No Means No

Bodice Rippers.

It's a term I've used in the past to mock the romance genre. It comes from an era of romance where the young virtuous ingenue is seduced by the experienced rake. She fights her own desire and, when she gives in, it is often under duress. It's the scenario where she said no but her body said yes. Now I consider that disgusting, it's rape made titillating. It also summarizes the value system of an era where good girls couldn't say yes... and it taught men that no didn't always mean no.

But romance novels did not create this norm, they were a symptom of it. The female readers during this time responded to these books because it was a representation of the social values they were living. Sexual fantasy was just that, fantasy. But the limits on a woman's right to claim her own sexuality was not a fantasy.

These were the romances I started with. In fact, these stories impacted my view about love and sex. I'm still trying to get over that.

Today's romance novels still frequently have an alpha man. The difference between the old school tropes and today's characters is that he's butting heads with an alpha woman. It's a meeting of equals. Unless you are reading a niche book about BDSM or rape fantasy or straight-up porn, mainstream romance is about a woman who is competent and powerful in her own right. She may or may not be virginal. She may or may not be young. Or thin. Or white. Or heterosexual. And there is no concern about whether or not a woman can acknowledge her own desires. If she says no, it's because she means no. And, an equally important shift, she has the right to say yes.

Romance has changed as the writers have changed. While it is still a market with, predominantly, women writing for women, that is not exclusive. A good story is still a good story, and (imo) the only thing keeping the romance genre limited to a specific section of the bookstore and a specific demographic is the prejudice in place against the genre.

(While I could talk at length about the ingrained prejudice against romance based on sexism and the patriarchal norms still lingering that want to limit women's sexual agency, this is a post specifically about the changing face of romance.)

So bodice rippers have had their time and the romance industry has evolved. It's to a point where the term has been reclaimed by the industry in much the same way as racial or homophobic slurs are used by people within the culture to take away the power of the word. We have taken ownership of the insult and know that, as a genre, we are above it.

*Click the image above to go to the BuzzFeed link, "19 Things Fabio Is Actually Thinking On Romance Novel Covers."

Perceptions on Romance

Romance, as a genre, does have rules. A couple discover attraction/love, there are obstacles, love conquers all, and the couple lives happily ever after. There must be an emotionally satisfying ending. Other than that it's open to however the author wants to tell their story.

I find romance novels (the one's that I enjoy, that is) have strong, well developed characters that I can relate to on some level. They story lines are optimistic but that's not saying they're all warm fuzzies. There can be heartbreak, tears, death, and abject misery. But the reader is promised that it will end well. In the real world full of uncertainty, I find hope in stories like these. They are mocked for having any sort of formula (as if fantasy doesn't have the chosen one saving the world or mystery having the detective following clues to uncover the bad guy). All genre fiction has some sort of trope or norm (which is how it's categorized as genre fiction), however romance is the genre that people disparage the most (based on my own experiences, I'm not citing any studies here).

Why?

Some say that romantic fiction is looked down upon for sexist reasons. It is a genre predominantly written by women, for women. I think there is absolutely some truth to this. You can go back the early days of mass market publishing and see women writing under men's names for credibility. And while women writers no longer such a sore thumb, in genres outside fiction intended for the female demographic there are STILL prejudices. (What boy would want to read a story about a boy written by a woman? Publishers had Joanne Rowling publish Harry Potter using her initials for marketing purposes.) Although I would like to think that our society is enlightened enough for matters such as gender to impact the perception of whether or not a book is of quality, I have a feeling we have a long way to go before we're there.

My own personal opinion of why romance is so denigrated by the reading community, even by those who read romance, is because of the perception of the sexual component. If you read the genre norms as I explained them above about what makes a book a romance you may notice that sex was not included. Sex can be included as part of the story, but sex is not THE story. I'll agree that some romance readers chose books based on the sexual content, but the books themselves are so much more than sex. Every time I explain to someone that I write romance, they will bring it up.

Smut. Trash. Porn. One relative even described it as "scatological" (I like to think it was a vocabulary error on her part, but maybe not. Maybe she does see it as shit. (OR maybe she reads scatological fetish stuff--in which case Christmas is going to be awkward. (And I'm adding a triple parenthetical aside here because I'm feeling saucy.)))

Whether it's a complete stranger or close family, I see ewwww stamped on their forehead the moment I bring up my writing. I may as well admit to being in a donkey show in Tijuana (I'm not linking it, you can look it up if you really want to, but you don't. Trust me.)

I'm amazed at how people get hung up on sex as if it is the sum total of the story. Yes, most of the time there is sexual content, but if it's a well written story, that content only furthers the emotional development of the characters. It's part of the story, not gratuitous. Are sexual components of fiction outside the romance genre criticized? No. It seems the readers are willing to accept that these scenes go toward telling the story. Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and the Song of Ice and Fire series,these novels are not categorized as romance, but have both romantic elements and explicit sexual content but no one is embarrassed to admit they read them.

Writing a sex scene is something I do not find easy. I have to be careful to not be clinical or boring. I also have to make sure that the descriptive tone matches the way the character would think, including includes sequence of events, emotional response, and vocabulary choices. The sex scenes have to serve to further the story and not simply exist for the purposes of titillation (that would be porn). It will be as sweet or gritty as the confines of the characters allow because it is entirely based on the characters.  If it doesn't belong, it doesn't go in the story. If my main character wouldn't say something like "silken covered rod of pulsing steel man meat," I don't write it and I don't read authors that do. The character arc and story has to take precedence.

Ultimately readers want to read good stories, whether they're classified literary fiction, young adult, or even romance. It's just a shame readers are so insecure they latch onto the aspects they expect to be judged upon (or perhaps, they judge themselves) rather than the emotional experience of reading.

Sure, I Can Make an Irish Solo Dress...

You see the price tags on the USED dresses and think to yourself that you have years of sewing experience. You even have experience in costuming. You can embroider, you can bead. Hell, you once made a dress that weighed almost forty pounds, a little baby Irish dress has got to be cake.

Well, it's not. It's so much more than a dress. It has to hang correctly when stationary and when moving. The skirt has to be weighted to stay down, but light enough to pop up with kicks. The bodice can't be form fitting, but should show the dancer's posture and form. The sleeves should always been in the down position and hang correctly that way, but the dancer needs to be able to fix her wig.

For my first dress I was worried about putting in a zipper. One YouTube tutorial later and the zipper was the least of my worries. In the long run, my biggest struggle (construction-wise) was with the sleeves. The detail work took some getting used to as well. I hated the idea of working with glue and opted to stitch on all the beads. This resulted in a dress that, up close, had a home-made quality. I still think it danced well, but I was too stuck in my own vision to consider resale.

This is a good source that answers questions about Irish dresses. I also found this very helpful when it came to patterning and applique. Then there is always just looking at the dresses, figuring out how the professionals pieced them together (this has been the most helpful). To look at some of the big name designers, click on the images included in this post.

I had a similar experience when it came to writing my first book. I'd always been a big reader, but didn't think, "Hey, I could write this," until I started reading romance (my Mom's Fabio collection). I realize now that I didn't have a respect for the genre or the writers at that time. Not until, years later, I struggled with my own story arc did I really pick apart what made a good book and gain appreciation for the nuances of the story building.

My first book was a labor of love, based entirely on my vision of how it should be. No, it didn't/hasn't sold. There's been interest, yes - but ultimately I hear that it's more like historical fiction than historical romance.

Just like with my first solo dress. I received compliments, sincere ones about how pretty the dress was. But was it an Irish solo dress? I'm learning.

My point here is that, from the outside, sometimes things look simpler than they are in reality. This is not new news by any means, but it's a lesson I learn over and over again. Knowing this has made me a kinder person, less critical. I appreciate the work that goes into making something great so much more than I did when I was full of unjustified confidence.

And thus, I am finished with another adequate blog post.

Defining Literary Fiction

In jumping the romance ship (sort of) I have to acquaint myself with norms for the much broader umbrella of literary fiction. That said, it seems there are no norms other than telling a good story. Then again, that could be said for any of the genre fiction categories -- the underlying factor that makes them genre is that the bulk of the story meets a certain angle. In my case, romance requires an emotionally satisfying happily ever after. All of my manuscripts meet this romance norm, but the romance between my main characters does not always meet the aspect of fantasy implicit in romance, hence the switch.

Part of my research brought me across "Literary Fiction vs. Genre Fiction," a Huffington Post article by Steven Petit. I agree with much of what he says about the difference between genre and literary fiction except for the distinction that genre fiction is to entertain and literary fiction is an expression of the writer's being. Gotham Writers points out that "literary and genre fiction aren’t exclusive of one another." Every thing I have written has been an expression of my soul and I would argue that many authors of genre fiction put themselves into their books and consider them art, albeit art that entertains. Art is successful when it draws forth an emotional response and I like to flatter myself that my writing does just that (even with a happily ever after). Maybe that's because I am amazing. Sure. Why not? 

I struggle with maintaining the norms of one sub-genre of romance. My historical romances are too  chick lit and historical fiction to have a clear shelf space (and I've heard this from my critique partner, my beta readers, AND industry professionals so it's insane that I'm only now accepting it as truth). My paranormal are too historical and thriller/suspense to even be categorized under romance at all. The only clear genre fiction I have in the works (notice it's not finished) are my contemporary, but contemporary romance in itself is also skirting the boundary of chick lit, so bully for me.

In short, I think good writing is "Literary Fiction is comprised of the heart and soul of a writer's being, and is experienced as an emotional journey through the symphony of words, leading to a stronger grasp of the universe and of ourselves" (Petit).  This description can apply to all genres and gives me hope of being successful as I look into a new pool of agents and publishers.

For now I'll ignore the niggling doubt that reminds me many of the agents I have queried in the past represent more than romance. That said, if they saw something more like literary fiction in my manuscripts, wouldn't they have instigated the change? Or were they looking only for romance norms since that was the description they started with?

Where's the Love?

Over a year ago I posted a blog (rant) about a run in with an acquaintance who had such a scathing attitude to the romance genre that it left me reeling. I understand not choosing to read it or just not getting into love stories, but the vitriol dripping from the comment was overwhelming. Any attempt at pleasantries between us was effectively crushed. Honestly, unnamed person, you could have just smiled and said no, then brought up the weather. Social niceties 101.

At the time I assumed this person must read obscure but profound literature. You know, the stuff college professors assign or the titles on your list that you never actually read but plan to some day because the names show up on crossword puzzles. Plus, it's fun to seem like you're smart, right? And, of course, the best way to do that is to make sure everyone else knows you think they're an idiot.

The fact that thinking about it still bothers me shows how sensitive I am. Oh well.

My point, you ask? Well, today I found out that this person reads sci-fi/fantasy and my jaw dropped. Wait, after that absolute slap in the face about the genre fiction I write and love, you read genre fiction too? You mean you deign to waste your brain space on formulaic, commercial tripe? You respond to the hero's journey? Say it isn't so.

Oh, it is.

Don't get me wrong, I love sci-fi/fantasy. My adolescent reading started with mystery and then morphed into sci-fi/fantasy with Xanth trilogy (or so it began) and I kept going from there. I only started on romance ten-ish years ago. I'm not insulting the genre, but I am saying that it is a genre of commercial fiction.

So what makes one genre more elevated than another? I'm going to go out on a limb here and say NOTHING. Within all genres there are good and bad authors and it's entirely subjective. That said, why the disdain? I teach high school and I can't remember even a student being that rude before. Seriously.

Image from HBO's mini-series Game of Thrones, written by George R.R. Martin (and yes, I've read it but not seen the series). High fantasy with a lot of kinda rapey sex.

Something You Can Trust

It seemed like all the events in the news this past year were aimed at rattling my faith in humanity (egocentric
much, Erin?). From citizens needing protection from the police, the Catholic Church more worried about its reputation than the congregation, teachers taking advantage of their position with students, even the highest offices in this country more interested in popularity than the good of America -- it all becomes too much sometimes. Who do you turn to when you can't trust anyone?

My easy escape is into a romance novel.  It's a place where men are honorable. Where love is important and family is everything. You are guaranteed laughter and tears. Happily ever after happens. Good is rewarded, bad is punished. Everything is right with the world. This is why I started reading romance in the first place. Real life has enough crap in it -- why read something that would make me feel even more hopelessness, helplessness?  Of course there is conflict in romances too, some more than others, but at the end everyone comes to their senses. Where does that happen in real life?

Even if people just read romance for the sex, at least they're reading about encounters where the physical is an expression of love. The couples cherish each other despite flaws or uncertainty. Sex is an extension of an emotional journey, not a drunk hook up at a bar or as result of low self esteem. It can be passionate and erotic, yes, but more than that: it's two people finding each other with a promise of forever.

You may say it's not realistic -- but the characters in a well written romance can be as real and inspiring as the most lauded literature, only I know when I finish the last page it will be with a smile and sense of emotional well-being. There's enough turmoil and sadness everywhere else. 

Post-RWA Recuperation

Tessa Dare accepting the RITA for Regency Historical

Romance Writer's of America's national conference in Anaheim is over.

There was so much stress and planning in leading up to it, I was sure that it would be like my wedding -- over in a flash and leaving me with a compromised immune system. Not so. The three days did blend into one, but every moment was full of opportunity. Yes, I had a schedule (that I sort of kept to), but I had to be open and accessible at all times because I never knew who I was going to bump into (I got all 13 year old fan girl on Zoe Archer in the bar).

It was amazing.

I was able to pronounce empire correctly without feeling pretentious. I learned the true definition of steam-punk (thank you Karina Cooper)as a genre. I even had a discussion about butt plugs and the evolution of what was acceptable in mainstream romance.

I came home with over 100 books, most of them signed by the author. I spoke with many of those authors (who include, but are not limited to, Lynsay Sands, Julia Quinn, Christina Dodd, Suzanne Enoch, Tessa Dare, Mary Wine, Darynda Jones, and Rebecca Coleman... to name just a few).

I pitched to a few agents, all of whom asked for my submission. I tackled in the hallway spoke with a couple editors who also asked for my submissions. Almost everyone, except for one person (if you know who you are, you don't care so it doesn't matter), was accessible, courteous, and receptive.

I've been emailing off the requested first chapters and such over the past few days. I plan to start writing new material tomorrow. As for right now, this very moment, I'm just exhausted. That last hour of the conference, my feet hurt so badly that I wanted to just lay down on the floor and fall asleep. I liken it to that image of the dehydrated man in the desert who just needs to get over that next hill or he might die -- same feeling. Not that I'm complaining about the conference.. I just know that next time I'll need to eat more protein or something (and splurge for a hotel room at the conference site regardless of the ridiculous cost).

Yes, there will be a next time. The conference was so awesome on so many levels. I really, for the first time, felt like a contributing part of the industry. 

See you next year in Atlanta!

You Have Me At A Disadvantage, Sir

The subject here: male vs. female orgasms.

Reader beware, this post may be crude. Surprised? You shouldn't be. I've never been accused of being too classy.

Female virgins are the norm in my genre. It's a tried and true cliche of the young, untried virgin and the experienced rake who initiates her into the realm of pleasure. Sure, there's deviation from this norm, but even when the woman wasn't a virgin coming into this new and oh-sweet-mystery-of-life-at-last-I've-found-you relationship, she may as well have been. Usually her past sexual experiences were sub-par, which generally meant she had never experienced orgasm.


When it comes to sexual gratification, men have women at a disadvantage. They've been experimenting with their 'doofinky thingy' (thank you Mrs. Manno) since their very first bath. One day, it did something miraculous and that meant daily experimentation. It is really, really easy for men to end sexual encounters with orgasms (whether or not anyone else is involved).

Women don't have it quite that easy, especially virgins. Now I know this is not true for all women, but I feel safe in making the generalization that MOST women don't take matters into their own hands and ALL men do (and the ones that say they don't, they lie).

I have read that the romance genre creates unrealistic expectations in women in regard to sexual encounters. I'll agree that romance novels make female orgasm look incredibly easy to attain. I read a few novels (including some written by Fabio) whilst virginal and, yes, when I had my first encounter, I was expecting something... more. Even following that time, I kept waiting for that something to happen. Was it my fault? Did I not work right? Or was my boyfriend a douche-bag that didn't care about anyone but himself? I'll bet you can guess the answer.

I will agree that women should not use romance novels as a how-to manual when it comes to sex (but guys, the whole seduction idea? Maybe you should read a few. I mean, if women think they're sexy, then maybe you could get some pointers). If you take the stories at gospel, yes, you're going to be disappointed both with yourself and your partner (unless you're Salma Hayek and your partner is Joe Manganiello -- then you're good). But if read it for the fantasy it is, the sexual aspects could be inspiring and leave behind a feeling of hopeful optimism.

When it comes to real life, the statistics about female orgasm are really, really sad. Maybe that's why women enjoy the fantasy of the 100% guaranteed orgasm (or 300% in the case of Fifty Shades). Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that women are sitting around all day wishing they were orgasming (at least I don't, I don't know about you), but, when it comes to sex, it would be nice to have the same surety that men do.

It might be funny to write a scene in one of my novels where she does not reach earth shattering heights and assures the nervous guy that everything's all right, it was still enjoyable. Or, she fakes it for his ego's sake. :) Somehow I don't think that would go over well with readers.

Try It, You Might Like It

An acquaintance, when asked if she read romance, responded, "I refuse to answer that question." Her voice was thick with derision, her mouth a sneer of disgust. She may as well have been asked if she liked to eat her own poo. I'm not exaggerating - it was that bad. At that point the attempt at conversation died.

An analogy:
I have never eaten Pho (this is unrelated to the poo comment above). It does not look appealing, but I know a lot of people like it. If it were served to me, I would politely try it. I hope I would give it an objective try, without being predisposed to disliking it because it looks sort of slimy. Who knows? Maybe I think too highly of myself. Maybe I'd be like my seven year old and gag through the whole swallowing process just because I'm in a snit (Lily did this with honeydew melon yesterday). Ideally, whether I liked it or not, I would treat the entire culture of people who love it with respect.

Back to romance...

My brother is not my target demographic. He's a 34 year-old (Yes, ladies, he's single! Sagittarius, stormy blue eyes, good with kids and Skyrim) white male - an entomologist. His book of choice is usually fantasy/sci-fi, but he does read humorist essay collections. He has read all my books. His feedback has been invaluable. Even more to the point, he did not suffer through my books. Yes, he loves me -- but he would never have read after book one if reading my romance novels was like pulling teeth. I don't think he ever felt like his intelligence was being insulted or that he was reading porn. If you asked him if he read romance, he'd probably say no because that's not his first choice -- but I guarantee that he wouldn't make you feel like jackass just for asking a question.

I know I go off on romance prejudice frequently -- but that's because it throws itself in my face so often (as a romance writer). When I first started writing, I told people I was writing historical fiction. That, while not a lie, was not the truth entirely. Yes, I write romance. I am proud of my writing. I know that someday my books will be published and that I will be a better writer with each book. If you sneer at what I do for unexplained reasons, that's fine. I don't need you to validate me. I hope, for your sake, you enjoy something.

But I do want to know, have you ever read a romance? Or is your disgust based on ignorance? I suspect the later.

I'm taking a risk that my brother and/or "the acquaintance" may read this blog post. We'll wait and see what happens. I'll let you know.

Genre Norms

Ava Donja at Silk and Stone had a post about Fifty Shades of Grey by E.L. James. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with her opinion of the book, I will comment on her statement about genre norms.

Ava qualifies romance as "having an emotionally satisfying happy ending where the good guys are rewarded and the bad guys are punished."  I tend to agree with her synopsis.

Romance Writer's of America defines romance as:

A Central Love Story: The main plot centers around two individuals falling in love and struggling to make the relationship work. A writer can include as many subplots as he/she wants as long as the love story is the main focus of the novel.

An Emotionally-Satisfying and Optimistic Ending: In a romance, the lovers who risk and struggle for each other and their relationship are rewarded with emotional justice and unconditional love. 

Ava's novelette, Mind, Body, and Spirit, meets the norms. Boy meets girl, attraction, conflict, resolution, and lots of sex (even some hair pulling, if you're into FSOG type stuff). Does that make it less enjoyable read? No - I kept it on my Kindle, alongside Hearts in Darkness, and will probably reread it. Is it cliche? Well, what isn't? It's what the authors do with the norms that make the difference.

This is where criticism of romance is the most strong. Romance promises you a happy ending (take that how you will). How can anyone take the story seriously when you know it will all work out in the end? I would answer that the enjoyment is in the journey itself. Yes, I know the hero and heroine will live happily ever after, but as they get to know each other and discover their love, I'm getting to know them. I get a glimpse of their lives, their worlds. Cliche ending? Sure. But the same can be said of all genre fiction.

• Sci-Fi - cool hero uses cool gadgets to save the world(s)
• Fantasy - chosen one discovers destiny and saves the world
• Mystery - super detective solves the mystery
• YA - angst filled, under-appreciated teen comes to terms with self (eventually)

FSOG  breaks genre norms -- that is, if it was intended to be a romance. There is (spoiler alert) no emotionally satisfying ending. In this, it leans more toward how people define literature vs. genre fiction. Literature tends to be darker, leave loose ends, not end happily-ever-after. I know that is a gross generalization. Does that make FSOG a literary fiction novel? I'll let you answer that question.

I Write What I Know

I am a white, thirty-six year old college graduate. I grew up exposed to western culture. I was raised with middle class values and a firm appreciation of capitalism and the possibility of improving my lot in life. I am a heterosexual woman. My father wanted me to go to a good college specifically so I would meet my future husband amongst the throng of young men set on succeeding in life (I was always a little offended by this). This is my basic background. Since people write what they know, I write about white women (exception of Karma) and their heterosexual relationships. Because I am a history major (in my adequate college, already married) and active in Renaissance faires, I feel comfortable writing about the Elizabethan era. I know what it's like to wear a corset, farthingale, bumroll, and forty pound dress. This is my element.

In a recent blog post on Teach Me Tonight, one of the quoted articles addressed the "ethnocentricism, heteronormativity, and cultural imperialism," of mainstream romance genre fiction. I really enjoyed the author's voice in this and did not disagree, given I've never been a proponent of romance novels as a form of feminism. It did, however, make me think about why I made the character and plot choices I do. It's because of who I am and what I find engrossing. Making the assumption that this is true for all authors, and given my 'brand' of character/plot is not outside the mainstream norm (much),  this issue is more about what publisher's choose to put forth versus what is being written or the writers themselves. Since publishers only publish what they think will sell and heterosexual, western cultural values based novels are being put out there, one could assume that people who want these stories are the people buying the books. So then is it the supply that determines romance norms? Or the demand? My local bookstore is in Temecula, California -- yuppie central. There is an itty-bitty shelf for GLBT literature. There is no erotica section. Romance spans three aisles. I have noticed that most titles in my local store involve white protagonists -- again, I assume this is a result of marketing analysis in regard to what sells given Temecula's demographic.

My point here? Publishers are providing what readers want to buy. All readers? No. Most readers? Yes. Are romance authors shoving their values of what is attractive, honorable, sexy, moral, etc... down reader's throats? No, the readers are choosing to swallow it (take that how you will). If indoctrination is happening, than the readers are drinking the Kool-aid ™ . I have drunk this particular Kool-aid™ hundreds of times and will continue to do so -- but then again, I am the target market.

I write this today because my stories include a message about self worth, about acceptance. I like to think readers would respond to the characters and story and my stories would have a positive impact. I hate to think of my writing as making someone feel worse, make them feel like an outsider looking in, like they were being judged. Then again, chances are excellent that if you are not in the target market for my books (which, for the record, are not published... yet) you won't buy my book, so it will be a non-issue.

Self Deprecation at its Finest

I just started, really started, my contemporary paranormal romance with suspense sauce. They get down and dirty within the first fifteen pages. Too quickly, you may ask? No, because they’re possessed by ghosts. It’s all good. Don’t worry, they’ll actually have honest and meaningful sex around the appropriate time – say page 125ish. And yes, it will be emotionally significant to their character arcs.

Karma, aka Kay, is an ethnic mutt newly moved to New Orleans to teach religious studies at Tulane. She is newly out of the life of professional student and is playing house. Unfortunately her house is haunted. You’d think as a scholar of religious studies that she’d be open to that stuff, but no – she thinks of mystical explanations as a crutch for humanity. Lucky for the readers, the ghosts are horny. Lucky for Kay (I have cast Halle Berry, but with blue eyes), her neighbor and chainsaw artist, is hot (Joe Manganiello). Yes, I have been watching True Blood and Saw Dogs.

In other news, Courtly Abandon edits w/beta readers are going well. No one has been turned off by my hero’s virginity, although one commented that the scene were he was trying not to, umm, spend, in his pants, hinted at sexual dysfunction. Changing that. Otherwise, my incredibly well bathed Elizabethans finding love amidst adversity has been well received.

Sometimes I enjoy laughing at myself. Sometimes I don’t. Right now I’m in the process of trying to finesse my queries. In doing so, I’m trying to step back and look at the big picture. What are my stories really about? This morning, this process has resulted in my laughing at myself. A lot. I’m frustrated with some of the cliché necessities of genre fiction, even though I’m confident that I addressed them professionally and made them an organic part of my stories. I like to think that I own the fact that I write romance. I am unashamed, proud even – but then I find myself highlighting all the steamy scenes to make sure there are enough and that they’re well balanced and I get a little sad. But then I read a romance and it lightens my day. I have to remember that, whenever I think of myself as tawdry, that I’m writing what I love, what many readers will love. Romance offers that silver lining and any negative thoughts I have about it stem from external sources. Take that, world!

Here I am writing my fourth book about stunningly beautiful people with baggage. Lucky for them I’m here to help them get past their issues and realize that love is worth it and that they are worthy of happiness. So, watch out Karma and Philippe, I’m about to rock your world way more than the ghosts of the wealthy plantation owner and his Creole mistress ever could. Just ask Jane and Percy, or Mary and Charles, or Frances and Henry.

Genre Rules

Courtly Abandon is just about finished. The main problem is that was written so disjointedly that the flow is off. As such, before I can finish the grand finale (where all the dialogue will be in blank verse with my main characters speaking in couplets), I need to go over it from the beginning and make sure it is consistent. I also have a good deal written by hand that I need to insert. Messy.

The good news is that I am pleased with my writing. Small changes here and there, but the beginning flows really well and jumps right into the story.

The bad news (kill me now) is that we don't meet the true love interest until page 22. The story is established with Jane and her objective (to marry her titled neighbor who we have met, but find more comical than desirable).  Then, KAPOW, she meets her first love, her best friend from childhood who told her he loved her the day before her arranged marriage to an older man. Percy was the one that got away. The one that duty, society, etc... said she could never have. Now she's in the same situation again (only older and a widow) and will realize the choice is truly hers, not her father's or social expectations. It always had been, she had just been too afraid to take a chance.

Personally, I like the bait and switch. Genre rules dictate differently though. This is my problem, apparently, in everything I write. I write within the rules, but with a good deal of interpretation. I consider this my own style. My sister uses this as the reason I should write historical fiction and not historical romance. If I don't like playing by the rules, I should pick another game. Valid point -- however I am within the bounds of the rules and love the optimism of the happily ever after that does not exist in historical fiction. The love story is the focal point of my story, not the sub-plot mystery, political intrigue, whatever. Boy meets girl, love, passion, conflict, resolution, happy ending. This is the romance genre norm.

And yet I am unpublished and unrepresented - therefore there is an issue.

Alright, enough of my freak out/pity party. Back to Jane and Percy. On page 22.

Telling the Story FTW!

Not counting the Fabio books I read when I was too young, my first real romance novel experience was with Stephanie Laurens' The Promise in a Kiss.  My mother recommended it to me.  It had been recommended to her from my aunt.  I honestly enjoyed it and should probably dig it out to re-read it.

The Promise in a Kiss opened up a whole world to me.  Prior to that book, believe it or not, I had been a loyal sci-fi/fantasy reader.  Romances had the same escape, adventure, and promise of a happy ending (let's face it, the hero of the fantasy novel will always save the day) plus sex.  The passion rekindled feelings that complacency had replaced.  I'm sure this is TMI, but reading romance was good for my marriage.

Sex aside, it also taught me something about writing.  Grammar rules could be bent and remolded in order to suit the pacing of the story.  As a history major, I was used to churning out research reports and papers bursting with analysis based on cited sources.  My writing was with thick with credibility, scholarly vocabulary, and strict adherence to grammar and format rules.  Stephanie Laurens' writing reflected the mood of a scene with the use of sentence fragments - -sometimes just a single word.  She started sentences with 'and' and 'but' because the heroine thought that way.  This was her story and she was telling it her way.

As I write, I know I have been influenced by these formative romance experiences.  Sometimes a scene is too fast paced to write a beautiful, descriptive sentence.  Sometimes a word paint is too much and detracts.  Sometimes repetition is good for flow.  And a sentence that would never pass an English teacher's muster is exactly what it needed.

I gave myself permission to use and abuse fragment sentences. It was hard to shift gears from scholarly to fiction so dramatically, but it has been done and there is no going back.  I will mangle grammar if that is what is needed to tell the story.

By the way, "FTW" means "For the Win" in leet speak (which is gaming lingo).

Romance Gets a Bad Rap Yet Again

A friend has been sick in the hospital and I recently paid her a visit. I decided to bring a book her her -- The Smoke Thief by Shana Abe.  I bought this book at the grocery story before checking into the hospital myself a few years ago.  At the time, I had not heard of the author and usually didn't go for fantasy/romance cross over, but it was available.

I loved it. The legend, the characters, the story, all of it.  It was all tight, well developed, well paced.

I have since forced this book and the rest of the series on a variety of people.  Most of them loved it and bought their own copies.

I decided to lend it to my sick friend while she was laid up.  I had no idea if she liked romance specifically, but it didn't matter because the story was good in its own right.  My companion on this mercy visit commented that she had read it too.  Expecting a glowing endorsement I was stunned when she said, "Don't worry, it's the type of book that only has four word sentences."  My jaw dropped at the blatant disrespect.  Pleased with her witty put down, she continued, "There might be one or two sentences that wrap from line to line, but not many."

What?!!

The moment was actually awkward enough that my ailing friend picked up on it.  After all, my companion had just called the book, the book I had already said I loved and wanted to share, crap.  Under any circumstance insulting a gift someone just gave someone else would be inappropriate.  In this case it went even deeper.

My companion is a writer as well.  Her writing emulates the style of the wizened sage, rocking in front of the stone hearth and spinning tales of her youth, bursting with colorful descriptions and life lessons told in the slow, considered pace of Great Uncle Nephi who has wisdom to share with the youngsters.   I write character driven historical romance with a tongue-in-cheek sense of humor.  I keep euphemisms and purple prose to a minimum despite the industry standards of the early 1980's.  We cannot read, let alone edit, each other's work and I always thought this was due to our relationship.  Now I wonder if that might be, yet again, a sign of Romance Prejudice.

RP rears its ugly head so frequently that it's frightening. In no other genre do you hear belittling remarks based strictly on genre.  Sure, you may hear, "Oh, I don't enjoy science fiction," but people don't say, their voices thick with derision, "Oh, is that book about a chosen one who has to save the world?"  In mystery, non-mystery readers don't jeer, "I can't believe you read those books, they're all about crime and stuff."   But romance you get to hear it ALL THE TIME.  Apparently it is porn for women, too effusive, and they're all the same with different names and eras.  Sure, there are only a handful of story archetypes, but that is true in every genre -- it's what the author does with it that makes all the difference. Sometimes the harshest criticisms come from closet romance readers who are secretly ashamed of their low taste. 

I have a question -- why do you read it if it is so terrible, so beneath you?  You probably read it because it has a great story, good characters, and helps you escape real life for just a little while... In which case, why does that make it something to be mocked or hidden?