After reading the 'mirror characters' thread and consequently experiencing a minor light bulb moment regarding the romance genre and writing styles, I'm curious - who reads romance novels and who doesn't? How often do you read them? Are you a big fan or do they mostly leave you cold?

I'm not doing this as a poll (yet), because I want to see if there's any correlation between writing style and whether you read a lot of romance or not. Readers, by the way, are more than welcome to post as well - after all, you are the audience for all this fanfic we writers churn out so it would be nice to know what you enjoy.

Okay, to answer my own question - I hardly ever read romance novels. I've always gone for action, excitement and intrigue in my reading, so a glance at my bookshelf over the years would reveal a lot of spy books, thrillers and detective stories. However, I'm not a fan of the purest forms of these genres - I like a lot of human interest and, yes, even a touch of romance in my reading.

Yvonne
(who's already changing her mind about the poll idea...)

Hardly ever read romance novels. I do like to have a romantic plotline running through the SF Fantasy novels I read, however.

Last year, I did read a couple of Regency romance novels that were given to me and I did enjoy them. But I wouldn't go seeking any out, I don't think. With the exception of Loretta Chase, maybe - whose Lord Of Scoundrels wasn't only one of the most steamy, romantic romance novels I've read, but also the most hilarious, which literally had me LOLing as I read with its banter between hero and heroine. Of course, naturally enough, this being the case, her novels are extraordinarily rare and difficult to get hold of.


LabRat

I've been reading romance novels since the summer I was twelve when I got bored and picked up my mom's books. I kept it hidden from my dad for a few years, until my step-mom's mother brought some books over, and I confiscated them. Once I started earning my own money, I started buying my own books.

I primarily read the Harlequin novels, and look for stories with humor. I especially love the ones where the couple were friends, and then realized they were in love. (Sound familiar, anyone? )

Granted, it's not the only thing I read. My bookshelves are packed full with fantasy and "young adult" novels. Granted, a lot of them have romance in them, too, but that's usually not the reason I read them. It's just an added bonus.

Hmm...I'm responding because Yvonne is asking.

I like the idea of category romance. But the execution in product varies widely and I don't actually read a lot of it because a lot of it is poor writing. (A couple of years ago, on Zoom's boards, I was an unwitting participant in something foul by beta-reading for a plagiarist. I was doubly embarrassed, however, by the reams and reams of grammatical and punctuation corrections I sent back...only to discover they were part of the original!!!!)

Category romance actually has a few sub-areas, and different lines reflect different qualities and emphases. Net net, a good author makes all the difference. Jennifer Crusie is such an author. She's published in category romance, but if you read her stuff, it's just plain old hysterically funny...and romantic and sexy too. (I recommend Welcome to Temptation and Faking It)

I suppose I like the idea of romance because I very much like to work within formula for entertainment. By that I mean that I read things to be tranported elsewhere to relax and I don't want any surprises--like an unexpected unhappy ending--to get in the way of that. I also think it makes the author work to do something original with a formula (like the L&C formula for instance)

Sherry

I've always been a reader. Re the romance category I just finished the 12-volume (one each month) Barone set from Silhouette Desire. And over the years I have read every historical novel Catherine Coulter and Jude Devereaux have written.

*Hand shooting up*

Although free time has been rare lately, and so I haven't touched a book since last summer, I'm usually a hungry reader of Regency romance - my favourite author in that genre is Mary Balogh, but there are plenty others I've tried and (so far) enjoyed for most of their books.

Kaethel

I don't read romance novels ... used to read a lot of "young adult" romances when I was a pre-teen and young teenager but that was many, many years ago. Now my reading is almost all non-fiction or magazines; I get my fiction fix from fanfic.

Not sure if that has any coorelation with my writing or not ... if anyone has a theory, please fill me in. <g>

Kathy

I'm not a fan of romance novels generally, although I have indulged -- and even enjoyed -- a few that I have read. (My particular favourite of the limited number I have read is Thunder and Roses, by Mary-Jo Putney.)

I do have, however, a very low boredom threshold where romances are concerned. After only one or two at once, I have to seek out something completely different.

One problem is that I don't as a general rule like regency romances. I am yet to find a Georgette Heyer that I could wade through. (Sorry, all you Heyer fans out there!) Actually, I'm not much on historical novels at all, and a lot of romances put me off by the cover alone. You know the type: gaudy colours, gilt lettering, and heaving breasts in empire-line dresses. Ugh!

Another problem is that most Harlequin stuff leaves me cold. They don't have the depth I want in my reading, and some are downright badly plotted and written. Yes, there are undoubtedly some gems out there, but I don't often have the patience to go looking.

Also, has anyone else had the experience of mentioning Mills & Boon, and been subject to that condescending raised eyebrow look? In my impressionable teen-age years, that was a remarkably inhibiting factor when I tried to read one. Took me about another twenty years before I managed to pluck up the courage to buy one from the local supermarket!

Like Yvonne, I like action. However, I don't like action at the expense of characterisation, so I can get bored of thrillers pretty quickly, too.

I guess that means I like variety.

Chris

I read the Barone continuity too. Look at the dedication in book #1.

I'd never read a romance novel until that unfortunate incident referenced by Sherry. Foul as that was, I consider it a serendipity in my life because it led me to where I am now and the array of new friends I have. I usually read 5-6 category books each month with a single title thrown in here and there.

I'll be interested to see who says they read romance novels and who doesn't because a lot of writing around here (most commonly the nfic) appears to me to be influenced by the overall style of category romance.

I've never read a romance novel. There I said it. Never. When I was younger, 8 or 9 I think, and probably would have started reading them because I had read everything else at the library, my mom set a limit on what I could read. If she wouldn't let me read Jean M Auel after Clan of the Cave Bear, she certainly wasn't going to let me read anything from the special shelves!

So when I got to Junior High and stopped reading all together, I never ended up reading a romance novel <shrug>. Now my bookshelves are filled with textbooks and printouts of scientific articles.

Well, to be honest, I would have been one of those people raising the eyebrow. The only time I read one was when I was staying in Orkney one weekend in an old lady's house, about twenty years ago. I was desperate for something to read, and this doctor/nurse Mills & Boon pamphlet (you could hardly call it a book, it was so thin) was the only thing she had which looked remotely interesting - and that was only because I'd been reading a lot of stories about doctors working in war situations. I guess I was also curious to find out what a Mills & Boon was like, so I read it. I remember picking it up each time thinking 'Oh, no, I'm reading Mills & Boon!' <g>. Anyway, it was better than I expected, but didn't really whet my appetite for more of the same.

Yvonne

In case you're interested, here are some Romance Statistics .

And here's another article from 2001.

Crap, well maybe I should start writing Romance novels then!<g> j/k I have read a few over the years but not nearly as much as Action, Fiction, Science Fiction and Spiritual books. I just finished 3 of Dan Brown's. Very Good. Fast paced and exciting, "The Da Vinci Codes", "Angels and Demons" and "Deception Point". And my favorite of all time is LOTR of course. Romance tends to be too sappy for me. I'd rather see a romantic movie. However if anyone knows of a romantic story that doesn't follow the sappy mold, do tell! Laura

Define "sappy mold."

You might check the MIRA line of books. It is mainstream women's fiction encompasses mainstream contemporary and historical romance, romantic suspense, thrillers, family sagas and relationship novels. I just read one that was a romantic suspense -- FLASHPOINT by Metsy Hingle.

At this point, I don’t think it’s going to surprise anyone if I say I regularly read romances. I do but not nearly as many as the “average” romance reader. I probably read 3-5 new-to-me romances a month and reread about the same number of previous reads. Occasionally, a couple of mysteries or fantasies will be included in that mix but, yes, the base of my fiction reading diet IS romance.

It will probably surprise everyone that I absolutely agree with the above statement. There is a lot of drek out there in romance-land. No argument. However, the thing that most people don’t take into consideration is the sheer number of romances sold each month. (Thanks, Marilyn for posting that article with actual numbers because I didn’t have anything handy to use. ) Romance truly is the cash cow of publishing and there are quite a few publishers that would literally and immediately go bankrupt on the spot if the romance market dried up. So, yes, there are “more” bad romances out there but, proportionally, there’s just as much drek in the other genres and just as many good romances as the rest, too. The problem is that one has to wade through so much more to find the brilliant ones in romances.

One other thing that I have observed, though, in the thirty odd years that I’ve been reading the genre is that there also seems to be proportionally more romances that fall into that solid middle ground between drek and brilliance than is routinely found in other genres. The sheer number of consistently above average, satisfying and entertaining reads that the industry is able to produce is mind-boggling. A large part of that is because 1) publishers do know and respect their audience in a way that isn’t found elsewhere, 2) romance authors are generally romance readers first and foremost, and 3) and most importantly romance publishers like Harlequin/Silhouette spend quite a bit of time and money “growing” their authors by teaching in them how to be consistent, solid storytellers. Brilliance or drek tendencies are up to their individual talents but it is intriguing to note that many of the current “superstars” of the genre who are also making their mark outside the genre with crossover novels started as series authors. Those books show the same consistently strong storytelling that they learned in the genre. Examples are Nora Roberts/J. D. Robb & Jayne Ann Krentz to name just two but I could name a dozen or more. (Even Evanovich started as a series romance author . . . )

Oh, and there is one other thing that I’d like to mention since this thread is specifically about romance novels. NEVER call them “bodice rippers” to modern, devoted romance readers because you might just be taking your life in your hands. There are several reasons behind and facets to this gentle warning that would take too long to get into in this post but if anyone IS interested I’d be happy to expound on the theme later in another post.

Beverly :-)
http://www.booksanctuary.com

Yeah, what she said.

Seriously, though, there is literally such a large variety out there in romances that I'd first have to know what someone "thinks" romances are about and therefore wants to avoid before I could point anyone to the type of romances they might actually like that don't fit that "mold".

Beverly
http://www.booksanctuary.com

I don't tend to read romance novels. I've picked one up on occasion, but I don't find them fulfilling enough. So, after I've read one, I can go years and years without reading another one.

Probably I'm that way because I grew up reading the Brontes, Jane Austen, Hardy ( I could go through the list but you get the idea) and I found that the depth of character and situation, the richness of language, metaphor and symbols. (Okay, I ended up majoring in English literature :rolleyes: ). Somehow, reading romances doesn't fill my inner needs.

Over the last 20 years or so, I've immersed myself in Canadian literature which I find very challenging, multicultural, and enjoyable. My favourite authors include Margaret Laurence, Margaret Atwood, Rohinton Mistry, Mordechai Richler, Gabrielle Roi, Roberston Davies and many others. (Do I get a Canada Council Grant for advertising all these wonderful writers? )

Anyway, that's my kind of reading.

So why do I read Lois and Clark? I don't know except that I love the characters and the romance!

gerry/whose going back to bed because this flu is tiring her out.

Frankly, the closest thing to a romance novel that I've ever read was Jane Eyre. I read L&C fanfiction and that's really more than enough.

But romance novels never held any appeal for me- I mean, I see them on display in the stores all the time, but I never even wanted to pick one up. I get my quotia of romantic fiction from a) L&C fanfic and b)TV.

Julie

Yes, I read romance novels, though I don't read anything and everything in the genre. While I do sometimes read series romances (Harlequin/Mills and Boon), these aren't by any means my favourite read. I find the shorter ones far too unsatisfying and very formulaic. When I do read them, it's mostly as 'throwaway reads' - ie for when I'm on long journeys or on holiday. In that case, they are books I don't intend to take home with me!

Like Kaethel, my favourite within the romance genre is historical romance. There, too, I'm very fussy, and will avoid like the plague authors who sacrifice historical authenticity on the altar of sexual explicitness. So where characters in books set in eighteenth-century London (England!) sound like contemporary Americans, I'm jerked out of the story. The kiss of death for me is an author who cannot do elementary research - so anyone who writes an 18th or 19th century woman divorcing her husband, for instance, goes on my 'avoid like the plague' list. I kept waiting for the real hero to arrive and rescue her... but it turned out that the rapist was the hero.

My favourite authors in the genre include people like Mary Balogh, Carla Kelly, Edith Layton, Jo Beverley and - thanks to a recommendation from Ann McBride - Mary Jo Putney. These authors, apart from getting the period detail as accurate as possible and, especially in the case of Beverley, explaining why they depart from it, just write the kind of stories I like to read. They're all different - no formulas there, apart from the obligatory happy ending. <g> They also include internal narrative - some of us really do like to know what the characters are thinking!

And this brings me back to 'formulaic' - it really irritates me when publishers take it upon themselves to decide what readers should like. I don't want to be told what to read, and I don't want my favourite authors constrained by some editor who really has no idea what readers enjoy. Take one of Mary Balogh's recent novels, More Than A Mistress. Loved it... but there was an element of closure missing near the end. I was far from the only reader to think so: this point was mentioned in Amazon reviews and also on Mary's email list. Mary herself posted to tell us that she had actually written the scene whose absence we were all bemoaning, but her editor had advised that it should be removed.

But we're all different, and people's tastes in reading matter do vary enormously. Take Jo Beverley's Devilish, in my opinion one of her very best. I was puzzled by a review on Amazon claiming that the story didn't start until p. 166 - and when I read my own copy and got to p. 166, what I saw was a love scene! Clearly, for that reader, the 'courtship' is irrelevant... for me, it's the whole point.

Do I write in 'romance novel formula'? I guess I'm not really the best person to answer that! Though I'd add that I do read other fiction; I enjoy political novels, such as Michael Dobbs' excellent House of Cards series, and contemporary women's fiction which doesn't necessarily fit into the romance categorisation.

Dunno if this ramble answers your question, necessarily, Yvonne...


Wendy

I read some romance novels, specifically those by Jo Beverley, Mary Jo Putney, Georgette Heyer, and occasionally Mary Balogh. (I must admit that the reams of circular introspection in some of Mary Balogh's books is a turn-off for me.) I still like the mystery/romance novels by Mary Stewart, but could never get into the Arthurian books she wrote. Not a year goes by that I don't reread Pride and Prejudice. I have also occasionally read a Silhoutte/Harlequin, but like Wendy, they are "throw away books" for me. They just don't have enough character development or depth of plot for my taste to reread them. I can't help but think that most of them could have been improved by adding something.

That said, I also love humorous essay-type books like those of Dave Barry.

And for what it's worth, I was a literature major in college and graduate school.

Schoolmarm

I love romance novels. I'm an avid reader of both fiction and non-fiction, and I'd guess that romance novels make up about 25% of my reading. Besides romance, my favorite genre is journalistic non-fiction. I also really like biographies and memoirs. I'm currently reading Confederates in the Attic, by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Tony Horwitz. It's a fascinating book about the long-term affects of the civil war.

Anyway, I find that romances are a fun way to unwind. I don't watch much television, so for me, romance novels are the equivilent of whatever sit coms I'm missing each evening. Especially since I read so quickly, that I usually read a romance novel in the time it would take me to watch an evening of primetime television. However, I'm extremely picky about which authors I read. I'm easily annoyed by horribly contrived plots and errors. Historical inaccuracies (like Wendy mentioned) bother me, but because that is not really my area of expertise, I can overlook minor errors. However, I read a novel not long ago where the plot setup was that the heroine was a columnist for a major newspaper who was suddenly thrust into being the sole reporter covering a professional sports team in the area. If that wasn't bad enough, the reason she got the job was that the team manager had requested she do it because he thought the old reporter was "unlucky" for his team. She then fell in love with one of the players and carried on an illicit affair with him while continuing to cover the team. Conflict of interest, anyone? Though normally I just stop reading books with major errors, this was was so ludicrous that I couldn't stop. It was like a train wreck.

Anyway, after a couple of instances like this, I got REALLY picky about romances and basically I wait for author recommendations before trying someone new. I love historical romance, and thanks to folcs I discovered Mary Balogh and Mary Jo Putney. I haven't read any Jo Beverly yet, but I've been hearing good things about her, so she might be the next author I start reading. For modern day romances, I like Sandra Brown and Linda Howard. (Though I don't recommend either of their early works, they've definitely improved with time.) And I adore Janet Evanovich, though her books are really classified more as mystery than romance. I love the romance elements of them though, and they are so funny. I like some Catherine Anderson books, but sometimes her heroines are so helpless and pathetic, I can't even work up any sympathy for them. And I'm always looking for more recommendations.

Annie

Mention has been made of bad grammar in romance novels and I have to wonder if or why an editor would let a book go to print if it was so full of errors. Then I started thinking about "voice" -- the special something that an author has that defines his or her work. And I realized that what one person may perceive as bad grammar my actually be that particular author's "voice."

In this article the writers gives some tips on finding your voice. Turning off the internal editor that makes you follow all the rules is one. I remember LabRat commenting positively about my use of sentence fragments in a piece I posted not long ago. To her it was my "voice" coming through. To another person it may have looked like I failed senior English. One friend was working on line edits last week and was having trouble with a "baby" editor who wanted to take out the southern dialect that showed through in her writing. That's her "voice" and should never be messed with.

Personally, I blame declining standards at publishing houses.

Seriously... 'distinctive voice' or not, would any author want to be thought of as, "Oh, she's the one whose grammar stinks"?


Wendy

Well, I wonder just how well Mark Twain's books hold up in that regard. I suppose it all depends upon whether the notoriety translates into sales from. I've run across plenty of literary specimens in the past that were lauded as "great works" that didn't contain "good grammar" at all. In fact the authors went out of their way to NOT have good grammar. It all depends on the interpretation and what's "in" at the moment.

That and whether ultimately they tell a story that grabs the reader's attention and won't let go of it.

Beverly

Beverley, just a clarification - I'm not talking about poor grammar in dialogue where an author is trying to convey a regional accent or the authentic dialogue of a poor, uneducated homeless kid. I mean books where the author and/or her editor clearly knows nothing about punctuation, tenses and so on.

As for telling a story which grabs the reader's attention, I couldn't agree more - and I have my doubts as to whether editors always know best there. Having said that, as with reading fanfic, poor grammar is one of the things which will always jerk me out of a story - and when it's a book I've paid good money for, then I'm not going to give that author another chance in a hurry! :p


Wendy

Back to Yvonne's original post...

Whether y'all read a lot of romance or not, most of the love scenes in above average fanfic sound like they were lifted from the pages of a Silhouette Desire. I'm not talking the "P" word; I'm talking style and the feel of the scene.

Question: Do you read romance novels?

Answer: Yes, I read Lois and Clark stories.

Actually, I have too many problems these days trying to keep up with all the Lois and Clark stories being posted on the archives to even consider reading something else. It seems that every week I get further and further behind in my reading.

When I did read other books, they were seldom romance novels. I tended towards Leon Uris or Tom Clancy novels.

ML

Actually, I don't find this at all surprising. Isn't it somewhat inevitable? There is only a finite way to write a lovemaking scene after all. And given how long fanfic has been around you could probably say Silhouette Desire books match the lovemaking scenes in fanfic, just as easily. So, it seems fairly logical to me that you don't necessarily ever have had to read a modern romance novel to write a similar lovemaking scene in fanfic, terms of style.

I know I should probably know this - no doubt from the rest of the thread - but it's eluding me and it's after 2am, so I'll ask anyway... P word? <g>

LabRat

Yeah, I forgot this was the purpose of the post. I got so wrapped up in talking about reading that I forgot all about writing. <G>

Do I think my lois and clark stories are influenced by romance novels and sound much like romance novels? In a word: yes.

Here's the long answer <G> : I started reading romance novels in high school, but only read them very sporadically. They made up a tiny fraction of my reading list. However, once I started writing, I started reading more and more of them. A million and one sucessful writers have said that the key to becoming a better writer is to read, read, read. That doesn't mean copying someone else's style, that means reading lots of different things and seeing what you like and what you don't. Finding what works for you. It also helps develop things like characterization, plot, etc. All the basics. So when I started writing romancy Lois and Clark stories, I stared reading more romance novels and I'm sure that affected my writing. Yes, most of my scenes do sound like they are lifted straight from a romance novel (hopefully a decent romance novel, not the ones that make me cringe, but the jury's still out on that one <G>). I've actually had so much fun writing romance (which I never thought would happen) that I've started a couple of original romance novels. I still have my "serious" writing that I'm working on slowly but surely, but now I have fun romance novels to work on, too. I think they are a great practice for my more serious writing, and they are also fun in and of their own right.

Annie

The "P" word? Plagiarizm.

LOL, I'm glad you clarified that ... my mind was going in a very nfic-y direction and that wasn't at all the word that came to mind. ROTFL!

But it's interesting to hear that L&C love scenes tend to be similar in style to published romance novels. Having never read one myself, I have no idea what that means and no idea if mine fit the bill or not! I'll have to ask Annie to give me examples when she gets back from vacation. <g>

Kathy

Yes and no. Yes, sex IS universal and all the, um, body parts are going to line up the same way regardless of what genre one is writing for, but that can happen the same way in an action thriller, just as easily as a romance if all one is talking about is physically describing the scene. Personally, I think the similarities in style between romance novels and L&C fanfic aren't in the physical descriptions but in the emotional content of the interaction between two people in love, which one wouldn't necessarily find in other genres. So, no, it isn't inevitable.

Beverly
http://www.booksanctuary.com

Okay, I gave in . The poll is here.

Yvonne

Bev, could this be because the focus of most L&C stories *is* the romance between the two characters, just as the focus of most romance novels is the relationship between those characters? Maybe it's ineviteble in the sense that in each case, you are describing a couple with strong romantic feelings for each other and the ups and downs of how they get together. Maybe "romance" is such a universal theme that we all 'know it when we see it', even if we can't describe it in specific terms?

Kathy (off to answer the poll <g>)

Hmm . . . again I’d have to say yes and no. Yes, in general terms what’s you and others are thinking is true, Kathy. A love story is a love story is a love story and to some extent all of them are going to “sound” similar no matter how many times and ways one tells it or even who tells it.

However, there is another sense where it’s not necessarily inevitable that they’re all going to sound alike. This has to do with the “language of love” - something that’s been written about a lot by those that actually “study” romance fiction, particularly as popular culture and not necessarily as literature. It’s a proven phenomenon that romance fiction as a whole has a completely different sound, feel, sense or rhythm to it than other genres of fiction with emotional nuances, sub-contexts and symbolisms that are unique to the genre, i.e. almost literally a language pattern of its own, and the primary reason for this appears to be that most of it is written by women for women. This sometimes flowery use of language appears to be the way women “communicate” with each other when storytelling.

This isn’t saying that all women and conversely no men are comfortable writing that way or reading it but simply that the phenomenon exists and isn’t an accidental, one time occurrence. It happens all the time, even with authors who’ve never read a romance before attempting to write one, and is probably one of the reasons romance as a literature form is held in such contempt to begin with – a large portion of the population simply doesn’t feel comfortable reading it and isn’t going to be unless they “learn” to understand the inherent language and accept it for what it is.

What I find curious about the fact that so much of L&C fan fiction “sounds and feels” like a romance novel to me, a longtime romance reader, is that apparently quite a lot of the writers that haven’t or don’t read romances are tapping into those rather unique language patterns without even realizing it. Inevitable? Maybe, but probably not in the way many of you mean and it’s definitely curious all the same. Don’t ya think?

For a great reference work on this phenomenon, check out a collection of essays by romance authors called DANGEROUS MEN & ADVENTUROUS WOMEN: ROMANCE WRITERS ON THE APPEAL OF THE ROMANCE and edited by Jayne Ann Krentz [ISBN 00610084638].

Beverly :-)
http://www.booksanctuary.com

To answer the original question: Yes, I do 'read' romance novels. That is, I 'listen' to them on tapes that I get from the blind library. I intermix them with mystery and suspense novels. My primary reaction to 'hearing' a romance novel is that in many of the stories, the sex scenes become hilarious when you hear all that overblown language spoken out loud. I'm still trying to figure out how to write really good L&C NFic. Some writers seem to have a natural bent for it.

Jude

Curious, yes ... fascinating, definitely!

Kathy

I'd like to back up a bit and address a statement in an earlier post that has been gnawing at me.

I spent last night and this morning re-reading the book you referenced and I'm sorry but I don't find reams and reams of errors. Sure there are a handful. Some fall into the category of author/editor error and the others I can tell are type-setting errors. But reams and reams? No. You could not have been editing from the original paperback book because you'd have known it was a plagiarized piece of work and the whole incident would never have taken place. So were you editing from a Word document that had been typed using the original book as copy? That would lend itself to "reams and reams" of errors. I wouldn't bother with this except the author isn't here to defend herself.

Wow there have been quite a few authors mentioned here. I like this thread for that reason. Now I will know who to look for my next trip around to the book store. LOL Kathy I was thinking in the same direction about the P word too<g> Laura

Also has hand up! Yes, I do read romances and have, on and off for a long time.

My favorite is Regency but I had stopped reading fiction for a long time. I was mostly reading periodicals and reference information until I found Lois and Clark fanfic. That brought be back to romance fiction pronto!

Through this message board, I had some recommendations and started reading historical romances again. I've recently discovered audiobooks for exercising and am loving rediscovering Georgette Heyer books on tape.

It's always been ROMANCE for me. Action is on the back burner and I have a lot of trouble with mysteries, always cheating and reading the end too soon

After a brief discussion with Marilyn, I wanted to amend my earlier post to indicate that my reflections are the amalgamation of (unfortunately) several plagiarized stories by several romance writers and not one, specifically. Secondly, the expression "reams and reams" is an illustration of the use of hyperbole.

But the point of my message stands: Quality varies widely.

Sherry

Well, of course.

But is that really THE point? There is something like a couple of thousand L&C stories on the archive, are there not? How would the fans here react if someone read two or three of those, decided they were horrible and subsequently made it sound as if ALL stories there were just as bad?

It wouldn’t be pretty.

So, the core issue isn’t whether quality varies widely in romances but whether it varies any more widely PERCENTAGE-WISE than in any other fiction genre? Quite literally, there are simply more romances all the way around to choose from than ANY other genre, past, present and most likely future, and so, sure, it’s going to be much easier to luck up on duds and a lot more work to find the gems. The gems ARE out there, however, as well as a great number of satisfying, well-written romances and even unintentional blanket statements dismissing the supposed quality of a few of them as representative of them all are guaranteed to raise the hackles of their “fans”, too.

Besides which, consider this - if we wouldn't accept judgment of L&C fan fictions as a whole from someone who has only read one or two, just how many romances should someone have to read for a comparative "fair" sampling of that genre? It boggles the mind . . .

Beverly :-)
http://www.booksanctuary.com

Beverly wrote:

Oh I volunteer for that job. Good, bad, or indifferent quality, I just wanna sit around and eat bon bons and read romances all day. (Are there romances on tape? Can I redeem myself by listening to them on the treadmill?) Then I'll deliver my opinion when I'm good and ready. (Per where I started my post, I average one or two category romance a year...but I'd gladly suffer more.)

Sherry (Who thinks there ought to be an RWA reading room somewhere...with an espresso maker, of course.)

That's what my best friend did, and now no matter what I tell her she thinks fanfic has no quality and all the authors either have no imagination or no basic grammer skills. :rolleyes: *sigh* This is the longest standing arguement we've ever had.

Quite a few, actually, but I'm not sure if they'd be as readily identifiable as romances as paperbacks would. One would probably have to be able to recognize the names as "romance" authors to find them. I know Krentz has several of her newer books in audio format under both Krentz and Amanda Quick. Nora Roberts and Linda Howard would also be good ones to look for in audio because they're both as prolific as Krentz. I'm thinking I've heard both Jo Beverley and Mary Jo Putney talk about audio versions of some their recent books but don't quote me on that. And even if there aren't "commercial" audio versions available, a lot of single title romances have been converted to audio for library "books on tape" through the years, so one could ask at the local library.

Beverly
http://www.booksanctuary.com

[QUOTE]That's what my best friend did, and now no matter what I tell her she thinks fanfic has no quality and all the authors either have no imagination or no basic grammer skills. :rolleyes: *sigh* This is the longest standing arguement we've ever had. /QUOTE]

Exactly. It can be like banging one’s head on a brick wall. Now multiply that frustration level by about a million and it comes close to what romance readers face all the time.

Just for comparison and to put this in some type of perspective, ROMANTIC TIMES is the best-known print magazine focusing on and/or reviewing on romance novels, even if it isn't the most respected, which is a completely different discussion that I won't get into here. Anyway, RT makes the claim, or it used to, that it routinely reviews at least 150 NEW romances each month . . . and that doesn't even cover ALL romances published each month. Now, multiply that by every month for the last decade, much less the last 30 years going back to the historical romance boom in the 1970s, and the numbers are staggering.

And yet, romance readers routinely, and I literally mean routinely, have people come up to them and say some variation of “I don’t read romances because they’re trash.”

Excuse me? They don’t read them, have never read ANY, and yet they KNOW they’re trash? We’re not even talking about sampling one or two or even a fair representative sample out of MILLIONS as a basis for passing judgment on an entire genre. We’re talking about a total lack of information. Period.

Oye doesn’t even begin to describe it.

Beverly :-)
http://www.booksanctuary.com

One of my friends has people who comment about how she "cranks those things out." She simply smiles sweetly and says "I don't crank. I write." Another friend had 6 books published in a 7 month period in category romance. That's the page equivalent of "Gone with the Wind." It's work any way you slice it.

On a different note, I got an email from a reviewer this morning that he'd received "The Call" from a publishing house earlier this week and will become their first male romance author. I can't wait to see his take on romance.

I thought everyone might enjoy this.

I know I'm coming to this conversation a little late, but I wanted to respond, so... No, I don't read romance novels. My reading tends to be more of the thriller variety. I do enjoy a good love story (like anything by Nicholas Sparks), but that's as close as I get to the romance genre. I read lots of Christian fiction, with Dee Henderson being my favorite, and even though her books are geared toward young adults, I love anything written by Lurlene McDaniel.

Jana (who is off to read The Wedding, which she received for Christmas)

I personally don't read romance. I read mostly science fiction and fantasy, as well as novels by Dean Koontz and Stephen King. I even read the occasional Tom Clancy novel (I like the Jack Ryan series, but not any of the others). I also read poetry once in a while.

Oh, alright, I suppose I should weigh in here...

Yes, I read romance novels -- I usually prefer the little category romance ones, actually, since they're shorter and there's less chance for pointless angst Longer stories don't require stupid conflicts, but they seem to be a favorite fill material for some writers. I will read full-length stuff if it's an author I trust. I'll read pretty much anything by Jayne Ann Krentz (and also whatever she writes as Amanda Quick or Jayne Castle) -- she writes to a fairly predictable formula, but what the heck, I like the formula <g> And she usually has some sort of intrigue/mystery plot going. The only thing I don't like is her recently developed habit of writing books that are only half a romance -- H & h are probably sleeping together by the end of the book, but she makes you wait til the sequel for anything like mutual "I love you"s and committment. ) since my early teen years -- loved Isaac Asimov and most of what I saw by Robert Heinlein. Loved Anne McCaffery, Robert Aspirin and then moved up to Lois McMaster Bujold. But again, I probably won't read a new SF novel unless it's an author I trust.

Of course, these days, I do most of my reading online <g> so I haven't got as much time for novels...

I've read a smattering of mysteries, all of Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan books, some P.G. Wodehouse & E.M. Forster, political humor by P.J. O'Rourke, and the "Mrs. Pollifax" series of spy novels by Dorothy Gilman, about a 60+ lady who volunteers to work for the CIA and turns out to have a talent for it. And all sorts of other odds and ends.

I prefer fiction, but I do like non-fiction about the craft of writing, social-sciences topics, and various other things.

On the book-owning debate, I have to confess I prefer to own my books, so that I can go back and re-read whenever the urge strikes (assuming I can *find* the book I want ). But I also have to confess that I'm looking at taking some of the ones I haven't looked at in years to the used-book store... so that I can buy new books, of course!

PJ

I also prefer to own my books, though I wonder if that's entirely wise, as I lost most of mine in the fire. I'm going to have to work on replacing my collection now.