Shades of Doppelgänger: Dislike Revisited

Some things are unbelievable coincidences. Others are deliberate incidences. I’m still stuck between the two on this new conundrum: Have you ever read two books by two different authors that read like they were written by the same author? As for my former review of Fifty Shades of Gray, I suppose I should’ve aimed it at the book’s less popular, older sibling.

• Annabel Joseph’s Comfort Object, 2009
• E.L. James’s Fifty Shades of Gray, 2011

Both stories by these two different authors follow a rather disturbing and substantially similar pattern in which an obscure, desperate, “nobody” woman plays a protagonist who’s propositioned to become the slave of a wealthy, secretive, psychopath man who goes by the name of “Gray.” James’s leading hot psycho is Christian Gray; Joseph’s, Jeremy Gray.

Through the use of stalking and pretense both men manage to persuade young women into signing confidentiality agreements that stipulate they want to own the woman, treat her like a slave behind closed doors, and she must isolate herself to keep his deranged fetish a secret.

Is it a coincidence that these different authors follow the exact same path toward the destruction of female freedom and identity—or is there a formula unto which authors of this over the top genre subscribe?

There are other possibilities that possibly explain this phenomenon. It so happens that genre fiction is repetitive. Its endless tirade of new authors shamelessly revisits the same subject matter over and over again to make a buck. However, using the supernatural romance genre as an example, Laurell K. Hamilton’s vampires do not—overtly or covertly—share any of the names or psycho-social archetypes of Anne Rice’s vampires. Neither of these author’s books share anything on the verge of plagiarism with the Twilight series, either; all three merely happen to be about vampires and/or werewolves. It’s all innocent buck-making.

The only stories throughout history to share archetypes—and rarely, names of similar meaning—in such a way have been religious stories passed down through time; myths. This is how we’ve deduced the exact same thing happened to Jesus as did to Osiris as did to Mithras, and so forth: All their births were foretold and visited by wise men, all were born in December, all began their ministries around age thirty, all died and were resurrected within three days. These stories share archetypal symbolism and only differ where their respective cultures are concerned.

The similarities between Comfort Object and Shades of Gray, then, are disturbingly parallel with the similarities between these religious myths: The plots are synonymous, reverent of and cloistered around the same 2D character—the hot wealthy psychopath who singles out women to abuse for pleasure. And in both books the women comply for reasons that cut the species socially and psychologically down to consumerist, self-hating whores: They only want hot guys and lots of cash and to be yanked around on Prada brand leashes; their only power is seduction, and even that is monitored and dispensed as their hot maniac sees fit. Either this is mythos for some underground sexual cult, or one of these authors owes the other an explanation.

Will there be more books that follow the “Gray” doctrine in the future? Were there other “Gray” siblings released in 2010, in 2008, 2007, 2006? Given the parallel storylines, why did James’s book make the New York Times bestseller list while Joseph’s did not; was mainstream unprepared for it in 2009 but ready in 2011? For that matter, what’s up with the twisted Pretty Woman rip-offs being done again and again—kinky publishers or a systematic mockery of strong women?

The fact that both these books were published somewhat closely may have a deeper meaning for new writers who would make a profit. If there’s any formula it’s this: Clichéd scenarios which induce corrosive values in readers across the board—lucrative; original stylized scenarios that induce enlightenment and personal growth—burdens for which the author is scrutinized and must continually reiterate altruistic motives. Bizarro.