AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2007 > June > 27 > Entry
Harm in reading romance novels?
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
I enjoy an escapist beach read like anyone else. I’ve got no literary pretensions. That said, however, I was concerned to learn that many romance novels are not as harmless as they look. In fact, some marriage therapists caution that women can become as dangerously unbalanced by these books’ entrancing but distorted messages as men can by distorted messages of pornography.
In fact, many of today’s romance novels actually have a huge soft porn influence, as nearly all major publishers are rushing to put out mainstream “erotica” titles to meet exploding demand. At what point should we admit that there is little difference between graphic images to men and seductive, graphic words and feelings to women? Erotica romances provide the porn-laced story with no worry about a spouse catching you online.
Erotica aside, even traditional romance novels promote - almost by definition - an unattainable romantic ideal. The male heroes are all strong, rugged and breathtakingly handsome, yet sensitive, patient listeners and utterly unselfish. Is it any wonder that if we read two or three of those romances in a row, we’d start to be irritated by our real-life husbands with all their wonderful yet exasperating idiosyncrasies?
Dr. Julianna Slattery, psychologist and author of the excellent book Finding the Hero in Your Husband, explained in an interview that “For many women, these novels really do promote dissatisfaction with their relationships. There is a neurochemical element with men and porn, but an emotional element with women and these novels. I have met women that are addicted to these novels.”
If you think this is an insignificant trend, think again. The Romance Writers of America website says 64 million people (mostly women) read at least one romance novel last year, accounting for 55% of all the popular mass-market fiction sold.
Although I wish “erotica” would disappear, I’m not suggesting women ditch other books that also happen to be romance stories. But this summer, those of us who like a good beach read would do well to remember, as we fold up our towel and head home, that it’s our choice to find the hero in our husband and not in the pages of a fiction book.
Rebuttal
There’s a war going on, children go to bed hungry and women are being raped at alarming rates in South Africa. Harlequin novels may not be like reading Maya Angelou, but at least women are reading.
If we’re getting out the protest signs about insipid romance novels, why not rid the shelves of silly self-help books, too. They, too, give women unrealistic and dangerous notions.
Like, say, the notions of the sick woman I saw on the Oprah Show who had breast cancer. She believed the positive thinking mantra message in the actress-edited best seller, “The Secret,” was a more viable method of fighting cancer than chemo. Even Oprah thought she was whack.
Romance novels are about entertainment, not the dissemination of seriously dangerous notions. I don’t think Harlequin readers believe they’re doing in-depth gender research or that Fabio is going to ride up on his white horse. I think they’re indulging in a little female pornography.
But I’d argue that all porn isn’t equal. Comparing romance novels laced with story lines and plots to visuals of girls bent over motorcycles is unfair.
Erotica has been shown to have no adverse social implications, according to an in-depth study of pornography and erotica, in “Pornography: Research Advances and Policy Considerations.” Violent and dehumanizing pornography did, however, show anti-social implications. And Internet pornography users show weak social ties, the March 2004 “Social Science Quarterly” reported.
The evidence is in: Pornography is objectifying. The only knowledge someone wants about a model in a porn shot is carnal. And, no, Playboy centerfold questionnaires about a gal’s favorite hobby, isn’t character development. That’s marketing, and an excuse for those guys who say they only read Playboy for the articles.
The difference between erotica and porn isn’t the lighting, it’s the content.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Watta Load
July 2, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ—snort-snort-ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ….
By Better Subject
July 2, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this
Smoking could kill 1 billion this century says World Health Organization BANGKOK (Reuters) - One billion people will die of tobacco-related diseases this century unless governments in rich and poor countries alike get serious about preventing smoking, top World Health Organization (WHO) experts said on Monday. “Tobacco is a defective product. It kills half of its customers,” Douglas Bettcher, head of the WHO’s Tobacco Free Initiative, said at the start of an international conference in Bangkok to draw up a masterplan for the world to kick the habit. “It kills 5.4 million people per year and half of those deaths are in developing countries. That’s like one jumbo jet going down every hour,” he said. With smoking rates in many developing countries on the rise, particularly among teenagers, that annual death toll would rise to 8.3 million within the next 20 years, he added. However, if governments introduced measures such as aggressive taxation, banning cigarette advertising and making offices and public places totally tobacco-free, smoking rates could halve by 2050, he said. “It’s a completely preventable epidemic,” Bettcher said, citing countries such as Singapore, Australia and Thailand where tough anti-smoking laws have helped people to quit. “If we do that, by 2050 we can save 200 million lives.” Officials from 147 countries are attending the week-long conference, which is likely to agree on binding laws against cross-border tobacco advertising — a move against events such as Formula One — as well as tougher legislation against cigarette smuggling. Around 600 billion cigarettes were smuggled in 2006 — 11 percent of the world’s consumption — according to the Framework Convention Alliance (FAC), an umbrella group of hundreds of anti-tobacco organisations. As well as keeping the prices artificially low and thereby stimulating demand, the counterfeit cigarette industry also deprives governments of more than $40 billion in missed taxes, the FCA estimates. BAN ON ADS In Thailand, smoking rates have fallen from 30 percent in 1992 to around 18 percent, a decline health officials attribute to a ban on all domestic tobacco advertising 15 years ago. “The most important medicines in tobacco control are: number one, increasing taxation; number two, bans on advertising; and number three, smoke-free public places,” said Hatai Chitanondh of the Thailand Health Promotion Institute. Besides agreeing laws on cross-border advertising and smuggling, the conference is also likely to issue guidelines for countries introducing legislation on “second-hand smoke” and “smoke-free” areas. Although not legally binding, anti-smoking campaigners are delighted with the explicit wording of the guidelines. “There is no safe level of exposure to tobacco smoke and notions such as a threshold value for toxicity from second-hand smoke should be rejected as they are contradicted by scientific evidence,” a draft copy of the guidelines said. “Approaches other than 100 percent smoke-free environments, including ventilation, air filtration and use of designated smoking areas have repeatedly been shown to be ineffective.”
By kimberly
July 2, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this
Oh, good grief!!!
By lozen
July 2, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this
Yaaawwwwwwnnnnnn! Shaunti wishes erotica would disappear! ???? Poor woman. Yaaaaawwwwnnnnn. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
By Monica
July 2, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this
I guess we’d better get rid of soap operas too. They are, afterall, the downfall of the stay-at-home-mom, right?
Seriously, who came up with this topic??
By JokesOn
July 2, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this
I love the qualifying tense here:
Violent and dehumanizing pornography did, however, show anti-social implications.
But its general application in the rebuttal.
By Bruno
July 2, 2007 11:56 AM | Link to this
Here’s a topic all you ladies might be interested in: Narcissistic Personality Disorder. I think the symptoms of those “afflicted” with this condition well-describes many of the bad, abusive men you may have come across in your lives. Here’s a layperson’s link, but I encourage everyone to google in NPD to find out more about it.
http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/index.html
By Don%
July 2, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this
The basic theory about NPD is that if a child doesn’t receive normal love and protection at an early age, they learn or choose to look inward for love, not being able to trust the primary caregivers. This carries forward into adulthood, in which the person has difficulty forming normal, empathetic relationships with others. One of the hallmarks of NPD is something called paraphilias, or the objectivization of the sex act. Examples of paraphilias are the regular use of pornography, along with more extreme situations like sadism and masochism.
By Don%
July 2, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this
For the record, due to the feedback of previous girlfriends along with some of you ladies here, I believe I have exhibited signs of NPD. I’m not sure how, but I’m gonna try to get better. Thanks.
By Bruno
July 2, 2007 12:13 PM | Link to this
Of course, for the ladies who keep ending up with the Narcissists, there has to be a reason. I’ll leave it up to you to figure out why. I’ve got a few ideas, but, being a Dumb Male and Narcissisist, I’ll keep them to myself today. ; > }
By Anonymous
July 2, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this
Gosh, I had no idea women’s brains were so flimsy and vulnerable. Better shield from the dangerous influence of romance novels and erotica, huh?
By Judy
July 2, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this
Frankly, I read romance for entertainment, the same way I read science fiction and fantasty. In those two genres, I don’t expect an alien ship to appear in my back yard nor an elf to battle a goblin out front. I know it can’t happen just as I know my husband doesn’t have all of the characteristics of a romance hero — and I don’t care.
Just let me be entertained.
By .
July 2, 2007 1:18 PM | Link to this
Sometimes those books give my wife ideas about new ways to play….I’m not complaining….
By Jacquie D'Alessandro
July 2, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this
I read Ms. Feldhahn’s and Ms. Glass’s comments with a great deal of interest as I am a local author of twenty-five romance novels. I would be very interested to know which romance novels these ladies have read because it doesn’t sound to me as if they’ve read very many—and certainly not recently. One of the reasons romances are so popular is because there is such a wide variety of stories to choose from. You can pick paranormal (ghosts, vampires, werewolves, magic, etc.) historical (Regency, Victorian, etc.), contemporary, romantic suspense, romantic comedy, inspirational, or erotica. Within each of these subgenres there is a variety of sensuality levels, ranging from highly sensual to sweet (nothing explicit). In fact, while some romances can be erotic, “erotica” is actually a different genre, one where the focus is on the sensual aspects of the story, whereas in a romance, the relationship between the hero and heroine is the main focus. Romances are books about love—about men and women who struggle to overcome the obstacles separating them. A couple who fights to beat the odds, who struggles to solve their conflicts, and forge a loving, happy, monogamous relationship. I don’t think that’s an “unattainable romantic ideal”—indeed, I think that’s what most people want. What they strive for. Which is why these books are so popular—they represent our deepest human desires. They’re about hope, and good things happening to people. And yes, while there are a lot of bad things in the world, there are also a lot of good things. Good people. And we like to read about them. We like to read about the good guys winning. We like a happy ending. When I finish reading a romance, I do so with a smile on my face, because I love happy endings. And I think they’re just as realistic as depressing, unhappy endings—after all, not everyone is miserable in real life. In a romance, no one hands the hero and heroine their happy ending—throughout the story they have to fight for it—fight the odds, the obstacles, and each other to reach that place where they can finally be together. Which to me, makes the characters very real and relatable, because don’t we all have to fight for things? Don’t we all want to be happy? Don’t we all want love and respect and hope? I know I do. And based on the number of people reading romances, I’m not alone. I think it’s incorrect and inaccurate to call books that promote love and monogamy and hope “insipid.” I’d be delighted to send Ms. Glass and Ms. Feldhahn a copy of my latest romance. I think they’d be surprised—and hopefully pleasantly so. And that they’d come away with a smile and a feeling of hope. Best regards, Jacquie D’Alessandro
By Embarrassed Silly Woman
July 2, 2007 1:46 PM | Link to this
“The Wolf and the Dove” by Kathleen E. Woodiwiss. That’s the last one I read twenty years ago. It carried me away with such bliss, but I realized life would never be thus, and carry the aching emptiness of knowing and feeling, if only in my mind, of that which can never be. I’ll never open another.
By Bruno
July 2, 2007 2:02 PM | Link to this
Embarrassed Silly Woman—Please share what your vision of real love is all about. I’m a little suspicious of the romance novel version, because (1) Real life isn’t very dramatic most of the time (2) People are inherently selfish to one degree or another, and usually end up with power struggles in their relationships with one person “winning”, and the other fighting for respect. I would like to believe Ms. Delassandro’s assertion that the fictionalized version of love is attainable, but I think it may be a narcissistic fantasy which may stand in the way of working toward the real thing.
By Jen
July 2, 2007 2:02 PM | Link to this
Flowers from the Storm by Laura Kinsale is a fantastic romance. I mean, it’s a really good story. So many romances are so bad that I can hardly finish reading them…the characters are shallow and it’s hard to sympathize with them.
But not this story…it’s remarkable.
By Mara
July 2, 2007 2:20 PM | Link to this
Hey! I read The Wolf and the Dove, too! I laughed at the end when the crazy old woman turned out to be much, MUCH craftier than anyone had given her credit for. And how nice that Wolfgar was indeed the true son of the old knight…
By Caro Kinkead
July 2, 2007 2:57 PM | Link to this
I cannot believe intelligent, serious women are discussing this. Romance novels are entertainment, if you haven’t noticed — and if a woman reads a romance novel and is dissatisfied with her husband, I seriously doubt the novel itself is the cause, but a symptom of a deeper problem.
Yes, I’ve met women who are “addicted” to romance novels; I’ve also met women who are addicted to shopping. I know exactly which one I think is more dangerous to a relationship. And the idea that women — and I’m using the same broad strokes Ms. Feldhahn uses — are so simple-minded as to confuse a work of fiction and fictional characters with real life is also dangerous and insulting to boot.
By Jo Leigh
July 2, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this
Oh, get over yourselves, both of you. Every woman I know is completely capable of distinguishing fact from fiction. Every woman I know is completely capable of deciding what kind of fiction she likes to read.
Have you ever been to a romantic movie? Is Tom Hanks truly a representation of what a real man is like?
Jeez, debate about something that doesn’t assume women are idiots.
By pascha
July 2, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this
I was really into the romance novels where white woman and Indian man fell in love…until I moved out west and met some native men! Many naive white women move to the west to meet “traditional” indian men. The traditional people laugh at how all these white women are descended from Cherokee, Creek or Iroquois indian princesses of course. Traditional indian men are married to traditional indian women, raising families and working every day at the army base or the missile plant. The only indians white women get involved with are the misfits and the alcoholics (there are a lot of those). The Noble Savage no longer exists ladies, so don’t go for that one!
By Megan Hart
July 2, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this
Oh, my goodness. So…it’s wrong of me to want a husband who’s strong, sensitive, handsome and unselfish? It’s wrong of me to want to read about characters who meet, fall in love, make love, overcome struggles and end up happily committed?
And…reading about that is supposed to make me dissatisfied, how? Because I shouldn’t want all of the above? I shouldn’t EXPECT all of the above in my partner for life?
Life isn’t a book. I believe the women and men who read my books can understand the difference between life and fiction.
Life is what you make of it, and no piece of fiction should keep you from it. And if it does, don’t blame the book. The blame lies someplace else.
Megan Hart www.meganhart.com
By Lauren Dane
July 2, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this
My goodness, I don’t know which opinion to be offended more by - the idea that wanting a man who is my partner, who respects and cherishes me is a fantasy or well, at least they’re reading pats dumb women on the head
For the record, I write romance novels. Some of them have quite a bit of sex in them. I also have a law degree and I’ve been married, quite happily so, for twenty years. My husband is my partner in my life. He’s a wonderful friend, a generous lover, a fabulous parent and he works hard to be those things. That’s what a real man does.
Also for the record, women are not as stupid as both commentators believe them to be. I know people don’t ride around on brooms like they do in Harry Potter. I know the difference between a book and reality and as I speak with readers every day, I can tell you they do too.
We do close our books and go about our lives quite well. Escaping into fiction isn’t the downfall of western civilization.
Lauren Dane
By Laura
July 2, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this
I think Shaunti is doing women a disservice in thinking that women aren’t intelligent enough to know the difference between reality and fantasy. I read romance novels for entertainment and approach them the same way I do all FICTION.
This column is just a thinly veiled disguise for Shaunti to preach that erotica is immoral.
Nice try. We’re smarter than that. Even those of us who read romance novels.
By Kate
July 2, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this
This is the most demeaning commentary on women I have ever read.
Argument One: A) We’re dumb—we must be, because we confuse romance novels with reality. B) We have overly high expectations—basic respect, kindness, and affection from the men we love. C) We’re little sluts because we enjoy books that include sexual relationships.
OR
Argument Two: It doesn’t matter what we read, because at least we’re basically literate. Praise the Lord, the unsophisticated little housewives can read!
How condescending.
Women are their own worst enemies, and both of these arguments show precisely how. :-p
Pascha, get a grip. The women living out their Native American fantasy have bigger problems than badly written romance novels. They’re the same sort of women who marry people on death row, and you’re not likely to find that scenario in a romance novel.
By Lily Toad
July 2, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this
This morning I read my cereal box. Hey, it’s not Maya Angelou, but at least women are reading!!
By Monica
July 2, 2007 3:31 PM | Link to this
Okay, quick show of blog hands… who read Judy Blume’s Forever? It’s still a popular checkout at our school library!
By kerry
July 2, 2007 3:33 PM | Link to this
Uhh, am I reading the correctly? What a bunch of baloney. If someone is already seriously disturbed, then yeah, she’ll put down her copy of Ranch Hands Do It Better and think her accountant husband is a drip. but intelligent women who pick up an occasional romance or the shocking(!) erotica is not doing this. She puts down the book and goes and plants one on her hubby snoozing on the couch while the lawn needs cutting. This Shaunti woman seems to lead a very restricted life and I think that’s rather sad. I think I’ll send her some Erotica!
By Toni
July 2, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this
I read romances, I LOVE erotica, and I’m a BIG fan of porn!! I can read up to 3 books of any genre per week; but I have to read at least 5 books of the romance genre every week. I watch upwards up to 4-5 porn movies a week too. I barely watch telelvision, and I’m not interested in Fox News, CNN, etc.; if they TV’s on, I’d rather watch porn.
I’m happy, my husband’s happy, and I’m amazed that I’m considered a “victim” by Shaunti’s standards!! Oh well, viva la victim!!
By The Kettle
July 2, 2007 3:42 PM | Link to this
Why, yes Bruno! I am black. How kind of you to notice.
By Jokester
July 2, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this
Send Shaunti A.N. Roguelaure’s Beauty Trilogy.
By Essie Lou
July 2, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this
Erotica and romance—-Brain food for smart girls and women. We all read it and we all can tell the difference between fact and fiction, thank you very much.
Girls, your columns are both so dated it’s sad.
By patronizing; we can do better
July 2, 2007 3:48 PM | Link to this
I find them patronizing, like that’s all that women can handle as far as intellectual challenge. I’m not referring to the porn or sensuality or whatever, but are we only able to read books with a love story?
By carrie
July 2, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this
When I was in my teens I used to breathe Harlequin romances!!! I’d read them by the dozen. When I got into my 20’s I stopped reading romances because I couldn’t find one where there was a black woman, like me, who was the heroine. It seemed that true love was only designated for the whites, (in the then romance genre). I’m back into reading romances now that I’ve found a line of African American inspired books, but now I’m becoming more interested in erotica. I’ve discovered online erotica and websites but again I’ve found that women of color are not represented that much!!
So, I’ve decided to write some books for people like me, who want to see someone besides the blonde haired blue eyed white girl find love. Love comes in all colors, lust too.
By azteclady
July 2, 2007 3:52 PM | Link to this
Bruno said: “Embarrassed Silly Woman—Please share what your vision of real love is all about. I’m a little suspicious of the romance novel version, because (1) Real life isn’t very dramatic most of the time (2) People are inherently selfish to one degree or another, and usually end up with power struggles in their relationships with one person “winning”, and the other fighting for respect. I would like to believe Ms. Delassandro’s assertion that the fictionalized version of love is attainable, but I think it may be a narcissistic fantasy which may stand in the way of working toward the real thing.”
So tell me, how many romances have YOU read? Because in a healthy percentage of those I have read, there’s no more drama than the natural conflict that arises from real life situations—divorce, single parenthood, different cultural/family backgrounds, etc.
And frankly, I find both the column and the rebuttal just as condescending and insulting to my intelligence—and that of the many women AND men I know who read romance.
By Bruno
July 2, 2007 4:14 PM | Link to this
Why, yes Bruno! I am black. How kind of you to notice.
Kettle—Are you hopefully working toward a better life for yourself?
By Nora Roberts
July 2, 2007 4:16 PM | Link to this
Jeez, I’ve been sending a `distorted message’ to women for years by writing about relationships and commitment, about overcoming obstacles and celebrating the discovery and value of love. Thank God somebody clued me in! And all this time I thought the message was love is a vital part of the human condition. Millions of women—who are, of course, irrational, weak-minded and unhappy—have become dangerously unbalanced. Marriages destroyed as they toss aside their husbands in search of fictional characters.
What utter crap.
Neither am I writing female porn. Since when is a novel highlighting two people falling in love, and enjoying each other sexually, pornography?
Oddly, I expect my readers to know the difference between reality and fiction, between pornography and sexuality—whatever their gender.
By Bruno
July 2, 2007 4:18 PM | Link to this
So tell me, how many romances have YOU read?
Well, because I’m a guy, I’ve mostly looked at porn. However—and what may be my saving grace—I do have a strong feminine side so do enjoy some romantic movies like “Sleepless In Seattle” and “Ghost”.
By Lisa
July 2, 2007 4:20 PM | Link to this
Well then, let me go home and tell my husband that since he doesn’t live up to my romance hero expectations, I’m going to divorce him immediately. Then, I’ll find my own place, sit on the couch and try to make sense of the words in the book in front of me.
I’ve never been so embarrassed to be part of the female sex as when I read these two commentaries. I was reading romances before I met my husband. If I took anything away from romance novels, it was that I should expect a caring, sensitive man who is an equal partner in all things, and who treats me with the respect and dignity I deserve. And guess what - I waited until I found that.
So if 64 million women have read a romance, do you think all 64 million women have completely unrealistic ideals of romance and men? Somehow, I doubt it.
By kimberly
July 2, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this
I am currently 300 some odd pages into The Brothers Karamazov by Dostoevsky, and it’s not particularly romantic so far. Slow-going, too, due to the two or three nicknames given to each impossible-to-pronounce character. Does anyone know if there’s any romance, erotica, or soft p0rn in the second two-thirds of the book? That would be cool.
By Bruno
July 2, 2007 4:33 PM | Link to this
I am currently 300 some odd pages into The Brothers Karamazov by Dostoevsky
Hey, JokesOn, you taking notes? How many ladies do you know that are reading Dostoevsky?
By eye roll
July 2, 2007 4:37 PM | Link to this
I cannot believe I actually stooped to reading this nonsense! (I am talking about this column Ladies). I have willing forked over $$$ for Nora Roberts, Amanda Quick, Jude Deveraux, Judith McNaught etc for decades! I do not find them to be soft porn at all.
When my marriage to an abusive piece of …. ended, it was not due to these books, in fact these books gave me hope that we might overcome the BS that was going on. However, what I can tell you that these books with their ‘spunky’, ‘feminine’, and ‘successful’ WOMEN I have realized that I do not need a man to define me (neither do most of the women characters these women write)…I need to be the strong woman God made me to be. Guess what, in deciding that I can succeed without a man on my arm, I have attianed many things I did not think I could have (a successful family, a home, a LIFE) without a man. Now I have men asking me out because of who I am!
Get a clue, the books take all the great parts of falling in love, mixes in some interesting plot twists and are no more harmful than watching “Failure to Launch’, ‘How to Lose a Guy in 10 days’ or ‘Notebook’….I would gladly go see Midnight Bayou on the big screen (with a male date!).
By Bruno
July 2, 2007 4:41 PM | Link to this
I gave up on all fiction when I was about 15, but did enjoy many of the classics like To Kill A Mockingbird (my fav), Huckleberry Finn, Zorba the Greek, and everything by Herman Hesse.
By Bruno
July 2, 2007 4:42 PM | Link to this
Anyone read The Invisible Man?
By Steve
July 2, 2007 4:45 PM | Link to this
It’s entertainment, plain and simple. Women as a whole do test out on many studies to be more of the ‘dreamer’ type of personality than men, but that’s a very good thing in it’s own way. A world full of realists and very little would ever improve as people would not try to attain things that defy easy explanation.
The problem comes when some people cannot detach themselves from their fantasies and they let it run, or in some cases ruin, their lives. This goes for all people, and all types of entertainment and fantasy, not just women. To say these books are the problem is absolutely ridiculous.
That being said, there is no doubt these books do cause issues for certain individuals. To say otherwise, or to pretend the fairer sex is impervious to such romantic drivel, is just being ignorant or naive.
By E-burns
July 2, 2007 5:12 PM | Link to this
I’m amazed at how little research went into the columns! And how many authors have responded. Thank you all ladies! Nora alone is an icon in the field and you can’t walk into a grocery store, pharmacy not to mention bookstore without seeing her books en masse.
Clearly she’s doing something that someone somewhere likes ;)
The snobbery in these hit piece columns dated as well as ignorant. Some of the best literature being written today is in the romance genre’. Yes, there is tripe and garbage, but there is also brilliance, wit, intelligence, great stories and even better characters. Maybe simply because anything goes, more creativity finds its way into these books than others.
Yes, I read everything, and I’m appalled at how bad writing, if written by the correct gender in a popular genre’ can get lauded, but often books that are light years better, get trashed because they are in the ‘romance’ or ‘erotica’ genre’.
That alone is pure stupidity, ignorance and just plain wrong!
In the last 10 years alone I’ve seen the R/E genre’ grow in leaps and bounds, with more sub-genre’s, more authors, the birth Net publishers and now self-publishers. The cliche’s are gone. No longer is this icon of the Dowdy Wife in the Bad Marriage and No Sex Life. Now it’s entertaiment and stories of healthy, intelligent, normal, sexy women (and men) everywhere. Because we accept that we can be smart, healthy, in love with our spouses AND read whatever we dang well want.
Sadly, it seems the Mass Media is about 20 years lagging.
I’ve yet to meet any woman who has unrealistic expectations because she reads these books. But I know smart women who can tell fact from fiction, who can use books as entertainment as well as education and well….. erotica has helped more marriages than Viagra could ever dream.
Anyhow, welcome to the new century folks…expect to see lots more of these books in the future :) And hopefully, as the media (and Hollyweird) catching on, more movies based on these books.
By E-burns
July 2, 2007 5:13 PM | Link to this
I’m amazed at how little research went into the columns! And how many authors have responded. Thank you all ladies! Nora alone is an icon in the field and you can’t walk into a grocery store, pharmacy not to mention bookstore without seeing her books en masse.
Clearly she’s doing something that someone somewhere likes ;)
The snobbery in these hit piece columns dated as well as ignorant. Some of the best literature being written today is in the romance genre’. Yes, there is tripe and garbage, but there is also brilliance, wit, intelligence, great stories and even better characters. Maybe simply because anything goes, more creativity finds its way into these books than others.
Yes, I read everything, and I’m appalled at how bad writing, if written by the correct gender in a popular genre’ can get lauded, but often books that are light years better, get trashed because they are in the ‘romance’ or ‘erotica’ genre’.
That alone is pure stupidity, ignorance and just plain wrong!
In the last 10 years alone I’ve seen the R/E genre’ grow in leaps and bounds, with more sub-genre’s, more authors, the birth Net publishers and now self-publishers. The cliche’s are gone. No longer is this icon of the Dowdy Wife in the Bad Marriage and No Sex Life. Now it’s entertaiment and stories of healthy, intelligent, normal, sexy women (and men) everywhere. Because we accept that we can be smart, healthy, in love with our spouses AND read whatever we dang well want.
Sadly, it seems the Mass Media is about 20 years lagging.
I’ve yet to meet any woman who has unrealistic expectations because she reads these books. But I know smart women who can tell fact from fiction, who can use books as entertainment as well as education and well….. erotica has helped more marriages than Viagra could ever dream.
Anyhow, welcome to the new century folks…expect to see lots more of these books in the future :) And hopefully, as the media (and Hollyweird) catching on, more movies based on these books.
By Seressia Glass
July 2, 2007 5:15 PM | Link to this
Wow. Not only am I brainwashing women by writing African American romance, I’m destroying families by writing about how people can develop loving, committed relationships while overcoming obstacles like race, suicide, abuse, and infertility. I didn’t know I was so subversive!
Luckily I give my readers more credit. People are smart enough not to believe everything they read. Like the “commentary” and “rebuttal” at the top of this page, for example.
Romance novels aren’t porn, and the people reading (and writing!) them aren’t delusional. These novels aren’t the downfall of marriage. I’d be inclined to believe a marriage has been spiced up a time or two after someone read’s a romance novel. And there’s nothing wrong with that.
By Whiley
July 3, 2007 8:26 AM | Link to this
I only buy romance books for the picture on the front covers.
By Kate
July 3, 2007 8:28 AM | Link to this
How many ladies do you know that are reading Dostoevsky?
Ummm. I have. Frankly, I enjoy Nora Roberts more. Her stories don’t take four freakin’ chapters, each as long as a standard Harlequin, to take off beyond preachy ruminations about the nature of guilt, Jesus and the hero’s itchy chillblains from walking across the frozen wastes that are symbolic of his empty soul.
For sheer, pondering, pontificating dullness, by all means go Dostoevsky. For entertainment, go Nora. He’s far less culturally relevant to me than novels about overcoming obstacles I might face in this lifetime—unless America is going to start creating gulags in the Alaskan wilds?
By DebbieDoRight
July 3, 2007 8:38 AM | Link to this
Seressia Glass!!! Seressia Glass!!! LOVE your books!!! Haven’t seen many around anymore, when are you writing some more??!!! You are one of my most FAVORITE authors!!! I used to be into Nora Roberts, (but when she deigns to put a black person in her plots, they are ususally stupid, weak, a hanger on, childish, or the first ones killed — I stopped reading her; she doesn’t need my money), but once I found one of your books at the bookstore I’ve been hooked on your words ever since!!! PLEASE WRITE MORE BOOKS!!!
OK — sorry now I’m going to go off topic because I’m just disgusted and MAD about this Scooter Libby crap!
This just beats all!! Scooter gets out! So I guess the only people who have to serve their time, no matter how biased or “unjust” are the poor and the minorities. Since the rich are the ones who are benefitting so much from this great theocracy that Dumbya and his buds have thrust upon us; then perhaps THEY should be the ones risking their lives in Iraq and Aghanistan. Because all of a sudden “We The People” is starting to stand for “We The Rich People Who Rule This Rock”.
Dissuade anyone who is not “Upper Class” from serving in the Armed Forces. Let the richest 10% blood spill for once.
By Theadora
July 3, 2007 9:11 AM | Link to this
[I]How many ladies do you know that are reading Dostoevsky?[/i]
Giggle! Golly! I’m just a stupid girl you know! I mean, NEVER read anything hard or written by a man. I mean, they are SO much bigger and stronger and ~~~sigh~~~/humoring the idiot.
Yes, I’ve read and I continue to read “important” books. Most of them are still pretty disappointing, often written by people with an expanded sense of themselves. Like others have said, if I want to read something good, worth reading, well written, well researched, with insights into the human condition, with real situations and often better humor, wit and dialog than you read in most of the ‘serious’ tripe out there, plus some pretty wonderful sex that is yes, better than anything in movies (or written by a ‘smart man’)—- I reach for romance and yes, often erotica.
So many things seem to be at play here reading not only the commentaries but some of the asinine responses. There is this unveiled bigotry and auto-assumption that if something is written for women by women it can’t be serious or have value. That a female’s sexuality is still a dangerous thing to be controlled. That ‘boys are still better than gurls cuz they’re SMART!’.
And most of all, that ‘romance’ just isn’t good literature. Talk about being in the wrong century (and damn that Jane Austen for putting ideas into women’s heads!)
Why don’t I see commentaries picking apart the guys who read sci-fi for believing in aliens and speaking Klingon? Or fretting that mystery readers will be seeing killers behind every corner and lose their ability to trust? Why don’t I see snarky remarks made about those writing fantasy and their inability to live in the real world? Or men who read Mickey Spillane-ish PI books for being misogynists?
And again, as others have said, it seems the commentaries show an insulting lack of research and datedness. I also agree with what I’ve read on many a forum. Take an average Romance/Erotica book. Change the name to something clearly masculine, market it as just plain fiction and it’ll be treated with respect and possibly be a best seller.
By Theadora
July 3, 2007 9:13 AM | Link to this
[I]How many ladies do you know that are reading Dostoevsky?[/i]
Giggle! Golly! I’m just a stupid girl you know! I mean, NEVER read anything hard or written by a man. I mean, they are SO much bigger and stronger and ~~~sigh~~~/humoring the idiot.
Yes, I’ve read and I continue to read “important” books. Most of them are still pretty disappointing, often written by people with an expanded sense of themselves. Like others have said, if I want to read something good, worth reading, well written, well researched, with insights into the human condition, with real situations and often better humor, wit and dialog than you read in most of the ‘serious’ tripe out there, plus some pretty wonderful sex that is yes, better than anything in movies (or written by a ‘smart man’)—- I reach for romance and yes, often erotica.
So many things seem to be at play here reading not only the commentaries but some of the asinine responses. There is this unveiled bigotry and auto-assumption that if something is written for women by women it can’t be serious or have value. That a female’s sexuality is still a dangerous thing to be controlled. That ‘boys are still better than gurls cuz they’re SMART!’.
And most of all, that ‘romance’ just isn’t good literature. Talk about being in the wrong century (and damn that Jane Austen for putting ideas into women’s heads!)
Why don’t I see commentaries picking apart the guys who read sci-fi for believing in aliens and speaking Klingon? Or fretting that mystery readers will be seeing killers behind every corner and lose their ability to trust? Why don’t I see snarky remarks made about those writing fantasy and their inability to live in the real world? Or men who read Mickey Spillane-ish PI books for being misogynists?
And again, as others have said, it seems the commentaries show an insulting lack of research and datedness. I also agree with what I’ve read on many a forum. Take an average Romance/Erotica book. Change the name to something clearly masculine, market it as just plain fiction and it’ll be treated with respect and possibly be a best seller.
By DebbieDoRight
July 3, 2007 9:15 AM | Link to this
By william
May 24, 2007 1:14 AM | Link to this
Folks, there is a cancer growing in America’s society and it is money and power. This is very noticeable if one just stops, looks, and listens. The elite, rich, and powerful individuals, corporations, and a collaboration of industry and other organizations and institutions have bought the United States Government, and are attempting to install an oligarchy form of government in which a few persons hold the ruling power.
The cost of gasoline keeps climbing higher as vaction time approches. Most Americans expect that gas prices will be at or above $4 dollars by years end. It will cost some Americans who are at the lower end of the wage scale (mimium wage) a day and a half to fill up their tanks. Most of these people make only $5.15 per hour and simplely cannot afford gas at these prices. Meanwhile, Exxon Mobil reported this year the largest annual profit of any U.S. company ever, $39.5 billion. That folks is #75,000 dollars a minute in profits. The Gas and Oil industries donated to the Bush Presidential campaign in 2004 two and one half million dollars, and this was from just the Oil and Gas industry spending on and to one person.
The Pharmaceutical Industry has given millions to the Republican President and members of Congress in return for a secured industry-friendly changes to landmark drug safety Bill, according to public records and interviews. The Bill grants the Food and Drug Administration broad new athority to moniter the safety of drugs after they are approved.
The U.S. Senate allow the drug Vioxx to stay on the market for years after signs that it could cause heart attack. “It is not that money buys votes”, said Senator Bernie Sanders I-VT., the lone vote against the bill “ but you have a cultture in which big money has significant influnce. Big money gains you access, access gives you the time to influnce people”.
The pharmaceutical companies spent $ 855 million dollars more money on lobbying than any other single industry from the year 1998 to 2006 according to the non-partisan Center for Public Integrity. In the Defense Industry alone the Republican party and it’s candidates recieved $9,996,874 dollars or 62% of the donations handed out by the different organations in the Defense Industry during the 2005-2006 year election cycle and was released by the Federal Election Commission on Monday, February 19, 2007, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Corporate donors from the Defense Industry have seen a high return on their campaign contributions and have seen exponential growth. These have not been proportional returns, as the top contribution have not in all instances been the companies to be awarded the most contracts. The Defense Industry in general has enjoyed unprecedented growth during the Bush administration, and much appears to be linked to former Republicans and Defense officials involved in both the Pentagon and private companies.
The Republicans are doing their best to get a lock on political power. After the reorganization of political thought that culminated with the “contract on America” in the mid 90’s the Republicans captured a majority in both houses of Congress. The way they did it was hitching the imcumbency to the wealth of industries and conservative churches via K street, and by using other despotic and anti-democrary tactics, These tactics let lobbying budgets blind legislators to the real needs in our country and eventually made some of them blind even to the difference between a bribe and a legal favor, with the false assumption that “anything goes” as long as money goes into the campaign fund.
The Republicans out spent their opponents in most of all the recent elections. This is why they so vehemently oppose McCain-Feingold initiatives!! They are back at this facade again, lining up their ducks in a row and counting all the feathers. Are Americans going to fall far this luncy once more. If they do it may be a long long time before they will ever vote again.
By LoveRomance
July 3, 2007 10:04 AM | Link to this
I think this topic is ridiculous. I’m not going to insult Shaunti and Diane but I think they need to take some time to actually talk to women who read romance novels to see what it is they find worthy of their time. As for erotica - so what! I do not think a woman or a man reading erotica does so to plan to leave his/her relationship but to spice it up. I know the men in my life have “benefitted” from Zane (If you’ve never read her and want some tips on how to spice it up, please do.) I enjoy reading love stories as well. Nora Roberts (great to hear from you!), Danielle Steele, Rosalyn McMillan, Terry McMillan, etc. all show that romance is possible but not easy and that sometimes you have to work hard for love but worth it. I get lifted from stories where there are obstacles that have been overcome for love and it doesn’t change the “requirements” for any man I meet. It’s stupid to believe that it does.
By Bertrice Small
July 3, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this
First let’s correct the impression that only Harlequin prints Romance novels. I’ve been a print for 30 years come February, and in that time I’ve published with Avon Books, Ballantine Books, NAL (New American Library), Kensington Books, and yes! Harlequin.
I have made my reputation as an author of Historical Romance. Today I write historicals, fantasy and erotic contemporaries. In my youth I was called, “Lust’s Leading Lady”. Once I became a grandmother I eschewed the title. I write good commercial fiction. I have never apologized, nor will I ever apologize for writing sexy love scenes. I was doing it long before it became the latest trend as my readers will attest.
The people who read my books come from all walks of life, all socio-economic groups, all educational backgrounds from professional women to women who never made it out of high school. But they all know I write fiction. And while they might wish their husbands or boyfriends were like my heroes they are wise enough to know it ain’t going to happen because my books are fiction. To suggest otherwise is to denegrate the intelligence of the reader.
I love psychologists who want to blame their female patients problems on romance novels. What a cop-out! I will wager few of them have ever read a Romance novel. I’ll bet none of them know that the Romance genre is divided into many sub-genres; or that that almost 100% of the authors are women. That those of us who actually earn a living writing treat it like the business it is. That many of our authors work full-time or part-time jobs as well as writing novels. Some of us support families. Some of us supplement our family’s incomes writing.
We are every bit professional women who belong to the various organizations addressing our careers. The Authors Guild. Romance Writers of America, Novelists, Inc. I don’t think any of us profess to write great literature. We’re authors of popular commercial fiction. The descendants of those long-ago storytellers who sat at the gates of Samarkand and Bagdad. We entertain, and bring brief respite from our readers troubles. There is no harm in that, and anyone who thinks there is needs their head examined. Bertrice Small, New York Times bestselling author of 43 novels of Romantic fiction
By Mongrel*
July 3, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this
For sheer, pondering, pontificating dullness, by all means go Dostoevsky.
Kate—I have to agree with you about Dostoevsky, along with almost all Russian authors. I don’t think they ever mastered the concept of editing.
Another “classic” author I always found to be dull as well is James Joyce. My HS English teacher suggested I read “The Portrait Of An Artist As A Young Man”. Didn’t even make it half way through.
By Chilao
July 3, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this
Nora Roberts is romance writer? I read one, it had violence, alcoholism, sex, crime, drugs, etc. but I never knew I was reading a romance novel. James Lee Burke, who writes a Cajun Detective series in the name of Dave Robicheaux, has all that as well, is he a romance writer? You also can never forget the train scene in Ken Follet’s Key to Rebecca, was that romance?
Works of fiction are to be considered just that, FICTION. escapist entertainment. I also read that cultured book Crime and Punishment, but it did not make me want to kill my landlady(and I actually had a female landlord when I read it).
Those Playmate’s have hobbies listed? Is that what is on that page on the back side of the centerfold along with the party jokes? I’ll have to check when I get August’s issue in the mail. Some might find this hard to believe, but the photos in there are the last thing I see. Some obviously miss Playboy’s TEXT material related to important American concepts like Free Speech/Press, Separation of Church and State, and reigning in Renegade Cops.
By oddnews
July 3, 2007 10:41 AM | Link to this
When Karen Armatrout died of cancer in 1997, her husband, Richard, collected a modest amount in life insurance benefits from her employer, Wal-Mart.
But Armatrout claims that, unbeknownst to him, Wal-Mart also collected on a life insurance policy, one the company took out on Karen Armatrout years before without her knowledge.
This week, Armatrout filed a class-action complaint seeking what his lawyers estimate might be $80,000 in benefits that Wal-Mart supposedly collected “in bad faith” on a corporate-owned life insurance policy.
The complaint also charges that the Arkansas-based corporation misappropriated Karen Armatrout’s name and personal information for the purposes of taking out the policy.
“Wal-Mart and the insurers used employees’ private information to buy and sell policies,” Armatrout’s Texas attorney, Mike D. Myers, told CourtTVnews.com. “As matter of public policy, Wal-Mart should not be permitted to keep the policy’s benefits because it did not have the necessary insurable interest in the lives of its rank-and-file employees to warrant being a beneficiary.”
From 1993 to 1998, Wal-Mart was not alone in reaping the tax benefits associated with corporate-owned life insurance, which came to be known by critics as “dead peasant” insurance, based on a character in Nikolai Gogol’s “Dead Souls” who buys up the contracts of recently deceased serfs.
http://www.courttv.com/news/2007/0629/walmartdeadpeasant_ctv.html?cnn=yes
By Mongrel
July 3, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this
I have an announcement this morning which should please all of the W2W regulars: I have canceled my internet account, so won’t be able to come online and harass you all anymore. I can’t seem to break my obsession with kimberly, and don’t want to upset her anymore.
By kimberly
July 3, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this
I am reading Dostoevsky because I had not previously, and was assured by smart people that enlightenment lies therein. (Please note that I receive many regular recommendations for enlightenment, and am really NOT INTERESTED in new suggestions for self-help or relationship-fix books, thanks just the same.) My reading list is varied, with emphasis on classics I’ve not yet read. This is my choice as a thinking person, just as romance novels are a choice, and only a fascist-loving anti-progressive non-thinker like Shaunti would have the notion that her opinion on what others should or should not read is somehow pertinent to anything.
Y’all please enjoy reading whatever you like, while it’s still legal to do so!!! {:->
By Mongrel
July 3, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this
Chilao—Are you a fan of James Michener? With your love of all things National Geographic, he should be right up your alley. Particularly poignant to me was his autobiography about growing up in an orphanage in Doylestown, PA, my hometown.
By Jen
July 3, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this
Hey DebbieDoRight,
I want to address the dearth of Black characters or books geared towards the Black community (especially in romance) - though I now see entire sections of Black romance in the bookstore (this is great).
I’m a hobby novelist. Speaking for myself I am hesitant to try to write in a Black character as a main character because you write what you know, you know? As a White woman, all I can write is a White person who has Black friends. Inevitably, any Black characters in my stories are secondary characters.
So, I can imagine that most White writers would need to have a lot of balls to pull of writing a main Black character. It’s been done, but not often.
I think the appearance of mainstream Black writers in the romance market is a sign that the “Good-Old-Girls” Club of Romance is opening up…. I’ve read some of those books and some are very good. However, they do confirm to me that the Black community has a perspective that would be hard for a White writer to delve into.
Anyway, that’s just my 2 bits…
By Mongrel
July 3, 2007 11:01 AM | Link to this
(Please note that I receive many regular recommendations for enlightenment, and am really NOT INTERESTED in new suggestions for self-help or relationship-fix books, thanks just the same.)
Can you understand why people might make those suggestions? I think it’s because a lot of people love you and want to see you find peace and happiness in this world.
By Jen from Ohio
July 3, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this
In my eyes, no one does it better then Bertrice Small. I am a 38 year old mother of two,who has been married for 17 years! I have also been reading Bertrice Small since 1980. I own all her books. She is one of the only authors whom I will buy off the shelf without looking at a single word. No decision involved. I applaud Bertrice Small for sticking to the Historical Facts and not changing history to suit her story. The research she does to write her Historicals is bar none the most complete. I can honestly state that I have learned more history then sex techniques from reading a Bertrice Small book :)
I also read Anita Shreve, James Patterson, JRR Tolkien, JK Rowling ( of course I am very disappointed that my hubby will never be Severus Snape) and a myriad of others. I am currently muddling my way through “War and Peace” by Tolstoy, because frankly everyone should read it (Once)
I am firmly rooted in reality despite my love for a Bertrice Small Historical Romance, just ask my friends and hubby.
By Alessia Brio
July 3, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this
When this popped up in a Google news alert, I figured from the many comments that it had already been making the industry blog rounds. I blogged it myself earlier this morning. My rant is there, if anyone’s interested: http://alessiabrio.blogspot.com
By Mongrel
July 3, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this
Gotta run for a while, but have a question for kimberly: Do you ever dream of writing a novel (or maybe even your own self-help/relationship book?) I may be biased because of my feelings for you, but I really think you have talent. Real talent. Seems a shame to waste in on technical writing.
By kimberly
July 3, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this
Would it violate watering restrictions to use the jet-spray hose attachment to blast the nuts off an annoying dog who won’t leave the yard?
By Mongrel
July 3, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this
For what it’s worth, kim, here’s what I’ve learned about “enlightenment”: When we have a good feeling about ourselves and aren’t upset and agitated, we are then able to “live in the world” and not “in our heads”. It’s not a matter of discovering some secret knowledge or perspective, it’s a matter of good chemistry in our brains.
By Archie
July 3, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this
First of all romance novels are fiction for the most part and anyone with common sense knows this so my answer is no, romance novels are not harmful. I used to be a comic book collector/reader and there were various romantic storylines depicted there as Clark Kent slept with Lois Lane before marriage and Iron Man was a playboy well it’s fiction and that’s that.
As for the Libby situation, once again we see arrogance and lying at work. Nothing is wrong with commuting but if you say you’re going to get rid of wrongdoers on camera as Bush did in this situation it smacks of hypocrisy as well as an appearance of being plain unethical. Bush knew his people did wrong by that Plame woman and he’s covering for them. This is why want to Hilton go to jail as well as certain athletes because the rich and powerful just don’t obey the rules. Hell, my state treasurer is in treatment but the guy(black) that sold him the drugs is in jail.
By Mongrel
July 3, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this
Would it violate watering restrictions to use the jet-spray hose attachment to blast the nuts off an annoying dog who won’t leave the yard?
Don’t worry, dear. My internet account will be closed at the end of this billing cycle. I figure it’s the least I could do for you. Please give me credit for wanting to do better.
By eye roll
July 3, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this
Theodra, go over to wooten’s blog and print that tripe.
This country was founded on the LAND OWNING forefathers blood and bank roll. Conscription was used to put very good men in harms way by the Brits that controlled the colonies…read your history friend. This land was for opportunity only if you made the opportunity and took it…it was NEVER meant to be some Utopian Society.
BTW, my child’s educated daddy is out there proctecting your right to write that stuff.
By eyeroll
July 3, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this
Theodra, my apologies, my comments were toward Debbie DoRight
By DebbieDoRight
July 3, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this
I’ve read some of those books and some are very good. However, they do confirm to me that the Black community has a perspective that would be hard for a White writer to delve into. Anyway, that’s just my 2 bits
Jen, I kinda understand what you’re saying but to me the point is moot. I have friends who are white, hispanic, oriental,etc. male/female and we talk quite a bit about their relationships and what they’re going through to try and find a mate. One thing I’ve gathered from listening is that we ALL are out there looking for the same things: Someone who’ll love you with their whole heart and be there for you, even when you’re sick and even when you’re old and even when you don’t look like you did when you were 21.
This to me is a universal subject. Yes there are cultural differences certainly; but there are cultural differences within each race anyway. White Europeans have a different outlook on life than American whites. Black Americans have a different outlook on life than Black Jamaicans, etc.
Having friends of different races/nationalities gives me a way to look into their perspective on life and their culture. For Instance: If I need to know about life and relationships in Cuba or in the Cuban Community I ask my friend Nury - her perspective on love, men, family, home, etc. is different from mine; but by talking to her I can gain a knowledge of her ideals.
This may be simplistic, but why can’t a writer (White), do the same thing when writing about a black character? Do they not know ANY blacks that they can ask for guidance?
By RectilinearPropagation
July 3, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this
This is the same crap people say about violence, sex, and the supernatural in any medium.
“Oh don’t watch the movie with all that violence in it or you’ll be violent.”
“Oh don’t listen to the music with all that sex in it or you’ll run out and have sex.”
“Oh don’t read the book with with all that supernatural stuff in it or you’ll think you can do magic [cough]LauraMallory[cough].”
How many times does it have to be said?
Healthy, rational people can distiguish fiction/fantasy from reality! Healthy, rational people can distiguish fiction/fantasy from reality! Healthy, rational people can distiguish fiction/fantasy from reality! Healthy, rational people can distiguish fiction/fantasy from reality!!!
By DebbieDoRight
July 3, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this
eyeroll, if your comment was to me than here’s my comment to you: Been there. Done that. Read it for yourself.
Have a nice day.
By DebbieDoRight
July 3, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this
This country was founded on the LAND OWNING forefathers blood and bank roll.
True, eyeroll, true. But then there was this little document called the Declaration of Independence which stated that ALL men are created equal and are “supposedly” equal in this great land of ours. That document, and time, negated legal slavery, discrimination, sexism, etc. Because you can’t tell someone their equal, make them pay taxes, and then treat them with inequity.
Now, if we’re lucky, perhaps the document I spoke of earlier can also negate your ignorance. Sigh. One can only hope…….
By wa-pow
July 3, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this
Oh don’t read the book with with all that supernatural stuff in it or you’ll think you can do magic [cough]LauraMallory[cough].”
Laura Mallory doesn’t read the Bible?! It’s got talking flora and fauna (burning bush, balaams donkey) transmutation (water to wine, loaves and fishes) necromancy (lazerus, jusus)curses (plagues) kenesis (parting the red sea) not to mention winged immortals and seers, all kinds of supernatural stuff!
Healthy, rational people can distiguish fiction/fantasy from reality!!!
most of the time
By PJWomack
July 3, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this
Utter nonsense to think romance books harm women. Filthy, angry movies and sickening music harm women, not reading a book. With the attitude of todays society, where else will young women learn it is not okay to be raped, beaten and tormented by men or anyone else. What’s wrong with expecting wonderful sex with a partner that respects and desires you for more than a back seat romp? Liberated women are fine, just don’t forget to teach the feminine side is what keeps the family fed, birthday partys planned and, that love only mothers can relay to children. Okay, I got off the hard topic,but it is all in the same basket. Denying our women the pleasure of reading books won’t help starving children or stop wars. I have never seen the benefit of giving up what is important to me to be accepted anywhere. Read on everyone, read on.
By Seressia Glass
July 3, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this
Georgia Romance Writers will have a booth at the Decatur Book Festival Labor Day weekend. This festival, sponsored by the AJC, drew more than 50K people last year. We’ll be more than happy to talk to anyone about romance novels of all kinds. We might even have a few you can purchase if you dare.
Seressia Glass www.seressia.com
By RectilinearPropagation
July 3, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this
wa-pow, that’s straying off topic but I would argue that unless an effort is being made to trick people it IS all the time not most of the time. We’re talking about people thinking the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park were real not people who thought the hippos in Congo were real.
By wa-pow
July 3, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this
off topic? isn’t the topic based on whether women can tell the difference between real and fantasy? you brought up mallory. she OBVIOUSLY believes all the supernatural things from the bible, so what makes you think she’d be any different in any other type of book?
By Jen
July 3, 2007 1:30 PM | Link to this
Debbie,
I don’t disagree with you at all. I’m just saying that for a White writer to try to write from a Black perspective puts them out for criticism. Who’s to say that some particular popular White novelist hasn’t tried, only to have the publisher say, “You know, why don’t you make this character White? Because someone might get mad that you have the audacity to try to write a main Black character..”
I belong to an online writers critique group. I submitted a few chapters of a story I wrote that is intended to be a rather psychologically dark romance (ie, not your typical warm and fuzziness). The first several chapters detail interactions with a criminally violent athlete. One of the critiquers got on my case that how dare I try, as a White woman, to write about what’s it’s like to grow up as a Black man in America…I mean got on my CASE. Thing was…the character I wrote about is White! That’s critiquer’s misunderstanding, however, made me realize how difficult it would be if I were to actually try to write from a Black viewpoint…how I probably couldn’t do the role justice.
Anyway, when I do see someone write from such a different perspective I usually have some admiration for them for giving it a shot. Like Sandra Kitt, who writes a lot of interracial romances (mostly the men are White). I think she does a good job, too, with not stereotyping the “White male”.
By GOB
July 3, 2007 1:44 PM | Link to this
*Laura Mallory doesn’t read the Bible?! It’s got talking flora and fauna (burning bush, balaams donkey) transmutation (water to wine, loaves and fishes) necromancy (lazerus, jusus)curses (plagues) kenesis (parting the red sea) not to mention winged immortals and seers, all kinds of supernatural stuff!
And my personal favorites…the main character in the NT ends up as a a zombie, after a symbolic cannabalism ceremony…good times.
By GOB
July 3, 2007 1:49 PM | Link to this
I don’t disagree with you at all. I’m just saying that for a White writer to try to write from a Black perspective puts them out for criticism. Who’s to say that some particular popular White novelist hasn’t tried, only to have the publisher say, “You know, why don’t you make this character White? Because someone might get mad that you have the audacity to try to write a main Black character..”
Isnt the main character in most of James Patterson’s books a black guy living in the inner city near DC? He seems to have done reasonably well going that route.
By Jen
July 3, 2007 1:56 PM | Link to this
You’re right, he does…character Alex Cross. But from what I remember Patterson’s writing style is very sparse with little character development. So, he doesn’t even give himself the chance to get a Black perspective wrong because he’s writing from a detective perspective only.
All I’m saying is that for such pop-style reads as mainstream romance that’s thin ice and I can’t imagine it’s encouraged by those in the business to make money off the sale of romance novels….
By DebbieDoRight
July 3, 2007 2:00 PM | Link to this
Sandra Kitt started out her career writing about white characters!! She was a Harlequin Romance writer who could only get her start by writing white only characters. Just in the last few years she’s come “out of the closet” and revealed that she was black. Amazing isn’t it?!? I’m a big fan of her work too, I think she’s one of the most versatile writers that I’ve ever seen!!
OK I can understand your hesitancy on writing some books; but I still feel that love is universal. Hope in the future people will accept the writer’s work, on face value, (without your having to change your name), and not be pre-programmed in expecting certain things from certain writers.
I guess that’s why lots of writers, like Nora Roberts, had to change their names when they wanted to try something different. That way their readers and publishers wouldn’t have preconceived opinions on what they can or can’t write. Sandra broke through the fallacy that only “black writers can write about blacks etc.”!! Hey are there any books out there that you’ve written that I can get? I’d love to look at some of your stuff. And I always keep an open mind!!
Let me know - since tomorrow is a holiday, i plan on doing a LOT of reading and eating!!
PS: Also Jaid Black, (erotica), is another lady who wrote a book from a “black” perspective. It wasn’t Tolstoy or anything but it was refreshing and HOT!
By Mongrel
July 3, 2007 2:07 PM | Link to this
GOB—Are you still buying any new Teaching Co. courses? I’m very pleased with “The Nature of Earth—An Introduction to Geology” with Professor Renton. Also good is “Sensation, Perception, and the Aging Process” with Professor Colavita. I also previewed a potential new course by the famous geometer Thomas Banchoff about the book Flatland, which is an attempt to understand the fourth dimension.
My reading list would be boring to most people, I read only Math and Science books.
By Mongrel
July 3, 2007 2:14 PM | Link to this
If anyone is really bored tomorrow, watch for me on TV about 9 AM when I reach the top of Heartbreak Hill. They always have a cameraman there and like to interview the runners. I’ll be sure to give a shout out to the W2W bloggers!
By Jen
July 3, 2007 2:18 PM | Link to this
Debbie, I totally agree. I’d love to see more fiction where people cross over racial, ethnic, and religious (ie, cultural) boundaries without getting lambasted.
I did not know that about Sandra Kitt! See, I think that’s more evidence that the romance genre has long been a Good Ole Girls club. It’s a shame such a talented writer had to pretend to be a whole other race just to get published! But then, didn’t Jane Austen sometimes pretend to be a man? Or was that someone else?
But that’s more common, like you said…Nora Roberts writing as JS Robb to get into the mystery genre…
I’m not a published writer, unfortunately for me. I lack the discipline to complete my book. I tend to put it away for a month or two, then pick it up and polish it, add a chapter, then put it away again. I have 4 novels in that state!
I like to write romances in which the hero first looks like a really really really really bad guy (hence the criminally violent athlete as the protag). And the heroine is gutsy and in trouble. And somehow they help each other (NOT he saves her or she saves him). And then we find out the really really really really really bad guy is not really really really really really bad, only kind of bad or did bad things and has been as horribly affected by his own action, or something else.
Not everyone likes what I write….it can be violent and squirmy. And if I am honest with myself it’s probably rather trite…tortured hero redeems himself while damaged heroine overcomes tragedy….but, it’s like an addiction….
Thanks for being interested, though. You made my day. I’m going to spend some time tomorrow polishing and adding to one of my stories….I’ve been inspired!
By eye roll
July 3, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this
Debbie DoRight: absolutely correct that DofI states “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” that is why the forefathers were willing to commit treason (make no mistake if the colonies had lost the war the ‘instigators’ would have been hanged until dead for treason to the Crown). However, when that document was written, they were talking about Land Owning MEN (not women) and they said those people have the right to PERSUE happiness nothing is garaunteed other than there