Jul 31 2008
Inspiration presents itself
My next RTB post might be a rant rather than a laugh riot.
If you don’t like formula, don’t read genre fiction, which is defined by formula.
Green Eggs and Ham has a happy ending. That’s not enough to make it a frickin’ romance.
I really don’t give a damn what “outsiders” have to say, but I am really getting sick of the romance genre being treated with contempt ON ROMANCE SITES.
Pissed offedness just might get me off my ass on the Cooties issue. We will not tolerate any of this crap over there, where romance will be celebrated as a wonderful thing.
Loading ...
9/30
11/4
11/4
11/25
July 31st, 2008 at 8:16 am
Umm, yeah. Assuming I’m thinking of the same thing you’re thinking of, I have to wonder why someone who’s clearly so disenchanted with romance as a genre is posting where she is. [blinkblink]
She’s also mistaken in her definition. Romance is defined by its plot — two or more people want to form a stable, romantic relationship, but can’t because some obstacle stands in their way. They struggle to overcome the obstacle, and form their stable, romantic relationship, the end. That’s the formula.
The establishment of the romantic relationship has to be the primary plotline of the story. If it’s not, then the story isn’t genre romance, period. It might be a really good mystery with a romantic subplot, or SF or fantasy or horror or suspense or whatever, with a great romantic subplot, but if the romance is a subplot then the story isn’t a genre romance.
Mind you, I like good romantic subplots. I don’t “require” them in my reading the way she does, but I do appreciate them when they show up in other genres of fiction. But the existence of that romantic subplot doesn’t infect the whole story with the Romance Virus and convert it into “a romance book.” [wry smile]
Whatever. If she’s happier reading in other genres, looking for books with romantic subplots, then good for her. There’s some good stuff out there now. That doesn’t mean romance as a genre needs to change, though, just because her personal tastes have changed.
Angie
July 31st, 2008 at 8:53 am
If you’re thinking it’s today’s RTB, you’re right.
I thought perhaps I had misinterpreted and overreacted, but a pal-o-mine read it and said, “So what she’s saying is, there’s too much romance in romance.” Now I’m teetering between growling and LMAO because that’s so riduculous.
The last time I went into B&N, I looked for a Portuguese phrasebook in the romance aisle, and there wasn’t one. Clearly, romance has failed me.
Romance doesn’t meet all my needs, either. That’s why I read other things—always have, always will.
But when I want a romance, romance remains my go-to genre. Go figure.
July 31st, 2008 at 11:27 am
Exactly. She’s criticizing romance books for abiding by the genre definition, which is just bizarre. :P
Angie
July 31st, 2008 at 12:21 pm
I don’t have the energy to read the original post and comment intelligently, but anything that gets you moving on Cooties is good with me.
August 2nd, 2008 at 2:06 pm
LOL Selah. I read it. I’m still scratching my head. Not exactly sure what the point was . . .
But, I will say that when I get ‘disenchanted’ with romance, it’s usually just a reflection of my mental space. And I always, ALWAYS come back to it eventually. I go read other books, and when I find myself hunkering for MORE than just a romantic subplot in them, I know I’m ready.
I get really tired of the ‘this is romance, that is not’ debate. Because, in my mind, I write romance. Though, I don’t always write an HEA. In fact, I think grief and romance go together like peas and carrots. Heh. But even the sad ones are still romance in my mind, because if you took away the relationship, the story is 30 pages long.