that is quite faithful to the script of a well known Bollywood movie, but not so much to history.

My book is my first book and I wrote it for the enjoyment of doing it. I didn't have any real audience in mind and I see that that probably significantly limits its appeal as well as makes its genre cloudy.

It is three things.

1. Historical fiction, and perhaps speculative history.
2. A love story.
3. An exploration of an ontological question.

The ontological question is explored in Jalendu's conversations with his guru, through the retelling of an well known Hindu myth (the churning of the cosmic sea of milk), but I think most importantly in the relationship between the two lovers.

It has two very explicit sex scenes, which are probably insufficient for someone reading the book for those alone. I did consider toning them down but they are still there.

It was edited by myself alone and I know of several typos that have remained undetected by me.

I had heard authors talk about their characters developed a life of their own but I did not realise how true that is until I had gone through this process of writing my own. In early versions, I had Gopala asking Jalendu/Jali to do things that as their relationships and personalities developed, I found I could never ask of them.

I do hope some people like it and that I don't disappoint too many others.

Hi Mark.
I'm tempted to find out how to edit Wiki: the entry on Genghis Khan, who is my main, is one of its low-standard entries.

I like chatting with you because I faced a few of the same things. Don't worry about your sex scenes, I think, explicit is common in any kind of novel that doesn't exclude sex for one reason or another. But my love story -- gay as it is, and the main emotional relationship of my Temujin (is that daring? Genghis Khan, main emotional relationship, gay? I don't know, not enough people have read it) -- is among so much other content that no-one can read the novel just for the love story. This leads me to wonder who my audience is?

I didn't/don't write with an audience in mind, either. I have to say, post-publication, I don't know how to find my audience, whom I have faith is out there.

'Makes its genre cloudy': fantastic. Keep doing that. You edited yourself: against what writers tell each other on a site like this, it's perfectly doable, if you have enough patience to go through it enough times.

My most explicit sex scene, however, is between female hedgehogs. Because it's what they do.

Hi Bryn. What is the name of that book?

Which book, mate? -- You're in Sydney, I just noticed. I lived in Sydney until recently.

I meant your book about Temujin?

Yes, I have lived in Sydney since 2008. I was born and raised in Wollongong.

I'm in Ulladulla now.
I only have the one work, Amgalant, ongoing.
It starts with Amgalant One: The Old Ideal. Then I split this into two in order to offer #1 free. So you can find #1 Of Battles Past free in every shop, I hope, but the love story kicks in with #2 When I am King.

Oh I like the Caravaggio on the cover of #1. Did you know the severed head is supposed to be a self portrait? Also, the David appears in several of his paintings and was probably his lover.

:)
Yes... I heard differently; I heard that both are seen as self-portraits. That may be wrong, that may be speculation -- I don't know too much about Caravaggio. I did choose the picture with the double self-portrait in mind, though. It's a fascinating idea, a portrait of self as a young man with one's present head. I hope I remember the ramifications for my fiction; I knew at the time I chose it.

I see from Wiki that these are the two ideas current:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_wi...

That is very interesting. I do recall the double portraits theory now that you remind me. There are a number of good and not so good biographies of Caravaggio. The best of those I have read is simply called "M". (I would find a link but I'm currently using the app).

M by Peter Robb

I have heard of M. M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio.
Can I say I liked the movie? Derek Jarman. No idea of its value but my main exposure to Caravaggio.

D'oh! That's what I get for not checking all my groups regularly. Missed it by a day...