Ladies: Is this romance-novel convention really something you fantasize about?

In My Humble Opinion
81

araminty, that sounds like a great recommendation! I’ll definitely have to try some of Trapido’s work.

[QUOTE=Eureka]
Despite my general enjoyment of the romance genre, I do sometimes like books like The Sharing Knife by Lois McMaster Bujold because it feels like there is a bit more substance. It’s a fantasy novel, and likely to be labeled that way, but a good case could be made for it belonging in the Romance category. Though I won’t swear that it meets all your criteria.

[/quote]

Thanks for the recommendation. I’ll definitely take a look. If I demanded any work meet every one of my criteria, I’d have to write it myself. Eek!

[QUOTE=Eureka]

I’ll have to investigate* A Cup of Light*, looks like it might appeal to me.

[/QUOTE]

I think A Cup of Light is a worthwhile read with a lot to recommend it. The female protaganist is a top expert in an obscure field, confident but willing to express doubt, and lives with a disability but is not defined by it. The events primarily take place in both historical and modern China, and one leaves the book feeling like one has visited there - a real place, not a mythical Western fantasy version. I’m not in a position to judge whether her portrayal is authentic, only that it feels authentic. The people she meets also seem like believable people, not exotic set dressing. The romance occurs fairly late in the book, but I like its slow-burn quality - and, despite coming along late, the guy (an American doctor researching lead toxicity in Chinese children) doesn’t feel like a trophy awarded to the heroine at the end of her journey. Normally I demand witty banter but in this case, I’ll give it a pass because I have no trouble believing these two would wind up together.

It’s not a perfect book by any stretch, including an underwhelming “big reveal” near the end, but I think its strengths far outweigh its weaknesses.

82

[QUOTE=Selkie]
Hmmm… good question. Hamsters absolutely loathe me today, so I’ll keep it short.

[ul]
[li]Light on the discussion of the physical characteristics (both his and hers). Physical relationships between demi-gods bore me to tears.[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

Fair criticism.

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]The brain is the sexiest organ, so lots of genuinely witty banter back and forth between the couple. They need not be beautiful, but they darned well better be articulate! … and smart, and educated (whether self or formal, I don’t care).[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

Pulling that off would require the author to be extraordinarily intelligent, witty and educated.

Please don’t hold the Harlequin stable to unreasonable standards. :wink:

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]Both parties somewhat unconventional and successful more on their own terms than society’s, but not fringe whack-a-loons either[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

Actually, that’s a fairly common romance-novel setup. (Even more common, however, is the plot where one lover is conventional and straitlaced and the other, more of a free spirit, teaches him/her to loosen up.)

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]The romance builds slowly and gradually, rather than “I knew the instant we met”[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

OK, that’s gonna be a major sticking point. A romance novel is always the story of two and only two people – all the other characters are mere supporting cast – and who the lovers are is always clear from the first chapter. The romance might build slowly and gradually, but the mutual attraction (nowadays, usually in the form of basic lust) always has to be there from first sight.

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]… and based largely on those little “I thought I was the only one who read this/did that/felt that way” moments where they recognize their mutual compatibility[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

Actually, that too is fairly common. (But it’s always lagniappe on top of the basic attraction the lovers feel from the start.)

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]Neither party was actively seeking a partner, but found one out of circumstances and a gradually building admiration and appreciation of the other[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

That too. In romance novels, the lovers never find love when they’re looking for it. They did not meet in a singles bar or through an online match service, they were not set up by a mutual friend. Either they are childhood friends, or they are coworkers, or chance circumstances have thrown them together.

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]Sex recognized as an important part of intimacy, but not the be-all, end-all of it[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

:confused: I thought you wanted something realistic! :wink:

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]Speaking of sex, I’m all for those “rip the other person’s clothes off” as the next woman, but sometimes it’s those little touches of a hand on the shoulder or a nuzzle on the neck that make one go weak in the knees. Lots of those little moments, please.[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

Seconded! :slight_smile:

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]Let me stress again: equals. Both occupationally successful, both of at least roughly equal financial standing, education, etc. I don’t expect a point for point match, but “rich prince marries housemaid” stories make me grind my teeth.[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

That kind of story seems to be out of fashion anyway (at least in contemporary-setting romances).

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]Absolutely no forced sex, babies, broken commitments to other people, giving up of virginity, prostitution, or rescues (financial, physical, or otherwise). Ever.[/li][/ul]

[/quote]

Except for the “rescues,” I’ve never encountered any of that in a romance novel.

[QUOTE=Selkie]
[ul]
[li]No weddings, or at least no wedding porn. Married couples can be just as romantic as unmarried couples, but I have a deep-seated loathing of traditional white frilly dress weddings and expect my protagonists to feel the same way. I’m also allergic to “Will he or won’t he pop the question” thoughts. If the story needs a gold band to prove they love each other and should be together, it has failed. [/li][/ul]
[/QUOTE]

And that’s gonna be the biggest sticking point of all. I repeat, a romance novel always ends with the lovers agreeing to marry – to end it any other way would be as unthinkable as ending a mystery novel without revealing whodunit. (The wedding is not always portrayed; the accepted proposal is resolution enough.) And the “will he or won’t he” speculation is indispensable – because there is no other way to weave any suspense at all into what the reader knows very well is a story with a foregone conclusion.

83

My two cents: while I do appreciate a man’s having sexual experience, having sex with dozens or hundreds of women doesn’t appeal to me at all. From a practical perspective, think how many times he’s probably been exposed to some sort of disease. Also, as mentioned earlier, how likely is he to be faithful. And I don’t think it’s a good idea to ever make a lifelong commitment to someone you think needs to change. Men aren’t clay, after all. You can’t mold anyone into something they don’t want to be, and why would you want to be stuck with someone who’ll roll over and let you do something like that?

That said, I do enjoy a good romance novel on a regular basis. I rarely have time to just sit down and veg out, and reading such a book is definitely a good way to stop thinking without wasting quite as many brain cells as one would watching TV.

84

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Isaac Asimov also got a lot of female fan reaction for his robot character R. Daneel Olivaw. An awful lot of women have a thing for highly intelligent, emotionless, self controlled men, it seems.
[/QUOTE]

I wish.

85

[QUOTE=Flutterby]
That’s why I can’t read the Harlequins. Practically all of them include the guy being an emotionally abusive arrogant prick and the woman fighting him until she realizes that he was right all along and falling in line. He’s also usually filthy rich and either Italian, Greek or Arabian. It just got too disturbing to me to keep reading them.
[/QUOTE]
I have a cousin that read them as a teenager and still does. I read a few just to see what the fascination was all about. The formula barely changes from book to book, the worst I read was about a sheik who kidnaps the blonde English maidem and well, rapes her, but she likes it, so it’s not really rape… and then she falls in love with him. :dubious:

In real life those women tend to end up killed or abused by their spouses. Nothing romantic about it.

86

Which is why it’s so disturbing to me, and I stopped reading them. I recall the last one I did read was about the time I had my son. It was about a woman who had had this insanely rich Greek guy’s kid and he only just found out about it… threatened to take the kid away from her forever etc… that’s when it really hit home how disturbing they were.

I got into them because my Mom reads them all the time, and she still does… whereas I mostly stick to the paranormal romance stuff (ghosts/vampires/werewolves and falling in love despite obstacles like he’s a ghost and she’s the only one who sees him… or vampire/human or vampire/werewolf or werewolf/human or vampire/demon as some I’ve found interesting are lately…).

It’s still formulaic, but at least the guys aren’t generally abusive (no promises that they don’t kidnap the woman sometimes or even vice versa but kicking ass is generally relegated to the bad guys or verbal sparring between them) and some authors make an interesting world for their characters to play in… like Sherrilyn Kenyon, who IMO has an interesting take on the vampire mythos and combines it with a healthy dose of Greek mythology and her own made up mythology for Atlantis. She even throws curves in at times that though characters end up together, it’s not always how you think they do. Honestly, I’d read books set in her version of earth even if they weren’t romance. I think most of her fans read just as much for finding out more about her ideas about Atlantis and (one common thread character) Acheron as they do about the Dark Hunters and the sex.

87

[QUOTE=Selkie]
Hmmm… good question. Hamsters absolutely loathe me today, so I’ll keep it short.

[ul]
[li]Light on the discussion of the physical characteristics (both his and hers). Physical relationships between demi-gods bore me to tears. [/li][li]The brain is the sexiest organ, so lots of genuinely witty banter back and forth between the couple. They need not be beautiful, but they darned well better be articulate! … and smart, and educated (whether self or formal, I don’t care).[/li][li]Both parties somewhat unconventional and successful more on their own terms than society’s, but not fringe whack-a-loons either[/li][li]The romance builds slowly and gradually, rather than “I knew the instant we met”[/li][li]… and based largely on those little “I thought I was the only one who read this/did that/felt that way” moments where they recognize their mutual compatibility[/li][li]Neither party was actively seeking a partner, but found one out of circumstances and a gradually building admiration and appreciation of the other[/li][li]Sex recognized as an important part of intimacy, but not the be-all, end-all of it[/li][li]Speaking of sex, I’m all for those “rip the other person’s clothes off” as the next woman, but sometimes it’s those little touches of a hand on the shoulder or a nuzzle on the neck that make one go weak in the knees. Lots of those little moments, please. [/li][li]Let me stress again: equals. Both occupationally successful, both of at least roughly equal financial standing, education, etc. I don’t expect a point for point match, but “rich prince marries housemaid” stories make me grind my teeth. [/li][li]Absolutely no forced sex, babies, broken commitments to other people, giving up of virginity, prostitution, or rescues (financial, physical, or otherwise). Ever.[/li][li]No weddings, or at least no wedding porn. Married couples can be just as romantic as unmarried couples, but I have a deep-seated loathing of traditional white frilly dress weddings and expect my protagonists to feel the same way. I’m also allergic to “Will he or won’t he pop the question” thoughts. If the story needs a gold band to prove they love each other and should be together, it has failed. [/li][/ul]

I’m not opposed to historical romances per se, but they usually don’t work because of gender imbalances imposed by the setting.
[/QUOTE]

It’s Sybil and Sam! :smiley:

(Seriously. Discworld is about as not-a-romance-series as exists, but Sybil Ramkin and Sam Vimes have the most totally awesome dynamic of any pair I’ve ever seen. Carrot and Angua leave me cold, frankly)

88

[QUOTE=Little Plastic Ninja]
It’s Sybil and Sam! :smiley:

(Seriously. Discworld is about as not-a-romance-series as exists, but Sybil Ramkin and Sam Vimes have the most totally awesome dynamic of any pair I’ve ever seen. Carrot and Angua leave me cold, frankly)
[/QUOTE]

Which Discworld book or books would one need to read to read about this couple? I’m not really a Discworld fan, but I’d be willing to try a book or two, if you’ll tell me which one it should be.

89

I’m the only one who keeps reading this as Discoworld, right?

I’m imagining a cadre of lithe women clad in peach rayon with pumps and feathered hair, doing sci-fi/romance things while Donna Summer pounds in the background.

Hmmm…might be something there…

:smiley:

90

[QUOTE=Eureka]
Which Discworld book or books would one need to read to read about this couple? I’m not really a Discworld fan, but I’d be willing to try a book or two, if you’ll tell me which one it should be.
[/QUOTE]

Sam and Sybil meet in Guards! Guards!, are married in Men at Arms, go on a diplomatic mission to Uberwald in The Fifth Elephant, and are raising a baby boy by the time of Thud!

91

BTW, the only Discworld character to date who is the kind of lothario mentioned in the OP is the dwarf Casanunda. His only romantic liaison specifically recounted is with Nanny Ogg in Lords and Ladies – an association which reforms neither of them. :wink: