03-14-2002, 12:16 PM
A review I found<br>
<br>
Rogue Roman<br>
By Lance Horner<br>
The name says it all, really. I mean... LANCE HORNER??? Such an unlikely and yet totally suitable name, it really sets the tone for the rest of this wretched heap of reeking filth, sorry, FILTH. As some of you may be aware (even if you don't admit to it), Mr Horner is quite famous for being one half of the tacky twosome that wrote 'Mandingo', and a whole slew of other sleazy southern sex-and-slavely sagas. For years I laboured under the misapprehension that the other half was KYLIE Onsett, a woman, and I thought that it was perfectly normal, you know, a man and a woman writing dirty books together, half their luck. Imagine my surprise, then, when I read the introduction, and found that it is, in fact, KYLE Onsett... a BLOKE (and a right pr@%k he seems too). Anyway, the introduction is where the problems start. 'I am happy to recommend this book for those who care for a full-blooded, lusty tale of adventure. It is not for the prudish', but for those readers who can endure the truth, it will provide the same thrilling experience it did for me' and a whole lot of other c#*p in a similar vein, stressing the 'truth' and 'candour' of the 'stimulating' novel. Get the picture?<br>
<br>
Yes, it's a what-we-used-to-call-at-school 'stick-book', but it's still got big problems. Written in 1965, the author can't seem to decide of it's literature masquerading as pornography, or pornography masquerading as literature, as he uses a bizarre array of coy metaphors like 'magic mandrake root', 'the argonaut's mast' and my own favourite, 'the brazen-headed battering-ram of Caesar's legions', instead of the more direct and easily understood 'd~%k'! Indeed, the overall purpleness of the prose tends to obscure what is actually going on. Not a lot does go on, aside from a lot of brazen ram work, and the few little snippets of historical 'fact' are so ludicrous as to be laughable. The hero, Cleon, astonishingly good looking and a red-hot goer, ends up rescuing the empress Octavia, substituting a dead maidservant's corpse and running off with her (Octavia) and a couple of his gladiator (what else?) buddies, presumably to live happily ever after. Did I mention that he was r**ting Octavia (brazenly) before he rescued her? I can't bear to go into more detail on the so-called plot, most of which I've already forgotten, but suffice it to say, I saw no evidence of the 'truth', 'candour' or 'thrills' touted by MR Onsett in his introduction. An utter waste of time, not even bad enough to be funny, the only thing this book has going for it is the fact that it wasn't successful enough to warrant a sequel.<br>
<br>
<br>
1 The Editors have censored this review so it is suitable for the prudish. The book really is unmitigated crap, though.<br>
<br>
The Hon. S Cunningham Esq.<br>
<br>
from<br>
<br>
www.geocities.com/Athens/...RogueRoman<br>
<p></p><i></i>
<br>
Rogue Roman<br>
By Lance Horner<br>
The name says it all, really. I mean... LANCE HORNER??? Such an unlikely and yet totally suitable name, it really sets the tone for the rest of this wretched heap of reeking filth, sorry, FILTH. As some of you may be aware (even if you don't admit to it), Mr Horner is quite famous for being one half of the tacky twosome that wrote 'Mandingo', and a whole slew of other sleazy southern sex-and-slavely sagas. For years I laboured under the misapprehension that the other half was KYLIE Onsett, a woman, and I thought that it was perfectly normal, you know, a man and a woman writing dirty books together, half their luck. Imagine my surprise, then, when I read the introduction, and found that it is, in fact, KYLE Onsett... a BLOKE (and a right pr@%k he seems too). Anyway, the introduction is where the problems start. 'I am happy to recommend this book for those who care for a full-blooded, lusty tale of adventure. It is not for the prudish', but for those readers who can endure the truth, it will provide the same thrilling experience it did for me' and a whole lot of other c#*p in a similar vein, stressing the 'truth' and 'candour' of the 'stimulating' novel. Get the picture?<br>
<br>
Yes, it's a what-we-used-to-call-at-school 'stick-book', but it's still got big problems. Written in 1965, the author can't seem to decide of it's literature masquerading as pornography, or pornography masquerading as literature, as he uses a bizarre array of coy metaphors like 'magic mandrake root', 'the argonaut's mast' and my own favourite, 'the brazen-headed battering-ram of Caesar's legions', instead of the more direct and easily understood 'd~%k'! Indeed, the overall purpleness of the prose tends to obscure what is actually going on. Not a lot does go on, aside from a lot of brazen ram work, and the few little snippets of historical 'fact' are so ludicrous as to be laughable. The hero, Cleon, astonishingly good looking and a red-hot goer, ends up rescuing the empress Octavia, substituting a dead maidservant's corpse and running off with her (Octavia) and a couple of his gladiator (what else?) buddies, presumably to live happily ever after. Did I mention that he was r**ting Octavia (brazenly) before he rescued her? I can't bear to go into more detail on the so-called plot, most of which I've already forgotten, but suffice it to say, I saw no evidence of the 'truth', 'candour' or 'thrills' touted by MR Onsett in his introduction. An utter waste of time, not even bad enough to be funny, the only thing this book has going for it is the fact that it wasn't successful enough to warrant a sequel.<br>
<br>
<br>
1 The Editors have censored this review so it is suitable for the prudish. The book really is unmitigated crap, though.<br>
<br>
The Hon. S Cunningham Esq.<br>
<br>
from<br>
<br>
www.geocities.com/Athens/...RogueRoman<br>
<p></p><i></i>
In the name of heaven Catiline, how long do you propose to exploit our patience..
