originally posted on February 11, 2010
there’s a definition of romance novels?
I first arrived on the Internet in the mid-1990s. And, of course, I eventually discovered various forums and websites related to romance novels. One of the things that fascinated me was the Romance Writers of America official definition of romance. It’s perfectly logical one would exist from a marketing standpoint. That’s business. I can respect that need.
What amazed me was how stripped down that definition was. At least from how I viewed the romances I read. That I’ve always read whether I realized it or not at that point. What I’ve always wanted in a romance is more akin to the traditional dictionary definition of the romance ballad. Give me a heroic adventure. Add in a bit of mystery. Toss in a smidgen of fantasy. Maybe a healthy dose of the supernatural. Then leaven it all with that mandatory romantic relationship AKA love story. But for god’s sake make sure everything ends happily ever after for the pair and I’m a happy camper. Because the one thing the RWA definition does get right is that happy ending.
It just so bare bones to say that romances are about a central love story and an emotional satisfying ending. OTOH, it works for their purposes.
To a point.
a new century and new sub-genres
Where problems occurred was around the end of the century and the beginning of the new one. That’s when the “wars” over the emergence of erotic romances began. Mainly because that’s when electronic sites like Ellora’s Cave (November 2000) started up and, surprise, became relatively popular. That is when it seemed like that’s when everyone and their aunt started pointing at that RWA definition. And using it both as a guide and the dividing line. So began the how much is too much (or the wrong kind of) sex wars in recent years. (‘Cause it’s not like that hasn’t ever been a problem books had over the decades, nay, centuries, now is it? Right?)
It’s not a battle anyone can win as far as I can see. It’s all about a balance between industry marketing, reader expectations and academic study in finding the real definitions. I will honestly admit that over the years I’ve witnessed many discussions of exactly this topic. And I only become more and more confused. Basically, an overly sexy romance is any romance that exceeds the individual romance reader’s comfort level.
But enough background stuff. Around 1999 or 2000 I came into contact with the paranormal romance and sensual romance (later AKA erotic romance) “movements”. Yes that was a thing. At about the same time, I attended the Celebrate Romance conference in Atlanta in 2001. Several individuals were absolutely raving about this new writer, Christine Feehan. Apparently she combined both highly sensual, if not downright erotic elements with the paranormal in her books. I think her backlist was up to about book 3 or 4 by that time. Definitely hadn’t gotten to Gregory’s story yet.
uh, vampire heroes? no thank you
There was just one problem, a slightly major one for me at least. Her heroes were vampires. Up to that point I’d pretty much managed to avoid vampire romances. To me they are like a plague. Right, famous last words but still I can stick to my guns at times and I honestly tried here. I’d been successful with avoiding most vampire romances and their authors prior to this, so I was confident.
Seriously, I prefer Superman to Batman. So give me a break and believe me when I say I don’t do dark easily. It’s that curse thing as much as any else although the blood-drinking doesn’t help either. I hate whiners and oh, woe is me stories with a passion. So, dark and brooding, no, thank you. Traditional vampires are certainly not going to be first on my list of heroes to look for. Or heroines either, for that matter. Any way one sliced it.
oh, so not vampires… kind of?
Of course, it does depend on the author and the actual plot. Plots can and will sucker-punch me. Everyone rushed to assure me that Christine Feehan’s weren’t really vampires. They were Carpathians. And liked who they were. They were simply looking for their light.
Huh?
Yeah, like all that was supposed to mean something. Still, the more they told me about the plots the more curious I got. Plots truly are a selling point for me. So I finally ordered the first book.
Big mistake.
It wasn’t only that the stories themselves were addictive, the heroes to-die-for… figurative and literally, so to speak. Or that the sensuality level was completely off the charts. It was another one of those where the heck do the love scenes start and stop mind-boggling situations.
It was also the universe she created. In an odd sort of way, it’s almost slightly off-kilter. Like it’s out of phase with the rest of the known universe. That works to its benefit instead of against it maybe because of their immortal life spans. I honestly don’t know. I mean they’re supposed to be contemporaries but there seems to be huge time jumps between books. How does that work?
strong heroines
But you know what the real kicker was? I liked her heroines. A lot. They struck me as truly strong and having something special inside. Plenty of other romance readers screamed and hollered that they were wimps but not me. Go figure. And, yeah, I’ve spent some time over the years defending them, too.
Sigh.
She hadn’t simply taken old familiar Gothic elements and used them to tell a new story. She’d completely rewoven them into something else.
In a romance.
Using vampires who weren’t really vampires. The survival of a species. And heroines who could stand up to them.
Hmmm.
The possibilities this series opened up were mind blowing in terms of paranormal romance. Don’t think readers didn’t sit up and take notice or that publishers were that far behind them, either.
Anyone else seeing a trend in my reading tastes that isn’t necessarily connected to sex here? We shall see. Onward and upwards. 😉