I just had my first wedding nightmare… so it begins?
So this week, there was a bit of a kerfuffle over the genre of romance at one of my blog groups: Fangs Fur Fey. One of the members admitted a bias against romance, but in the interest of expanding her horizons, asked what books people recommend. There were a few comments that were generally negative against romance (but who can control crazy comments, right Heather?) and some people took issue with what they thought was the original poster’s derogatory phrasing.
Yawn. This kind of shit goes down all the time. I don’t step in too often on public forums, because I’ve learned over the years that most of the time it’s like walking into a pit of rabid hyenas after slathering yourself in steak sauce (especially if you write–gasp!–chick lit), but I will occasionally pipe in to point out when people are contradicting themselves. I did it in this instance because the OP said she loved Twilight. I’ve read Twilight (not the sequels) and let me tell you, from twelve years of reading romance novels (and four years of studying/trying to write one), I can say unequivocally that Twilight? She’s a romance. In tone, in plot, in characterization (gorgeous, unattainable, perfect, desirable angsty alpha male every reader can fall in love with who avoids/antagonizes but is secretly obsessed with a female the reader can identify with, and a commitment at the end of the book)? Ding ding ding, that’s a romance, folks.
Me, I love romance and always have. I read historicals in high school, categories in college, and pretty much anything I could get my hands on afterwards. I’ve read books ABOUT the genre of romance and its development. I’ve read old categories from the 1940s,50s, and 60s where the plots are pretty much exactly what I described above (sans vampires).
More than once, I’ve been at a cocktail party where someone will sniff and say something demeaning about romance novels. I always ask what it is they LIKE to read. More than once, the answer has been “Nora Roberts.” But they don’t realize that’s romance, because in their heads, it’s not romance unless it’s a historical with Fabio half naked on the cover. They think THAT is what defines romance, not the actual content of the book. there are romances that aren’t shelved in romance. There are romances with adirondack chairs on the cover. I felt like this same kind of “I don’t read romance but Nora Roberts is my favorite author” conversation was what was going on at FFF, so I did bother to comment.
So the kerfuffle ran its course, and then — because they love nothing like they love a good kerfuffle, with the possible exception of an HEA — resurfaced on Dear Author. (Uh oh. Hide the steak sauce.) 
No, that’s not fair. Everyone was pretty even-keeled, I thought. Actually, what struck me about the thread comments was the absolute weariness with which all the romance writers and fans seemed to approach the conversation. There was a definite sense of “sigh, here we go again.” (I was paraphrased in Jane’s original post re: the Twilight thing. And I commented on the DA post as well.)
This weariness makes me so sad. I’ve been trying to figure out why, and I think it’s because this book I’m writing, this YA urban fantasy that allowed me to join FFF in the first place? Also a romance. A romance that even dedicated romance readers like the folks on DA would approve of. I refer to the stated description of Rampant: It’s about killer unicorns that can only be defeated by virgin descendants of Alexander the Great, and the teenage huntress whose birthright is seriously messing up her social life. That last part is where the romantic conflict comes in.
The SSG books aren’t romances. They contain that lovely coinage of RWA’s: “romantic elements.” i.e., Amy thinks about her love life. (I’m really not going to talk much more about this to avoid spoilers.) But Under the Rose was called, respectively, “romantic” and “romance” by Publisher’s Weekly and Booklist. And when I get fan mail, it’s almost always about Amy’s various romantic relationships, and speculations about “who she’ll end up with.” So I guess the elements are loud and clear.
I love romantic elements. I love romances. My favorite romances are, arguably, the ones that are more “elemental” in nature, though I will always say that people have it backwards. Like The Terminator. I think that’s pretty obviously a romance — what could be more romantic than the idea of a man — a dedicated soldier — who has loved you, in secret, his whole life, coming back in time to save your life and the life of your child, knowing that… well, I speculate that Kyle knows who he is at the end. But that’s me. All that killer robot and nuclear holocaust crapola is just window dressing for the romance. It’s the conflict that brings the characters together AND keeps them apart. But then my romance writing friends would all be, “but what about the HEA?” But what is Sarah Connor focusing on at the end of that movie? Killer robots? Nah, man. She’s thinking about Kyle. Sighhhh.
Anyway, I might be getting off track, here. I guess all I want to say is that I’m writing
romance that is also UF, and I hope both romance and fantasy readers can appreciate that, no matter what it says on the spine…
9 Comments
September 21, 2007 at 4:38 pm
I just had my first wedding nightmare
And last, I hope! At least it was a dream, and not a waking nightmare (like some ill-advised marriages I have known).
Um, if a person wanted to write, say, an epithalamion, would a person be permitted to know the date of the Happy Event? At one point I think you said something about it taking place this summer, which suggests that maybe it’s this weekend already and any poets in the crowd should get cracking. An email heads-up would be appreciated!
And when I get fan mail, it’s almost always about Amy’s various romantic relationships, and speculations about “who she’ll end up with.”
*Bill blushes…guilty as charged!*
Fun post!
September 21, 2007 at 5:22 pm
What?!? I missed drama?
Yeah, I’m struggling with this romance/urban fantasy thing too. I think with vampires and scaries, they are calling it “romantic horror.” I’m all, whateva. I’m with you. I don’t know what to call it. I’d call it both actually. I just hope people read it and like it.
September 21, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Terminator was pure and simple Robot Porn..
What do kerfluffles taste like? They sound yummy. Do they have them at Olive Garden?
September 21, 2007 at 6:28 pm
I hereby confess I’m more interested in SSG book three to see if Amy and Poe hook up or not. rest of the island be damned.
*hangs head in shame*
September 21, 2007 at 7:39 pm
Crazy comments make me snicker.
And if I missed this, forgive me, but when is the release date for Rampant?
September 21, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Interesting (and oft repeated) debate. I always find it interesting for one genre (Genre A) to put down another (Genre B). Because then there’s always some literary-purist who puts down the Genre A, pissing them off and getting them all defensive.
Can’t we all just get along?
September 22, 2007 at 1:19 am
You know, your post really hit home with me. While I can’t bring myself to read a straight (as in typical, not as in hetero) romance novels, I do *love* a great action story with a strong romantic subplot, like The Terminator. Or Independence Day (with Will Smith). Or “Executive Power” by Vince Flynn. Or Speed (with Sandy and Keanu). It’s my favorite kind of story, be it in movies, books, novellas or TV shows. When there’s no love story, I find myself feeling dissatisfied and vaguely irritated with the storytellers. Unless of course the movie stars Gene Hackman. But that’s just my own personal aside.
Good post, D.
September 22, 2007 at 1:41 pm
I like to read. In fact, my friends have often referred it to an obsession. haha. I read everything from biographies, to books related to sports, to simple fiction novels that are American classics.
I have a love for romance though. It started with Nora Roberts and has gradually expanded to other authors. I’m young, only 23. It’s fun to read about someone’s relationship from start to finish. One of my favorite romance novels is called Alphabet Weekends by Elizabeth Noble. Though it is different from the likes of Nora Roberts, Jaci Brown or Catherine Anderson; it’s a fun read.
I can’t stand the snobbish stance people seem to take about romance novels. My bookshelf is filled with them. The poster loved Twilight? That’s a romance novel. A modern day Romeo and Juliet. I have read the other two books in the series and they are much the same. They’re about a love between two unlikely people who are supposed to be together. You have to wonder though. Isn’t that the beauty of love? Though I haven’t experienced it myself, but I have read and witnessed it.
Sometimes people just need to get off their high horse for once, and try something new. Who knows? Maybe they might fall in love.
September 23, 2007 at 5:33 pm
This post sort of reminded me of a recent conversation I had with someone about books. She was an avid reader. We shared favorite authors and books…I noticed that most of my favorites, over the last 5 years or so, had been written by women…Jodi Picoult, Tess Gerritsen, etc.
She told me that years ago she read a Danielle Steele book. And then she got bored of it. Steele was too simple for her, too empty of any depth (I don’t mean to start a squabble here, but I’d have to agree with her on that). So, she decided because of Danielle Steele, to never read women writers again…because she assumed ‘all of them are romance.’
What? I was really quite horrified. Especially when I mentioned my favorite Gerritsen book and said, “oh, and there’s a good romance between the two main characters.” She said, “Oh, I love that.”
I seriously think there are many people who refuse to pick up female authors for dumb reasons like this. Who don’t realize the books they read (even when written by men) are books they like because there is a hint or a whole lot of romance in them.
Argh.