Again, please have the intellectual honesty to address your complaints to whoever the hell merits your snit-fit. I am not “several circles;” I haven’t been talking about this “for the past several decades;” I have not been “dismissive;” and I frankly don’t give a good goddam if you agree with me or not. Your disagreement – based on what others have said in “several circles” for “decades” past – does not negate my opinion.
And some of that reputation is deserved. A lot of Romance is badly written, pandering crap. A lot of it is good for what it is, but really has very little literary value: it’s delicious, entertaining, mostly forgettable, and not particularly good for you, a written candy bar, IOW. That has NOTHING TO DO with the point I was making, which is that modern romance is trending towards other genres – a point I still stand by. But as far as it goes: I read romance and I’m not ashamed of it, or of anything else I may choose to read. People who choose their reading material based on other people’s opinions deserve to be stuck in Chapter 3 of Ulysses for the rest of their lives as they carry it around to impress others.
The hell it doesn’t! I meant what I said and you ACKNOWLEDGE that my intent was not as you have construed it, so if this is some fight you want to have, you’d better start having it with some one who intended to pick it.
None of which has fuck-all to do with me, and make no mistake: I do find it ridiculous, deeply so. Which is simply another reason to stop acting like your position and/or your objections have anything at all to do with anything I said. I’m serious: You want to make this some industry-wide battle taking place is “the romance community” or “literary circles,” you had better leave me the fuck out of it. It is intellectually dishonest of you to misrepresent what I say in order to use my post as a strawman for you to air your personal pet grievances on this topic.
Oh, I don’t know: Probably because I consider porn and/or erotica to be male-centered genres, and having highly sexualize material aimed specifically at women to be a relatively new trend. Or possibly because I wasn’t thinking that some poster with a huge honking chip on her shoulder was going to come along and attempt to nitpick my post to death in order to find it objectionable.
Either way, at this point, you’d better climb the fuck down off of me or I’ll be seeing you in the Pit. :mad:
While I have to agree with this specific sentiment, I have to admit that despite owning the sequels, I haven’t read them. I got about halfway through the second one and set it aside in boredom, and haven’t picked it up again. That was years ago so I’d probably have to start from the beginning of the first book again…
I didn’t think Jodi’s description sounded demeaning or judgmental. In fact, when I read that list I wanted some recommendations for examples of #3, because it’s the only one that really interested me.
The romance community reminds me of the hardcore comic book geek community, in that they could use a massive chill pill.
Speaking of “bodice-rippers,” there’s actually a very funny scene in one of the Outlander books…our feisty heroine is now a doctor and is waiting on a patient to get out of surgery. To pass the time, she picks up a rather tattered paperback in the doctor’s lounge and starts reading it. She bursts out laughing at one of the “love” scenes, and that’s how she meets one of her best friends…he’s also a doctor, waiting on a patient to get out of surgery, and he guesses which part made her laugh, because she wasn’t far enough into the book to read the other “infamous” part.
I don’t disagree that it could use a massive chill pill (anybody interested in a giggle might want to look at the massive drama surrounding the latest Romance Times convention–just google it, it’ll show up on a bunch of blogs). I don’t even disagree that I could use a massive chill pill–especially because I know I see this issue different from most casual readers of romance and most writers due to various reasons. But I saw reflected in Jodi’s original description the same sort of language that typically sends up red flags in other venues. I tried to further explain why I saw those red flags in my second post, though judging from Jodi’s response, I did not make my intention/words as clear as they should have been or could have been (that is, describing why I read her description the way I did, not a further attack or demand that Jodi defend herself).
For the record, I think Jodi is entirely correct that romance novels in general have been trending away from pure romance and into essentially novels of other genre-types with romance elements. I’m personally all for the change. I’ve found that that trend has pretty seriously increased the number of “romances” I find readable. I used to read the odd romance novel (primarily when I was in the mood for mindless escapism that required little-to-no involvement on my part), but in the last few years, I’ve found myself reading a lot more of them - and the ones I’ve been reading are largely the ones that are what I mentally refer to as “courtesy romances” - the ones that are basically a mystery, or a police-procedural, or a sci-fi fantasy novel in romance-novel drag. I’ll hold up as examples the J.D. Robb “In Death” series that are in the romance novel section (and marketed that way) but are basically mystery/police procedurals in romance novel drag, or the previously-mentioned Sherrilyn Kenyon Darkhunter books (at least the first few - they got a little tedious at the end) that are essentially paranormal thrillers (although with a clear romance component). I almost never run across a book in the romance genre that’s a pure romance novel anymore - the vast majority of them I run across are pretty much just using the romance-novel as a framework to tell another sort of story.
I’m theorizing that this is largely because a lot of publishers read the metric that “romance novels are the fastest-growing and most profitable genre of fiction” and started shoving anything that could even remotely fit into romance-novel drag. I know that I’m finding some of my favorite fantasy authors (like Robin McKinley and Patricia Briggs - really, WTFBBQ on that one) in the romance section, even though they’re still writing the same books they’ve always written (and which were previously to be found in sci-fi/fantasy).
Really? The rape scene bothered the hell out of me, and not in a “hot and bothered” way. I thought the man intended to be the hero was villain throughout.
“Outlander” would definitely be on my list, though I really, really wish Gabaldon would have stuck with her original plan to condense the storyline to 6 books. The amount of plot that is covered in the first book is staggering compared to subsequent books, most especially “Fiery Cross” which was one of the most disappointing, tedious books I’ve ever read. At this point, I’d just like resolution.
I don’t read a lot of romance, but one author I like is Susan Johnson. Characters are well-developed, passions are always raging, and her historical settings are suprisingly well-researched for the genre. Brazen, set in late-Victorian Britain, actually had end notes.
Y’know what I’d like to see? A romance novel where it’s not clear from the first chapter which two characters are going to be the lovers the story is about. Or one where we know who the heroine is, but it remains unsettled for much of the book which of several men she’s going to end up with, or vice-versa. Something with more dramatic tension.
Lately I’ve been on a Lyndsay Sands Argeneaux novels kick. I’m a vampire junkie and I like how she presents the history of the vampires (which also explains why they haven’t overrun the earth…). It mainly involves Atlantis and nanos… I gave up on Christine Feehan long ago but I haven’t quite given up on Sherrilyn Kenyon (who also writes some interesting books with Arthur and his knights as Kinley MacGregor)
I also read, well lots of fantasy style. Just found a new author who has dragons, the second book comes out in August. Deborah Cooke.
Then of course there are the mysteries… such as the aforementioned JD Robb books (which I am listening to on audiobook lately). There’s the agency ones by Susan Sizemore and Amanda Quick and Sherrilyn has her BAD books also. What else do I read… lately I’ve been reading the classics. Pride and Prejudice, Jane Eyre…
There was one series I really enjoyed about spies in Regency England… The Fox, The Lion etc… well that was the newest ones. That’s not the titles. I haven’t read them and need to find/remember her name so I can get the ones I haven’t. There was one series before it though, but the animal ones are supposed to be the upper level spies known only to the King sort of thing… ETA: Celeste Bradley! That’s it! Liar’s Club and Royal Four series…
And of course I have an addiction to Nora Roberts. She gets totally formulaic, but I love her.
Can I hijack a bit and ask for recommendations for good smutty romances? In other words, romance novels that are both good AND really hot? In college I dug Robin Schone, although I could do without the homophobia. I used to read them around finals time, when I wasn’t up for the heavy stuff. I like historicals, but only if they don’t make me howl with laughter and throw the book across the room. (That’s why I used to read them for finals - I was a history major and almost went to grad school in it. My favorite is the Viking one with the talking whale.) I don’t want just, you know, stroke books - I want to be into the story and have it not be stupid and eye-rolly, but I also want some hot action when I pick up a romance novel.
I think even big fans of romances can distinguish between “romance novels”, which are put out by certain publishers and fit into certain subgenres (historical, contemporary, etc), and general fiction or literature with romantic themes. I love Pride and Prejudice, but I wouldn’t call it a “romance novel”, although I’d certainly call it a “love story” or “romantic fiction”. In publishing and libraries, at any rate, “romance novel” has a specific meaning. When I ask for one, I’d be happy to get “general romantic fiction”, but I want it to have certain characteristics.
ETA - I admit it. I keep reading Stephanie Plum (not a romance novel, but a romance novel cousin). I can’t help it. I know she is never, ever going to sleep with Ranger again and I just can’t stop reading them anyway.
Heh. I looked up Brazen on Amazon and that cover is embarrassing. Maybe the genre as a whole would get a little more respect if they didn’t do that sort of thing!
Anyway, his chest is totally unrealistic. There’s no way his shoulders are that big and his waist that little unless he has a truly creepy-ass physique.
I have to disagree with the “for the genre” bit there. The historicals have always had a large percentage based on lots of accurate research. This is probably because a surprising number of the writers have degrees in history, anthropology, etc.
pepperlandgirl’s sudden freakout makes more sense in context: she’s a professional romance novelist.
J.D. Robb is actually Nora Roberts, which is the primary reason why the In Death series ends up in the romance section these days. Though I agree that there’s a general trend towards suspense in the section right now. By the way, completely aside from whether or not you like her books, La Nora is a completely awesome person and a master of the well-deserved smackdown.
Shirley Ujest, I’m afraid that I’m going to have to take exception to your description of Dara Joy as a genius. Honestly, I find her writing to be pretty poor. I still read her, though, because she writes the hands down hottest smut I’ve ever read in my life.
