Although give the popularity of the paranormal, that explanation doesn’t seem complete. Maybe it’s that technology is still viewed as the domain of guys, and we women sometimes disempower ourselves by telling ourselves that we can’t really understand it.

Emma, your question about female authors of fantasy is interesting. My speculation is that they don’t shy away from romances to the same degree. Fantasy has its roots in myths and fairy tales, and these often included love stories. I know that in our piece on paranormal romances, Sharon Shinn said that she thinks “fantasy romance” is an accurate term for what she writes.

Devon, so glad you enjoyed the book! :) I agree that the fully realized world of GoC is a big part of what makes the book work.

Bev (BB), have you read Asaro’s The Veiled Web? I thought that one was half and half, too.

If there were more well written and marketed books like Ms. Sinclair’s, maybe sci/fi/futuristic could step in to fill the needs of people getting burned out on paranormals.

Ah, it’s the marketing angle that’s the kicker. Marketing my books seems to try the patience of even the most saintly gurus at Bantam. They’ve been buying me ad space in LOCUS. I’ve been buying my own ad space in ROMANTIC TIMES BOOKREVIEWS.

My covers are decidedly SF though Bantam is mulling that situation.

And sorry about the long URL–I need to use the tiny-url site more often.

I will here. One woman who has really been ignored in this whole SFR thing is–IMHO–one of the early frontrunners, author Jaqueline Lichtenberg. She blogs with me and I’m constantly in awe of her experience and insight. She’s been writing “intimate adventure” as part of SF since the 1980s. Here’s a tad for your notebook:
http://tinyurl.com/yr2p6r

Her site is http://www.simegen.com . If you’re interested in SFR and its roots, she’s someone you ought to read. And she’s a nice as pie gal to boot.

Hugs all, ~Linnea

I’m being really long winded without getting to a point. Ok, what I’m trying to say here is that the success of the Urban fantasy and paranormal romance genres seem to point to the fact that readers like a mix in their books. If there were more well written and marketed books like Ms. Sinclair’s, maybe sci/fi/futuristic could step in to fill the needs of people getting burned out on paranormals.

Ah, the elusive half-&-half. I remember way back to the very first time I raved, er, posted about Linnea’s books on RRA, I think. I could probably dig out the post and find it said the were the first time I’d ever run across someone who actually wrote half romance and half science fiction, that elusive blend of a no holds barred romance set against a fully fleshed out science fiction reality.

Catherine Asaro comes close but even in her The Quantum Rose I still felt like the science fiction was overshadowing the romance by more than that equal measure. What’s really amazing is that for the most part that “equal dose” is there in each of Linnea’s stories except Wintertide and technically it’s fantasy. They truly could be labeled either way.

I wanted to address the scifi/romance issue that people have brought up. As a teen, I used to sneak my mom’s romances at night, But for years and years my genres of choice were mystery, fantasy and horror. But I always enjoyed romantic elements in my books. All my faves had some kind of romantic subplot. Not surprisingly, when I started reading romance again, it was during the rise of paranormal romance. I like my genres smushed together and I think a lot of people do. I think that the success of authors like Kelley Armstrong, Charlaine Harris, and Kim Harrison attest to that. These authors have strong elements from several genres at once at work.

I think what’s happened with the paranormal glut is that the paranormal elements are starting to take on a wallpaper feel. Y’know, some fangs and fur thrown in there, but otherwise it could be any contemporary. Plus it’s growing very reliant on cliches. A lot of the more recent paranormals are lacking that thought and commitment that brought them to life.

I thought we were talking about SciFi here? Ok, now I’ll try to get on point. Although I watch a lot of SciFi, I haven’t read a lot. When I have tried to branch out into the futuristic field, I found that wallpaper effect at work. The extent of the world building seemed to be cutesy lingo and slang, and maybe some kinky sex. What distinguished GofC for me was the fully realized world and characters that I could get into and get behind . Most of what I read is set in some kind of alternate universe, it’s the level of depth and detail that the author brings to it that makes it work.

I’m being really long winded without getting to a point. Ok, what I’m trying to say here is that the success of the Urban fantasy and paranormal romance genres seem to point to the fact that readers like a mix in their books. If there were more well written and marketed books like Ms. Sinclair’s, maybe sci/fi/futuristic could step in to fill the needs of people getting burned out on paranormals.

I’m just babbling. Sorry. Off to pole dancing class.

Linnea, I followed that link you provided. Interesting read. I think you’re hitting on some interesting issues by framing of “sci-fi romance” as a bastard child unwanted by both parents. Gender politics definitely come into play in a way they can’t in, say, mystery-romance crossovers (it would be hard for “womanly concerns” to be dismissed as “inauthentic” to a genre that hosts Agatha Christie and a million and one cozies). Despite LeGuin, Norton et al, sci fi has been and remains, for some reason, an old boy’s club (cf blogosphere reactions to the Harlan Ellison Connie Willis scandal, 2006 — or, in the TV world, the horror at the BSG “quadrangle of doom”). And since romance outsells sci-fi in such huge numbers, it doesn’t seem totally outlandish to me that sci-fi fans who dislike the genre could be afraid that the growing influence of romance in “their” shelves might spell the gradual eradication of the sorts of books they like. Good god, the mushiness is contaminating everything! (Silly talk, but understandable all the same.) My question: is this kneejerk fear of romance also visible in female fantasy writers? I don’t know how the sci-fi world divides itself when it comes to convention and bitchery time, whether the Asaros/Friedmans and the Rawns/Douglasses/Shinns shall never see themselves in the same genre, that sort of thing. I’d be curious to know, because it does seem as though the fantasy authors have been more likely to incorporate romantic subplots (Armstrong, Briggs etc.), or to make wholesale leaps into romance. (I wonder, is this considered a wise move in terms of reaping more sales? I would expect so, but maybe there’s a fear of losing the earlier readership?)

Did you always see yourself as a romance author? GofC is the first of your novels I’ve ever found shelved in romance; heretofore I’ve found your stuff in the sci-fi/fantasy section.

Glad you enjoyed GAMES (even if not as much as GABRIEL’S) and I’m honored to be in a ‘stack’ in your house! Hugs, ~ Linnea

Yes, you’re in a stack, and you’d better make sure it continues to grow! :)

I just finished this one this morning — bleary-eyed, because it kept me up till the wee hours of the morning as well!

So I guess my recommendations are doing a good job of keeping you sleep-deprived, LOL.

Gabriel’s Ghost is still my favorite (and I’d be massively curious to read the original, shorter e-book); I think I enjoy it most because it has the best balance between the development of the romance and the development of a kick-ass, totally enthralling plot. Or, to be more precise, the plot in that book pushed forward the romance, and vice-versa, in amazingly organic ways.

I have to get my hands on this book.

Regarding the resistence to science fiction romances, I know that I haven’t always been keen to pick them up, because sometimes the science fiction aspect feels just kind of thrown together and doesn’t always make sense. One of the things I liked so well about Games of Command is that the science seemed very well thought out in this book, and yet the romance was very satisfying too.

I don’t know why the knee-jerk reaction. I only know it exists. I know I sit at the signing table at Barnes & Noble and a gal comes to my table and picks up my book and when I tell her it’s “Star Trek with Sex” (my immediate tag-line), she asks: “You mean, sci fi?” When I say yes, she drops the book and says: “Oh, I can’t read that. I’m not smart enough.”

The reverse happens with male readers: they can’t read romance and moreover, romance has no part in science fiction (evidently they’re all test-tube cloned humans…).

I’ve blogged on the subject, has have others:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2006/06/why-do-sf-readers-boldly-go.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2006/07/romancing-sf-shy-romance-reader.html

Keep in mind I’m an authority only to my own experiences. But it’s food for thought.

Glad you enjoyed GAMES (even if not as much as GABRIEL’S) and I’m honored to be in a ‘stack’ in your house! Hugs, ~ Linnea

Either way, I felt that GoC once again demonstrated that Sinclair is majorly gifted at what she does, and I really, really hope that she will be the author who turns things around for the long-maligned subgenre of sci fi romance. In terms of the future of that subgenre, it seems like the current industry trends might make for a launchpad moment, what with paranormals being so popular. In fact, some of those paranormal authors (like Nalini Singh — or even JD Robb) are verging so closely on sci-fi that it might perhaps behoove us to consider what the difference between sci-fi and paranormal romance might be. — Or, for that matter, if we want sci-fi and futuristic to be categories distinct from each other, as well. But if Singh’s Psi in fact had space travelling technology, technology which never factored into the plot but was nevertheless mentioned, would people be more likely to call her books sci-fi or futuristic romance? (Would people be less likely to buy them for that very reason?) I guess I don’t understand why this subgenre is still faltering, and why there might still be a knee-jerk aversion to it among people who have now taken to voraciously consuming futuristic or contemporary paranormals. I’m rooting for Sinclair to convert them all!

Hugs all, ~Linnea

My copy came yesterday and I’m just loving it.

Thanks.

html – which didn’t get eaten in the conversion to Ebookwise either because they were on my computer, I might add.

Which reminds me, I’ve been meaning to ask Jane if there’s anyway to convert old Gemstar books to new reader. Always assuming I can assess them, of course. Or has she addressed this in a post already.

And speaking of rereading those old ebooks, I almost reread Command Performance before reading Games of Command but couldn’t bring myself to do it. I’m glad I didn’t. The changes were big enough that I think it would’ve only confused me if I had. This wasn’t simply a reediting. This was major expansion and rewrite of second part the older book.

Sigh.

‘Course, I have to admit that there are aspects to the ebook version I miss and I whined to her about it. I know why they got changed in the print version but I still miss them. Sniff. What can I say, I liked the Gothic feel of the book and the things I miss were very Gothic touches.

Double sigh.

The thing is, though, that each of her books have been unique enough stories that I’ve enjoyed them all but Gabriel’s Ghost and Games of Command have special places because of the heroes. Two extra special heroes in both of them, that’s for sure. They each got their special, strong heroines, too, though. ;)