I sent an email to the NY Times Book Review. Following Robert Gottlieb’s wildly inaccurate and offensive article last week, “A Roundup of the Season’s Romance Novels” , Radhika Jones’s rebuttal “Who Gets To Write About Romance?” still completely missed the point yesterday. So I responded to her question: “What are the stories in the field of romance that you think are most significant?”
Here are mine! (I may have gotten a little carried away. The Times has so much room for improvement! *side-eye* Even still, I by no means had space to cover all of the offensive slights in either article. Please excuse the things I had to leave out.)
—
Dear New Times Book Review,
I appreciate that you have a desire to cover romance. It is a nice change. Though, it is long overdue and the lack of coverage on the genre is itself discouraging. To have the article misrepresent the genre, whether written by a romance enthusiast or a critic, is damaging to the awareness the romance industry is attempting to bring to the validity of its genre.
The following are possible topics which would show respect for the marginalized genre that is so often derided, mocked and overlooked in our culture and by the literary world at large.
1) Feminist Ideas in Romance Novels
That’s not an oxymoron. Those of us who know, love and respect the genre see it for what it is: feminist ideas written for forward thinking women.
Research for an article on this could begin with Maya Rodale’s “Dangerous Books for Girls: The Bad Reputation of Romance Novels Explained.” The very basis of why romance novels are so derided by our culture stems back to when it was considered scandalous for women to read at all, as Rodale’s book based on her graduate thesis shows.
Romance novels from the beginning—from even before Jane Austen and her contemporaries—have been about women going after and getting what they want in life and in love. They are about a woman’s freedom to choose and pursue everything she desires. In a romance, she can expect equal treatment and a right to a love life where she has no fear of being abused or mistreated, where she is valued and her pleasure is taken as seriously as any man’s. Things that are still in 2017, unfortunately, still revolutionary.
Romance, good romance that’s well written (there are bad exceptions as in any genre) is about the pursuit of what success and pleasure a woman is entitled to. Romance is popular fiction teaching us everyday feminist ideals, encouraging the reader to know she deserves and should feel confident in achieving things for herself without apology.
2) The Social Significance of the Romance Genre In Our Current Culture
Salon had an excellent article over the weekend about romance https://www.salon.com/2017/09/30/welcome-to-the-romance-resistance/ touching on the social importance of romance in our current culture.
When there is such discord and tragedy taking place in the news and all over the world, the therapeutic value of reading a Happily-Ever-After is not something to be mocked, but rather valued.
The romance genre epitomizes the idea of reading for pleasure, for the pure joy of something happy. Something that especially for women whose roles in our culture are still based in serving others and facilitating the pleasures and successes of family, friends and co-workers, is scandalous.
3) Why Romance Readers Are Ashamed of What They Read
Romance is the only genre in danger of being referred to as “trash” by both its critics and its lovers alike. Our culture’s regard for romance as a waste, as something so insignificant it is worthier of a garbage can than a bookshelf is puzzling. So many readers, and arguably Mr. Gottlieb in his article as well, feel a need to denigrate the books they are enjoying so as to cover their embarrassment for enjoying them at all. Reading something for pure pleasure is regarded as a frivolous waste of time in our culture and reading romance leaves one open to derision.
A woman reading a romance novel in public, or god forbid, admitting she writes them, is in danger of being slut-shamed, harassed or at the very least made fun of or whispered about. It is no small topic worth exploring by the NY Times.
A note about humor in regards to articles about romance novels:
It is not wrong for a man to write about romance, but care must be taken by men writing about a genre that is loved and written mostly by women. Romance is often the butt of jokes, and humor about the genre from a white, cis, straight man can come off as misogynist and blatantly derogatory. Avid romance fans make loving jokes about their books all the time. (For instance, Sarah Wendell’s wildly popular romance blog entitled, Smart Women Trashy Books.) But gentle teasing from someone who loves romance and holds it with respect is different from jokes coming from a book review source, such as the Times, who many will view as “lowering itself” for covering the genre at all.
4) The Endless Varieties in Romance Novels
I’d appreciate a retraction of Mr. Gottlieb’s wildly inaccurate comment that romance novels fall into two categories: contemporary and regency. For all of these article suggestions, I’d like to request thorough and accurate research be pursued before publication.
The contemporary genre alone can be divided in countless different kinds, darker or lighter in subject matter, small town or urban in setting, sweet or broiling in titillation (to use Gottlieb’s word). The options are endless. The variety of subgenres is too. Erotic romances, most of which are far more than titillating and are downright explicit, sensual and beautifully erotic. (See how I did that there? I mentioned the sex without making fun of it, something I’d like to see in future NY Times piece on romances.)
There are paranormal romances of many varieties and historicals from every time period in history, far more than the mere regency Gottlieb mentions and categorizes inaccurately. The Ripped Bodice, a romance independent book store, has over 40 categories of romance. http://www.therippedbodicela.com/books
Any prescription that a health care provider otherwise female viagra sildenafil it may met you several adverse effects. But Kamagra drugs require sexual stimulation to give its best result in viagra 50mg canada bed. Kamagra Online viagra prices in usa can be ordered easily and fast delivery is ensured. What is hip viagra tablet replacement? Hip replacement is a life-changing decision and could give you long-term consequences.
These multiple subgenres are visible on any retail ebook website selling romance, including Amazon and Barnes & Noble.
5) Sexism In Critiques of Romance Novels
To pigeon hole romances as only about hot men and swooning women, as from the beginning of Mr. Gottlieb’s article, is woefully misguided and bad representation.
Mr. Gottlieb misses all of the above points about social significance and feminism, his mocking comments instead focusing the “titillating” aspect of romances that out of context are so easily mocked. Are men mocked for admiring models, images and descriptions of sexy women? No. And novels written by women should not be either.
But women in novels pursuing their sexual desires is something that makes most people uncomfortable, including critics. Other writers have misrepresented romance novels as badly if not worse. An article researching the history of inaccurate coverage would be fascinating.
6) Romance Novels Empowering Women
Romance novels are mocked partly because they empower women to dream of a better world for themselves and give them ideas and the courage to fight for it. Popular fiction has been how these ideas have been passed on to women from the inception of novel writing by women, for women. (See Rodale’s Dangerous Book for Girls for actual historical research supporting these points.)
In a romance, a heroine’s problems are never solved by a hero. In every good romance novel, she, not the hero, saves herself and pursues what is best for her and her personal goals. (Again, there are exceptions in lower quality romance novels, which again, every genre has some of.) The heroine never has to give up on her goals for love. She never ends up with a hero who will oppress her or control her, abuse her or belittle her. She will end up with a lover who accepts her for who she is and supports her in all the adventures and choices she wishes to make in life.
7) Tropes or Stereotypes About Romance
Gottlieb’s categorizing of all contemporary novels as “young-woman-finding-her-way stories” is seriously false and makes me wonder what contemporary romances the critic has been reading. That they all “provide comfort and (mild) titillation to women who dreamed of marrying the boss” is inaccurate at least, and a bit ignorant. The variety of romance contemporaries that have nothing to do with either of these statements is endless. To think a New York Times critic misses all of them is… staggering.
Gottlieb is not the first to overly simplify and pigeonhole romances as all the same. Yes, there are tropes in romance, but there are tropes in any genre. I ask where is the article mocking all thrillers for their obsession with serial killers? Or the mystery genre’s obsession with murder? Or all tragic literary fiction having to do with death?
An article presenting and combating the negative stereotypes about the sameness of the romance genre would be appreciated.
8) Sex in Romance Novels
The progression of women’s sexual desire in romance novels over the course of decades is a fascinating topic. In the sixties and seventies, the bodice ripper term was coined and books like The Flame & The Flower depicted scenes where women weren’t even allowed to desire sex and so must be seen as “taken” or as we now see them, assault or rape-fantasies. The progression now to heroines who are free to express a desire for sex, wanting to have it and lots of it, and even the development of feminine dominance in scenes of intimacy, is a subject that could be addressed with care and sensitivity.
In other words, an article that addresses sex in romance with respect and accuracy rather than mockery. Something comparing the quality of sex writing between genres would be great too. Perhaps leading to a conversation of how much literary writers could learn about writing intimacy from romance novelists.
9) Diversification of The Romance Genre
The romance novel industry, as should be the case in every genre, is on a fierce crusade to diversify its titles with books from #ownvoice authors of different ethnicities, sexuality, gender, disability and other marginalized groups. To fit this entirely into one article would likely be a disservice and would probably require a series.
10) The lack of romance novels in indie books stores.
Many booksellers refuse to sell romance. They have no section for it and won’t even carry it among the regular fiction titles, despite it being a higher grossing genre than mystery and sci-fi/ fantasy combined. Sexism, anyone?
11) Romance, the bastard child of the literary world.
I must end with a possible topic on the regard of romance by non-romance readers. Ms. Jones’s article quotes a commenter who said to “spare us the bodice rippers” and believes romances should not be included in the NY Times Book Review. It’s a commonly held opinion and worth investigating. Also worth uncovering is the Times reluctance to cover the genre and why it regards novels with such social significance as less worthy of page time than other genres.
It can hardly be because the pages can reference sexual pleasure and a woman’s belief in deserving a Happily-Ever-After. Or can it?