Interesting, and somewhat annoying

[ellid]

I posted my weekly Daily Kos diary last night. The subject was bad romances. I chose three books, only one of which was written in my lifetime Pamela, The Sheik, and Dark Fires).

I deliberately try to avoid contemporary books because the true quality of a book (or utter lack thereof) only becomes evident with time. Romance novels have changed dramatically in recent decades, with even the average category romance being far better today than the equivalent would have been as recently as twenty years ago, so it's better to give recent romances a pass and look to the past for examples of true badness.

One problem: I was stupid enough to admit that I rarely read romances.

I have now received recommendations for at least a dozen romance novelists, some of whom I've tried and couldn't stand (*cough*Diana Gabaldon*cough*), others of whom are writing the equivalent of the sort of fantasy or SF that came out when I was in high school (and that I didn't much like then, when I reading every heroic fantasy I could get my hands on). I downloaded a sample of a highly recommended book and was less than impressed, although I'm going to finish the sample to give it a fair chance.

I've also had at least one person ask if I *really* don't read romances, as if she couldn't quite believe that I'd genuinely prefer other genres. ?????

Now *I'm* wondering just why so many people are so eager to have me read their favorites. I've been writing these diaries since the late winter and have never had such a reaction, or such a flood of recommendations. Is this an attempt to steer me toward books I might enjoy, or a cyber version of "get the straggler into line" because of course I should read romance novels since I'm a woman.

Very strange. Very, very strange.

Comments

[handspinner.livejournal.com]

It could be a reaction to the fact that there is an academic bias against romance novels. Those of us who read them feel picked upon. You can be writing one of the least biased, most even-handed article, but if you are not a consumer of the genre, it is assumed you have the intellectual bias. Because we have been looked down upon for a long time. I remember an introduction from Marion Zimmer Bradley where she admitted amazement that her very organized intelligent secretary admitted to reading romance novels. I also had a physics teacher who openly sneered at a romance novel she picked up when it fell out of a student's book bag.

You tripped into a mine field.

[ellid.livejournal.com]

Looks like it :)

[ivyblossom.livejournal.com]

I enjoyed your post a lot!

I think people want to share their favourites with you because it seems like you're willing to read the genre but haven't found anything really good yet. So they want to give you books they think you'll love! And you'll be a convert! They are probably mostly wrong, but I think the recs are coming from a relatively good place. :) I suspect romance readers get a lot of flak most of the time and want to prove a point. Like how if anyone writes about fanfiction being terrible there's a flood of people jumping in to say OH THAT'S NOT TRUE.

Again: great post!

[ellid.livejournal.com]

Thanks :)

And I think you're more right than anything else. The books and authors they've suggested are all in genres I said I already liked, and some I've already read (Nora Roberts in her JD Robb persona - I'm just not sure where to start because she's written so many!).

So I may find some new books to read. But a romance convert? Probably not. At most I may find a few new authors, but that's probably about it. :)

[ivyblossom.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's like being Canadian. When people who are not Canadian visit, we really really want them to like it here, and to like us. If they don't, we are completely invalidated and sad. It's like waiting for a pat on the head from the master.

You are the master! The tourist whose opinion and validate/invalidate an entire community!

No pressure, or anything. ;)

[neotoma.livejournal.com]

It could be entirely innocent -- people love books in a particular genre, and think you might love those books too if you read them.

And since romance is such a huge genre (~50% of USA fiction sale, right?) there has to be some gems in it, just going by Sturgeon's Law.

I've also had at least one person ask if I *really* don't read romances, as if she couldn't quite believe that I'd genuinely prefer other genres.

Otoh, this was just kind of wtf. Doubting your word that you don't read romances is calling you self-deceiving at *best.

[ellid.livejournal.com]

I'm thinking that it's probably the former - although I really have to wonder since, as I said, I've read some of these and wasn't all that impressed (Sherrilyn Kenyon? *shudder*)....

[tree_and_leaf]

I'm not a romance reader, but I do love Georgette Heyer and Mary Stewart. Of course, you can enjoy Heyer without caring much about the romances, as she does quite good plots (she also wrote detective novels), and she has a fabulous ear for language.

[ellid.livejournal.com]

Mary Stewart was an old favorite. I wish I could find some of hers to reread, like Airs Above the Ground.

[tree_and_leaf]

Some of them have just been reissued over here, so you could always try Amazon.co.uk, though I'm not sure if "Airs Above the Ground is one of the chosen. I was always very fond of it.

[samantha-vimes.livejournal.com]

I have *no* idea. I'm not even clear on the definition of romance as a genre, actually. I mean, clearly, it's the central focus, but is Jane Eyre romance? What about P.G. Wodehouse novels, which are humorous, but are pretty much about lovers overcoming obstacles and finding their happy ending? I never see them characterized as romance novels, so it seems there are less obvious rules about what's included in the genre.

Meh. Like you, I've got other things to read.

[ellid.livejournal.com]

I'm wondering about that myself. I mean, some of my favorite books involve characters falling in love, but they aren't romances. So what exactly do they mean?

[roonilwazlib6.livejournal.com]

I'm not a big fan of romances, either. I tried the first book of the Outlander series, and it was ok -- but I didn't enjoy it enough to continue reading. So you're not alone! :)

[ellid.livejournal.com]

That's one of the ones that was recommended to me as a slash fan. I politely said that I'd tried it and hadn't been impressed. It's true, and doesn't get into how much I disliked what I did read of it.

[aseneth.livejournal.com]

The only "Romance" author I have ever cared for is Roberta Gellis - she's my guilty pleasure author. I think you might like her medieval books; start with the Roselynde series or the Magdalene la Batarde books. She has a Masters in Medieval Literature and is at least reasonably well-researched.

[anotheranon.livejournal.com]

I read and enjoyed the first Magdalene la Batarde books.... but never thought of it as romance. More like mystery with incidental romance. Huh.

[ellid.livejournal.com]

*That* is something that has been puzzling me - what is a romance and what isn't. I occasionally check out Smart Bitches, Trashy Books, partly to see rufinia's reviews (which are hilarious, partly because the blog itself is a great resource.

And what do I find? Some of the most popular authors seem to be people I would never categorize as romance writers (most notably Dorothy Dunnett, who writes historical fiction, most of which doesn't center on a romantic relationship) or Lois McMaster Bujold (space opera, ditto).

I'm puzzled. Is an attractive lead and a happy ending all that's required? What about an action series centered on a couple, even though their relationship isn't the main point? And why do some writers who write about couples qualify and some not?

I'm really puzzled.