Comments on: Harlequin Lightning Reviews

By: Teresa

Teresa — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 06:26:54 +0000

I admit to enjoying Harlequin Intrigue novels until this past month when they had the stupidest title ever for one of their books and one mentioned on their web site coming out next month. I quit cold turkey. They were: Preg nesia (I wish I were joking But I’m not) and one upcoming was called covert cothichie coo. Is the title department totally brain dead? I enjoyed their suspense books but couldn’t buy something with such idiot titles.

By: RfP

RfP — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 05:05:50 +0000

I've never seen "bedsit" as a verb so at first I thought this must be one of those old-style "all the Downtrodden Young Thing could afford was a bedsit" Harlequins. Especially given the name Sara Craven on the cover--some of her '80s romances were the oldest of old school.

By: WandaSue

WandaSue — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 16:57:37 +0000

No matter how good an HP is touted to be, I won’t read it. Sorry. But no. Can’t get past the titles, which are sick parodies of themselves.

By: eggs

eggs — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 11:12:01 +0000

I’ve been reading Sara Craven Mills & Boon for a loooong time, as in they were already “old” books at the second hand store in the 1980′s. I think her very young virgin heroines get a pass because she’s been writing them that way for decades now – wiki says her first one was published in 1975! These style of heroines are really her hallmark, so you know what you’re going to get if you read one. I wonder how many of these Grand Dames of Mills & Boon romance (i.e. authors from the 70′s) are still being published?

By: Jane

Jane — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 01:59:27 +0000

I’ve become inured to them and laugh about them. I won’t read a mere millionaire hero though. What’s the point when you have the tycoons and billionaire books featured right next to them?

By: Jia

Jia — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 01:56:11 +0000

The titles and plot lines just scream misogyny to me. Ugh, I thought the romance genre got over all this crap two decades ago. What gives?

I'm confused about the current HP title strategies myself. I have some old HPs from the late 70s/80s that were given to me and they all have normal names by comparison. No Man of Her Own, Time of the Temptress, etc etc. I've heard the marketing strategy for the current titling system is so that readers will know what they're getting. Want a secret baby? Pick this one! Want a virgin? Pick that one! Want a virgin, mistress and a millionaire? Well, you're out of luck this month but next month, there's one coming out! But even so, I still can't stop myself from wincing a little when I read the titles.

By: Lleeo

Lleeo — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 00:36:59 +0000

If I could just get over the stupid titles on the HPs… I used to love reading them, but the stupid titles completely put me off..

I completely agree, sallahdog. The titles and plot lines just scream misogyny to me. Ugh, I thought the romance genre got over all this crap two decades ago. What gives?

I don’t mean to generalize here because I’m sure some of the books are great and some of my favourite authors still write smaller books for Harlequin, but I am still baffled.

By: Sami

Sami — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 23:40:12 +0000

OHPAH – I love it! Sound a bit like Oprah though. You think she’d mind?

By: sallahdog

sallahdog — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:14:51 +0000

If I could just get over the stupid titles on the HPs… I used to love reading them, but the stupid titles completely put me off..