Breaking Romance Ranks
It’s impossibly hot here in D.C. today and writing a cogent opinion is beyond me, I’m sorry to say. The best I can do is come up with a few things that I’ve been thinking about lately.
But first I better explain what I mean by my title. Here in the online romance world, some things become accepted as the general prevailing opinion fairly quickly. After all, we are all smart women who also love romance, and, as in all parts of life, the loudest and most persistent dominate. That is what it is. But little old me (and, I hope, others) don’t always feel as if I’m on the majority opinion team. So, here are a few ways I don’t feel part of the prevailing romance voice.
- I like Dukes marrying seamstresses. Okay, so I know it didn’t happen and I don’t give a rat’s ass. I read romance for fantasy and the Cinderella story is one of my very favorites. And when an author is as good as Loretta Chase, that’s all I need to know. I read the last two Chase novels with a great deal of pleasure and enjoyment.
- I don’t want “gritty realism” in my historical romance. There is enough poverty and problems in today’s world that I don’t want to experience it in those of the past. I don’t care how they cleaned their teeth or where they pissed. I just don’t want to know.
- I do not believe that writing about premarital sex in historical times is unrealistic. People have always had sex. People have always had sexual motivations. And they always will.
- I am sick, sick, sick to death of the small town contemporary romance novels. Saccharine. Filled with Ma and Pa type characters who haven’t existed for 50 years. And, of course, the sheriff is always hot. And single. I grew up in a small town and, trust me, the Sheriff was a Bubba who undoubtedly kept Mrs. Bubba happy at home.
- I am sick of all the 50 Shades of Grey bashing. This is especially ironic when it’s clear that the bashers haven’t read the book. I am certainly not saying that the book is great, but it’s at least a B- to me. And, as I wrote before, there is something fresh there that I haven’t read in a while. Bashing the book makes other authors look small and I am tired of reading it on Twitter.
- I am sick of all the bashing of 50 Shades of Grey readers. What gives anyone the right to judge a reader for a book she likes? I am sick of the vicious remarks I’ve read on Twitter, but the casual swipes are also getting to me. And on that subject…
- I have moved past the Harlequin love and I am mystified by serious readers who haven’t. I get that there are some good and maybe even great authors working in that genre, but, for the most part, they are formulaic novels that are, in fact, written to formula. I understand how they could be a guilty pleasure and a comfort, but to wank on and on about how great they are as literature? Here’s what I think: If all the Harlequin lovers were subjected to the stuff that is regularly aimed at 50 readers, the sputtering outrage would be off the charts. But, you know what it comes down to for me? I liked, but didn’t love 50. I once liked, but now don’t love Harlequins. Wouldn’t it be nice if everyone could respect each other and coexist peacefully? I won’t read the Harlequin reviews or the message board threads and it would be nice if the anti-50 people would do the same.
I hope everyone survives the heat wave wherever you are. Look at it this way: It’s the perfect time to crank up the AC and read.
– Sandy AAR
I could care less if someone else does or does not like 50 Shades. I personally have read it, did not care for it, and moved on. I definitely understand many of the viewpoints of those who have read it and who DON’T like it, but I am not about to sit in a gripe circle with them and commiserate about how bad it was. Neither am I interested in flaming people who DO like it. Many of my friends liked it, and I think we’re allowed to disagree. Ditto Harlequins; the first several I tried just did not do it for me and I found lots of other genres that did.
I share my opinions on books that I have read in book reviews, whether I am sharing a negative OR a positive assessment. If you don’t like my review, positive or not, just don’t read it. All there is to it. I have an honest reaction to a book, I share it, I move on to the next book. So many books, so little time!
If 50 Shades bashers bother you, my advice is, go do something else with your time. Turn off the TV. Get off the forums and close the internet page. Take your dog for a walk. Clean your bathtub. In the scheme of things it’s a pretty minor irritation.
I learned about this kerfluffle from other sites. The original post chuffed me a bit, but I always try to dig a bit deeper to form my own opinions. Read all the posts, get all the pros and cons.
I’m really sorry, PatH, but when you stepped in with your opinion, I crossed to the other side of the fence. Your other bullet points didn’t bother me, found them insightful. But this…
* I’ve always seen category romance as the training ground for new authors and a way for mid-listers to remain in business. So categories seem to be a fairly uneven group, which is what eclectic readers like.
You can’t take away from that first sentence by sugarcoating, in an odd way, with the second sentence.
We all have opinions, and mine is now formed. The original post was a genre slap.
Have a great 4th.
and here we go again!
Leslie: I absolutely have to find out whether I was serious! Thanks for the details.
Barb: if you are serious. The Witches of Eastend and Serpents Kiss. Very silly stories about Beauchamp Family of witches/norse godesses. Can’t remember author’s name.
Melissa de la Cruz
Sandy, maybe the next time you feel cranky you could you know, go for a little walk, maybe a little swim, get a really strong drink!! ANYTHING but blogging! I have to say though I have enjoyed it. I love it when everyone gets their panties in a knot.
They should toss them away, because they are impossible to untangle! LOL! what a kerfuffle. Only in Romland!
Do you love it when your panties get in a knot over something you don’t like?
Honestly people, just because people disagree doesn’t mean you have to try to think of ways to insult or condescend to them.
Leslie, I want to read this:
“”immortal virgin witch/librarian…In the Hamptons!””
LOL, Sandy! You certainly did get everyone’s blood pumping and popping here before the 4th. I’d like to add my 2 cents worth:
* I burned out on historicals (to me hystericals) for just the reason you gave. (which makes me a hypocrite if you keep reading…)
* I’ve always seen category romance as the training ground for new authors and a way for mid-listers to remain in business. So categories seem to be a fairly uneven group, which is what eclectic readers like.
* The small town contemporaries are just as unrealistic as the Cindarella Regencies. So it’s just a matter of picking one’s poison.
* At least 50 Shades put romance novels back in the forefront, and anything that’s pop culture will be discussed and argued whether anyone actually has experienced it (read the book, seen the movie, listened to the song, etc.). Today it’s romance and 50 Shades; tomorrow it will be (fill in the blank).
Hope you had a great weekend, commenters! And thanks for enlivening my evening, Sandy. I go to bed smiling.
I’m “”mystified”” when people extol Georgette Heyer’s books; to me, her typewriter, pen, whatever had diarrhea. But, I don’t think that my being “”mystified”” by that admiration necessarily questions those readers’ intelligence or the seriousness of their reading choices.
However, I do think that, since readers of blogs have only the words which the blogger puts on the screen in the order chosen, when and if those words and order are misunderstood or taken in the wrong way, it’s really best to revise and clear up whatever confused or was misunderstood.
farmwifetwo, Kathy, and xina, sometimes I wish the AAR blog had a like button.
I am going to step away for a while now.
Sandy, I’ve played in romance and autism-land for years. The heckling will never change and I’ve learned that I prefer to take the high road, instead of returning to being a teenager.
People want free and open internet as long as you do as they say. I’m impressed with the number of internet “”police”” out there no matter what the topic nor if you posted to them. The number of people that claim to disagree with you but refuse to stop reading your postings b/c that would mean not being able to disagree with you.
I still slum in autism-land, posting rarely anymore. I’ve don’t have twitter nor facebook and truly only play on goodreads. I’ve been on numerous boards – including AAR over the years. The comments in the news articles (I’m a news junky) are so childish and immature to be frightening if that’s the intelligence and ability to debate of most people. I admit to reading the comments for entertainment.
The internet is not “”real””. It is for “”entertainment””. I enjoy a good blog post. I agree or disagree, and don’t care if you do or don’t.
Just remember when you email me “”spam”” or when you comment… if you wouldn’t say or send it to your Mother without the internet… then maybe don’t do it, with. So far, I’ve managed to lose 4 RL friends for refusing to take their spam… their choice I haven’t missed since all they ever sent was junk and didn’t want to “”talk””.
Just read your post and I agree with you on all of it. The point that you made about the internet not being “”real”” is so true. I have always been quite amazed at the number of people who live through their time online. I think it goes way beyond entertainment for some, and those self-appointed internet police just crack me up. People behind their keyboards, taking themselves so seriously, actually imagining that the people who disagree with them are jealous and wish to be their friend. I pity them, always have, who wouldn’t? They seem to have very little outside their time spent online, and it is not longer entertainment for them but their life.
Anway…great post and spot-on observations.
Okay, Sandy. I interpreted your cease fire comment to mean that you’d been fired upon and were firing back.
What some consider bashing others consider honest criticism, so I think it’s worthwhile to distinguish between the two. Just to clarify, I was saying in my original comment that criticism is fine and bashing (reader shaming and name calling) is not.
I love books where the man is rich and titled and he falls for a poor working class lady. These are actually some of my favorites.
edit…meant to say..””Either is not better than the other,””
Jill, I am going to take exception to your “”retaliation at bloggers you feel slighted by”” interpretation of my post. That was not my point at all. I was writing about the ways in which I differ from the romance mainstream, not retaliating against anyone.
And I think we all know what’s bashing and what isn’t.
“”This is especially ironic when it’s clear that the bashers haven’t read the book.””
You are correct. I should have said “”many of the bashers.””
Sandy, that doesn’t give you the right to assume that everyone who bashes the book hasn’t read the book which you have done.
I have moved past the Harlequin love and *I am mystified by serious readers who haven’t* – how is this not an insult and a generalization? Even if it was meant to be funny, I’m sure you are aware that online humor does not always came across as intended.
I don’t see how that DA post you linked to targets you in any way; Robin referenced an AAR post and your comment, said that she disagrees and explained why while developing her thoughts beyond the original post. That’s typical of online discussions. Nobody attacked you in any way, shape or form, and you were welcome to respond to her in the comments. Why didn’t you, if you thought your views were being misrepresented?
BTW, I thought it was Laura Vivanco and Teach Me Tonight that you were unhappy with, and I know I’m not the only one. Not that I see any reason to complain about TMT or Laura’s writing.
Despite what some here seem to think, the online romance community outside of AAR is not a single entity. Perhaps if AAR reviewers and readers were more willing to engage with others in the romance community – and not just to explain how AAR is the best – there would be more positive interaction and less of what seems to be this prevailing sense that there’s some sort of war that requires a ceasefire.
I agree that the commenters didn’t attack me. But, considering all of the dire insults of which I am being accused, read the context of her post. It was written to invite bashing. I am just glad it didn’t take place.
As for my commenting there, are you that naive?
@Yulie
Exactly, this post along with a few others regarding 50 Shades are just disgusting. To imply that if you have an opinion opposite to that of the blogger that you either haven’t read the book or you are jealous is simply insulting to the reader and then to go on and insult other readers simply to be cruel for the sake of being cruel? What the ever living hell?
lj-68, many of the 50 bashers are open in saying they haven’t read the book. It’s no secret nor is it an assumption on my part.
“”This is especially ironic when it’s clear that the bashers haven’t read the book.””
Funny, when you guys give a book an F, no one claims you haven’t read it but when someone dislikes a book you like? We haven’t read it? Gotcha. Nice to know that All About Romance continues to drift away even more from my what it once was when I first started reading this site. Next you’ll be giving Twilight A+ status. Christ.
http://dearauthor.com/features/letters-of-opinion/title-here/
Sandy, which DA post? I’d like to read it.
Julieanne and Yulie,
First of all, I was referring to the online romance community as whole, not specifically Dear Author, though I do find I disagree with them fairly often. So there’s that.
Secondly, Yulie I was not resorting to “”generalizations and insults”” in my post so I don’t know where that’s coming from. It was designed to be a somewhat tongue in cheek post about ways I differ from the online romance world — DA included.
Thirdly, romance world spreads far and wide these days and, yes, it is toxic out there. On Twitter alone, AAR readers have been called dunces (I really like that one), harpies, morons, throwbacks, pearl clutchers, idiots, and the list goes on and on. Our readers know all this and that is what they are reacting to. Some of the name callers have no online site affiliation and others do. Frankly, I am glad to see our readers defending themselves.
I was also the target of a wanky (yes, I think that word applies) DA post recently and I undoubtedly will be again. So it goes. I don’t recall anyone taking the poster to task for being impolite.
Back in the old days of AAR, before Twitter and before a proliferation of blogs giving voices to so many, it was far easier to keep it all here at AAR. The insults included. Now it’s a different world.
A cease fire would be lovely, but it can’t be unilateral.
I was an AAR reader and poster for a very long time, and have largely given up in recent months because the tone here has become quite unpleasant.
This site has been a wonderful advocate for the genre for so long and it saddens me to see the official blog being used by an AAR publisher to insult readers, bloggers and authors with such a broad brush – not to mention the ensuing nastiness in the comments. And really, the suggestion that 50 Shades readers have been exposed to more negativity than Harlequin readers (two groups that may – gasp – overlap) is laughable. How much ridicule have Harlequin readers and authors faced over the years? How long has Harlequin been used as shorthand for silly, trashy books that no *serious* person would read? Romance readers should know better than anyone that category romance is too diverse and varied to be dismissed like that.
It’s possible to be critical and honest without resorting to generalizations and insults; AAR did it for years, and I hope to see more of that in the future, and fewer posts like this one.
Yulie, I have been reading and posting on AAR for probably as long as you have, and I just don’t remember AAR being a Hearts and Flowers type of message board. For as long as I remember, there have always been dust-ups and ruffled feathers, along with the very easy going conversations and pleasantries among posters. In fact, many of those who have started their own blogs were the very ones that got in the fray, and that are now gossiping (like jr. high girls) about AAR posters on Twitter, almost daily about what idiots we are and how we clutch our ever lovin’ pearls. My point is that none of these blogs or message boards are perfect for everyone. Some stay here because they feel comfortable and some leave because they don’t like the company. Either is better than the other, more like a better fit.
I’m finding this a disheartening discussion for a number of reasons.
If I try really hard, I can kind of see what Sandy meant (although I can easily see why others are mystified), but- and I may be doing her an injustice here- I can’t help but read the references to ‘loudest voices’, prevailing opinions and ‘wank’ as a dig at blogs like Dear Author. And some of the commenters defending this post- making digs about so-called intelligence etc- aren’t helping to make this site any less of a toxic environment. I’m a longtime reader and I love the reviews, but sometimes the discussions (here in the comments and in the forums) can be so hostile. Although the hostility is obfuscated by carefully polite language, I find it nonetheless hateful.
As someone who likes this site, it’s really depressing.
1. I don’t care about the social ladder status as long as the story is good. Give me a good story and I’ll buy anything.
2. I prefer my historicals to have some element of realism to them. But refer to #1. If it is a good story I’m certainly not going to complain and am less likely to notice the historical inaccuracies.
3. Premarital sex was certainly going on during all times. I believe sex has a time and place in any book. No matter if it is a historical or a comptemporary I enjoy a well written sex scene.
4. Got to disagree about the small town contemporaries. I just started reading them and love them. Although while reading Jill Shalvis’ Head over Heels I had to think that most sheriffs weren’t as sexy as Sawyer. I got chuckle out of your Bubba comment.
5. I will admit to being prejudiced against 50 Shades and then I read it. It was better than I was expecting and was a page turner for me.
6. I’m just sick of any bashing of readers. Why does it matter what we read just as long as we are reading? I read for enjoyment and escapism and I find that in different genres.
7. Sorry have to disagree again with this. I read categories and I love them. I think there is a place for them. They are perfect for a weekend read or a quick evening read. Sure there are some bad ones, but there are also some real gems in there. It is just like with any other genre. There are good and bad. I’m sure there are also formulamatic stories in historicals, paranormal, mystery, etc.
Sandy I just love your writing. I always have. You just wrote exactly how I feel. These people who get their panties in a knot because something isn’t realistic? Really? In FICTION? BTW you really should write a book.I think it would be a big hit.
So…Sandy was being deliberately provocative to prove a point a bout people bashing 50 fans by bashing Harlequin fans? Because that would some kind of sense, if she weren’t insisting that there’s no contradiction or hypocrisy.
Lordy, lordy. Go back and re-read her opening title and text but not her opinions. Let that sink in. Take a deep breath. Now quit being provoked by opinions. We’re talking about thoughts and feelings about romance here not global catastrophes. I’m speaking for myself only. These are my opinions.
Umm, what? What exactly did I say that implied I’m being “”provoked by opinions?”” And how, pray tell, do I read her title and text but not her opinions?
Hint – it’s a forest and not just a tree.
This, just this……
Get over it already people. Sandy has opinions and she was making a bigger point. Try to figure out what it was if you missed it. Get a helicopter if you need one to see the whole picture.
OMG…a certain poster does not get the point. I have never typed this online, but here goes….headdesk…..1,000 times. wow.
I haven’t read “”50″” yet and until I do, really have no opinion on the book. Though I do enjoy reading the pros and cons of the “”50″” novel.
And the only Harlequin books I enjoy reading are the Presents series. And other than the criticisms of the HP’s and “”50″” (since I have not read that novel), I pretty much agree with your commentary Sandy on everything else.
And OMG…I clutched my pearls and they have fallen all over the floor. Whatever shall I do???
You guys are cracking my up. Sandy, I don’t think they get it. You said one comment that could be viewed as negative about Harlequinn (which I tend to agree with) but everyone is going berzerk. Meanwhile, none of those that are angry seem to get it that they and others have been bashing 50 SoG. I say, don’t dish it out guys if you can’t take it.
I honestly think all the stink has proved Sandy’s point. Ultimately, if you don’t agree …then quit reading her posts. It’s not that big a deal and certainly not worth argueing about.
pardon any spelling errors, my keyboard needs replacing.
It’s kind of funny to see supposedly intelligent people NOT GET THE POINT. Excuse the shouty caps!( yeah…that’s a 50 Shades thing.)
I don’t like it when AAR readers & reviewers are called names, either. This site has been very good to me in terms of reviews and I’ve enjoyed many of the discussions. What you’ve presented here isn’t really a discussion though. It’s a call for everyone to stop criticizing 50, and a retaliation at bloggers you feel slighted by.
I admit that I’ve cracked a few 50 jokes in my tweetstream, but I’ve also made comments in support of the book and its fans. I’ve written a couple of blog posts encouraging authors not to slam it. I’m a neutral party here!
I’m also not sure I understand your definition of “”bashing.”” Can you give examples? I don’t want to bash anyone, ever, so it would be helpful if I knew exactly what you meant.
I could easily say that those who don’t like 50 criticism should stop reading it. But ignoring the people and ideas we disagree with is hardly a step towards mutual understanding.
As far as I’m concerned, you can bash category romances and their readers all you want. I think everything’s fair game.
But it’s hypocritical to take a swipe at category readers after just decrying everyone who’s taken swipes at the 50 Shades readers.
Why are Harlequin fans deserving of your condescension, but 50 Shades fans aren’t?
And once again my point is proved. If Harlequin readers were subject to the same kind of crap regularly directed at 50 readers, the sputtering outrage would be off the charts.
I am one teeny tiny voice in the overwhelming deluge of Harlequin of love on the Internet.
As for the “”intelligent enough”” dig. Gee, thanks.
It astounds me how people continue to miss the point you made. They didn’t get it yesterday, and they are not getting it today. Shoe is on the other foot. It is indeed a sputtering outrage. You did get the neighbors talking!
I think a point has been proven, but regrettably it isn’t yours.
You neatly sidestepped the direct question, so I would guess you aren’t capable of owning up to your mistakes. I did very frankly assume you were of sufficient intelligence to see the contradiction in your statements. It wasn’t meant as a “”dig”” but as a straightforward observation. But I don’t believe you’re looking at your statements and reading them with an honest eye for their content.
That you are one teeny voice is utterly irrelevant to the issue at hand.
You stated that bashing readers was a bad thing to do, and then a few lines later, you bashed readers. You won’t at least own up to that? Really? Just for the sake of your own credibility?
If you want to stand by words that make you look hypocritical, that’s your decision, I guess.
Let me quote you, then, and we’ll see if we can’t work past your confusion over your own statements.
“”What gives anyone the right to judge a reader for a book she likes?””
“”I have moved past the Harlequin love and I am mystified by serious readers who haven’t.””
You are surely intelligent enough to see the contradiction there, so I have to conclude you’re being deliberately obtuse because you don’t like admitting you made a mistake.
I think you might feel better if you just go ahead and acknowledge the contradiction and correct it. People generally have more respect for someone who can admit to being wrong and apologize.
To continue to protest that you made no contradiction when there’s solid evidence you did only puts your integrity into question. Own up and you’ll feel better about it in the long run (assuming you value integrity over pride.)
Oh, and sorry about the double post. The site keeps presenting a blank page, so it was difficult to tell whether the post had gone through.
M, I stand by what I wrote in the blog, just to be clear.
And I do not see any contradiction.
Nothing about the juxtaposition of “”I am sick of all the bashing of 50 Shades of Grey readers”” and “”I have moved past the Harlequin love and I am mystified by serious readers who haven’t”” strikes you as contradictory?
Are you playing dumb with us to avoid owning up to a mistake, or do you really not see the disconnect?
And you’re certainly welcome to it, Karen. BTW, I gave 50 a B- so I am hardly a “”fan.””
@Sandy The way you feel about Category enjoyists (my own made up word) is pretty much the way I feel about Fifty Shades fans. That’s pretty much me assuming that you aren’t a ‘serious reader’ seeing as you gave it a B. Just my opinion of course…
Hmm my only comment is on the pre-marital sex. The thing is that married couples worried just as much about the consequences of pregnancy as unmarried couples. My grandparents, growing up in the 30s, and then post war 40s Germany were constantly worried about having another child because they could not afford to feed another one. They had my mother and that was it.
So even married couples in Regency, Victorian, EVERY historical period would consider the consequences of sex. Let’s just thank our lucky stars we have many methods of birth control available.
Wow. Sandy, you poked the hornet’s nest, didn’t you?
I am tempted to add my two cents worth point by point, but it all comes down to this: you read what you like, and I’ll read what I like, and its all good. I admit to feeling disappointed when someone doesn’t like a book or an author as well as I do. No doubt other people feel the same way when I can’t get into their favorites. Doesn’t matter, it doesn’t mean I like, or respect THEM any less. Its just a matter of taste.
A couple of points I can’t resist making though…..one is like somebody else said, if a book has me, then I won’t notice, or pay much attention to anyway, historical errors. That said, most authors that can catch me up in their story don’t toss in massive historical mistakes. On the other hand, if I’m not really into the story anyway, then I tend to pay more attention to any mistakes that are made.
And second, or connected to the historical inaccuracy thing is this: I have read historicals where slaves were treated not only not like slaves, but like members of the family. Or where gay relationships were accepted, casually accepted, by everyone. No one in society so much as blinked about it. I get that the author doesn’t want the book to be about that struggle, but it seems really wrong to pretend that it wasn’t hard fought for years, and years. It feels vaguely disrespectful, to me, when its all just glossed over. And I always have trouble with that.
Anyway, I read this recently, and I think all of us readers feel the same way. I wish I could remember the line well enough to quote it, but here it is somewhat mangled….””I missed the concert because the book I was reading turned out to be crack””. And there you go. That’s what keeps me reading, those books that are impossible to put down, the ones that I can’t stop thinking about even when I’m done. Maybe one day y’all could put together a list of books that are crack. Yeah?
Thanks, everyone, for the feedback.
I did some thinking last night and I kept coming back to this: Blogs are opinions and points of view of an individual writer. I wrote my opinion. You all are welcome to agree or disagree with what I said — as Jill said, the topic is open for discussion — but it is not welcome to tell me what I should have said. I wrote what I wrote. It is my opinion.
How boring would the world be if we all became afraid to express an opinion.
But you contradict yourself. So which of your own statements do you actually believe?
Because it’s coming across that you realize you worded that in a way you shouldn’t have but you’re too stubborn to acknowledge it and correct it as you should.
*Can* you answer the question directly and honestly?
But you contradict yourself. So which of your own statements do you actually believe?
Because it’s coming across that you realize you worded that in a way you shouldn’t have but you’re too stubborn to acknowledge it and correct it.
*Can* you answer the question directly and honestly?
xina,
Are you saying that I’m offended, insecure, or reader bashing? I certainly didn’t mean to bash Sandy. She expressed her opinions, and I agreed with some of them. I thought the topic was open for discussion.
This whole article/post cracked me up. I tend to agree mostly.
Dukes should so marry seamstresses
Realism without the grit. I would like them to brush their teeth once in a while.
Premarital sex is fine, but I do like when the Hero or Heroine kinda worry or try to avoid pregnancy etc.
I disagree about small town perfection. I like that fantasy as much as the Duke/seamstress fantasy, vampire fantasy etc. None of it is real, so why not solve our towns problems with a cuppa coffee and some pie.
50 Shades- Over it. Read it or don’t. I don’t care. Is it good or not? Don’t care. Everyone has given scathing reviews for books I’ve loved and glowing reviews for books I thought were crap. If you think it suck then don’t read the rest. But don’t bash someone else. Do whatever floats your boat. Now, I still reserve the right to read a book and review it on my blog. If I don’t like something, I’ll say so.
Harlequin. I’m personally over them. I find them too short to do real justice to character development. But someone must love them because there are plenty of them at the bookstore and walmart. So if you love them, read on. More power to you!
Enjoy your hot summer days and Happy REading.
I enjoyed this thread because I’ve felt I’m always breaking romance ranks for instance I don’t consider virgin heroines in contemporaries unrealistic, I love wealthy uber ahole heroes, the more aristocrates the better and I still read Harlequin Presents(30 yrs). I also wouldn’t mind seeing more Stormfire/Ginny and Steve sagas published. The drama and angst was so compelling.
I agree with Sandy’s post, and have just one thing to add:
Jane Austen made choices in her life that would define her as a feminist in today’s world. It’s not a dirty word, and I think romance readers should embrace it.
I don’t care who dukes marry.
I like gritty realism, hate the idea that only rich & beautiful people live HEA.
Premarital sex is fine anytime.
I’m not sick of small town contemps, but I haven’t read that many.
Most 50 bashing is just healthy discussion. So what if some people think the book is poorly written or a bad representation of romance/bdsm? I don’t see any reason for readers to get offended or insecure about varying opinions.
Reader bashing, ugh. I’m tired of that also. It’s a book, not a litmus test of intelligence or genre familiarity. Liking it doesn’t make me stupid and hating it doesn’t make YOU smart.
Harlequin’s category romances: I’ve read some great ones.
Oh, my dear pot…meet kettle.
I loved Sandy’s post this morning and agree with all of it. I am though a college English teacher and spend a great deal of my work day teaching pre-20th century literature, and so I am steeped at times in social realism, aka the “”gritty”” kind. Romance literature as a genre awkwardly handles the realism of poverty and easily can pull you out of the fantasy that love conquers all. I certainly found this to be the case with Meredith Duran’s _A Lady’s Lesson in Scandal_. In literature grittiness is the final word on romance. Death from consumption or starvation is a more likely resolution. I always like to think of _The English Patient_ as a perfect novel that explodes the idea of romance and happy ever after in the war destroys personal relationships.
On the topic of Harlequins, I read them as a teen with my mom and so have nostalgia for them. I imagine that there could be some nicely written Harlequins out there but generally I find it nice to have a more leisurely exploration of a romance, and so in that sense I’ve outgrown them.
AAR Sandy says:I’m getting cranky again.There is no dearth of Harlequin love all over the net, including here at AAR. I expressed an opposite point of view that I haven’t liked them in years and people get irritated. In no way did I say that others are not allowed to read them. To each their own. I used to read them and I am persuaded again and again to try one and it just doesn’t work for me. That ship has now sailed. I accept, however, that others don’t agree. Why can’t others accept my opinion?
Perhhaps because there is such a wide range between the Harlequin books? The truly bad ones and the good ones? If you have found an author you really like and does a good job in her writing you feel offended by the general Harlequin (and combined reader) bashing.
As Dick has already said there are outstanding authors and such writing unreadable books. I should add that I’m not a regular Harlequin reader but sometimes I just have the time for a short read and then one of the “”tried”” authors mostly doesn’t fail bringing a few ours entertainment and distraction from every day stress.
To other points:
Historical accurcy: There should be some resemblance to the reality of the era, the social (and not to forget the religious!) mores of the time. I’m really tired of the feminist attitude of so many heroines allegedly living in Regency England. As for the seemstress marrying a duke: It stretches the probability a bit wide but miracles do happen and if the book otherwise is humorous and not too serious, why not? (By the way, the last of a very wealthy and very influential line of a noble family in Bavaria – they were high ranking Grafen = Earls – married the daughter of a small town innkeeper in the 1820s. Unfortunately they did not have children. A Habsburg archduke, Johann, married the daughter of a Posthalter (= he run a post station) with the acceptance of his brother the emperor. The marriage itself was morganatic but he did not lose his political influence and power.)
Gritty realism: Concerning hygiene, sometimes one would like to read more realism or nothing at all. “”Older”” authors managed that quite well, better than many today.
Concerning poverty and other dire circumstances people lived in: I wouldn`t mind reading more about it and not always about glittering ballrooms. But! One day I like to read realism, the other I’m in the mood that I want to get away in a not so realistic world and the ball rooms are just the right thing for the moment. So I think both kinds of books are legitimate (don’t know the correct English word but hope I made myself understandable) on romanceland too.