Friday, July 25, 2003

In response to the article Andrea introduced a few posts ago:

Hmm, the author of the piece really had to drive home one thing about romance novels: These books are dust ruffles on Softcore Porn. Even while quoting the writers with apparent sincerity, the reporter was snickering into his tape recorder. I hate reporters like this.

Gimme a break. There are plenty of 'real' novelists who use a fair share of T&A in their work. Do you think those lawyer thrillers would sell if they didn't involve some erotic stuff? Or at least some sexual tension.

And Gone with the Wind as the archetypal romance novel? I beg to differ. Unless I have a very poor memory, GWTW ended tragically, a big romance no-no. The author of GWTW, an alumnus of my Alma Mater, wrote a story that was full of romantic elements, but I prefer to place it in the 'historical fiction' category. The romance novel in its most concise form is a fairy tale, and even before fairy tales were popular in the 17th and 18th century, Nuns were writing mush in their cloisters.

And some mush is good mush, and some mush is lousy. Thats all fine and good in my book, critique away, but don't write a peice that makes women who read and write romance sound like a bunch of psuedo feminists who are really stepford wives underneath. Its worse than Michael Moore describing the Republican National Convention.


Post a Comment

<< Home