…Wolk describes \”comics culture\’s slightly miserable striving for ‘acknowledgmentÂ’ and ‘respectÂ’….\” That could be said of portions of the romance community (witness the hostilities between authors Jennifer Weiner and Curtis Sittenfeld …

I think the main problem with the authors isn’t so much that they have to embrace the review for the book or the reviewers, but they need to embrace criticism as a concept. I.e., authors many times control the discourse surrounding romance. They are the ones with the biggest platforms, the loudest voices. So when comments about reviews that have qualifiers, the authors encourage only the most positive of reviews. They do not, in any way, foster a community of reviews that are critical. And by doing that, they are essentially saying, these reviews that are critical have no value in our romance community.

I don’t know about the monolithic “Authors”–there are a lot of us out here with all different levels of influence (the idea that I have as much ability to control discourse as Nora Roberts is just…silly). Just like authors of any other literature, there are authors who are going to be more or less receptive to critical review. I’ve no doubt that there are authors of more “highbrow” fiction who have been involved in blog wars or other communicative shenanigans.

But when it comes to critical review, romance as a genre is going to run up against a brick wall (or maybe a pink ceiling). Consider that to review a book of any genre by an author, it first has to be published, and nowhere else but the romance genre can you find publishing criteria or editorial preference so specific–hence you have a publishing industry (or portion thereof) at odds with critical review efforts–there exists a commonality that means steady profits to the one, but devolves into cliche’d banality very quickly for the other.

Not to say it couldn’t be done – I appreciate honest critique of my work as an author, and as a writer, I appreciate honest critique of both mine and others’ work because it’s how I learn what works and what doesn’t. I just think that a new or different approach to literary critique is probably going to be needed.

Romance is the meatloaf of the publishing industry. Nourishing, plentiful, and fun for the whole family, but not generally served because it’s startlingly unusual. Authors have the capacity to construct really good stories within the framework. Make really good meatloaf, so to speak. But in order to be published as romance, rather than a cross-genre, it still has to be meatloaf.

I doubt the NYT is going to be jumping on board any time soon, and truthfully, I don’t read and write romance because of anything the NYT may or may not publish about it. But I do get tired of people thinking it’s okay to scorn the romance genre just because it’s large and well-stocked.

*Given the numerous incidents of ugliness in the author community we’ve seen over the past few years, has the culture of suppression around honest critique really convinced anyone that it’s the healthiest path, either for the industry community or the genre?*

My own experiences,– I am also an author as well as reader– have not been good. I am not going to focus on the negativity. Romance does not need validity outside the community. It needs work inside the community. There are some excellent authors, and even *Great Failed Attempts* at trying new things.

Again, your thoughts have been insightful and provoking. I’m linking.

My sense is that the current culture of the romance industry makes it difficult for authors to review books or to come out more strongly in favor of criticism, because they are afraid of backlash from fellow authors (And who knows? Perhaps from editors as well). I could be wrong about that — I hope I’m wrong about that — but that’s the sense I have. And if that’s so, who knows how many authors might wish for a different atmosphere that would make them feel more free to participate in critical discussions.

Good points, Janine. And haven’t we already gotten word that such pressure from editors exists? Where was it I saw someone quote Brenda Chin in saying that she won’t work with anyone who bad mouths another author? If I were an author desperate to publish, I sure as hell would interpret that sentiment as including reviewing another author’s work with anything less than a rave. I think that change is going to have to be initiated by readers.

Given the numerous incidents of ugliness in the author community we’ve seen over the past few years, has the culture of suppression around honest critique really convinced anyone that it’s the healthiest path, either for the industry community or the genre? I can’t help but think of Pleasantville.

Was that a reference to TMT? We have had disagreements, and they’ve stayed fairly amicable and polite but we haven’t had many (if any) disagreements with authors. I suspect that we’re not very likely to get disagreements with authors because we tend to pick out aspects of books which we can comment on and analyse. That means that when we refer to individual novels we’re saying we found them interesting in some way. Of course it might get a little bit nasty if we started analysing individual texts and saying that they were interesting because they were sexist/racist/homophobic…

Reviewers, though, have to comment on lots of books, from ones they love to ones they hate, and they have to assess the value of the whole book, not just particular aspects of it, so I think it’s likely that reviews will generate controversy more often.

they need to embrace criticism as a concept. I.e., authors many times control the discourse surrounding romance.

It does shift the balance of power when readers become writers of prose too. I’ve read comments by a very, very, few authors who seem to consider themselves the wordsmiths and therefore consider the opinions of readers as less valid. It’s true that authors are the experts at writing fiction, but that doesn’t automatically make them expert readers who can tell other readers how to respond to the books (everyone’s reading experience is personal, and affected by their own emotional and intellectual outlook, their mood etc.) nor does it necessarily make authors experts in writing reviews or literary criticism.

We probably also need to separate out ‘criticism’ as in ‘negative comments’ (which might or might not appear in reviews, depending on how the reviewer felt about the book) from ‘criticism’ as in ‘analysis/literary criticism of texts’.

I think the main problem with the authors isn’t so much that they have to embrace the review for the book or the reviewers, but they need to embrace criticism as a concept. I.e., authors many times control the discourse surrounding romance. They are the ones with the biggest platforms, the loudest voices. So when comments about reviews that have qualifiers, the authors encourage only the most positive of reviews. They do not, in any way, foster a community of reviews that are critical. And by doing that, they are essentially saying, these reviews that are critical have no value in our romance community.

But… to play devil’s advocate, I see a lot of authors posting here and at other review blogs like Smart Bitches. And I’m not cynical enough to think that these authors are participating in the discussion solely for self-promotion. That may be a part of it, but many of them also seem genuinely interested in the discussions we have here. And I think their participation helps those review blogs where they post. I do see it as a show of support for us, and I appreciate it.

My sense is that the current culture of the romance industry makes it difficult for authors to review books or to come out more strongly in favor of criticism, because they are afraid of backlash from fellow authors (And who knows? Perhaps from editors as well). I could be wrong about that — I hope I’m wrong about that — but that’s the sense I have. And if that’s so, who knows how many authors might wish for a different atmosphere that would make them feel more free to participate in critical discussions.

That’s why I applaud so strongly those authors who are reviewing. I know it’s not something every author can do but I see them as the ones who will make it possible for things to change for the better.

But still, how much value would good criticism be, and think how time consuming?

Well, I think it would be of great value, for many of the same reasons Romance as a genre has value. Take that Joyce review of Clarke’s book, for example. IMO that’s an incredibly powerful and GOOD review — a statement of profound respect for Clarke, an acknowledgment of her talent as a writer, and an honest reaction to her latest work. IMO it adds something to discussion of the Fantasy genre merely by reflecting on Clarke’s contributions to the genre and positioning her work within a larger literary and cultural context. But I wonder: how many Romance authors would see that as a positive review? This is not a rhetorical question — I really don’t know the answer.

Your comment and Jane’s remind me of how important it is to stress the notion that reviews are NOT FOR AUTHORS. If authors want to use reviews for promotional purposes — as they often do — then they will likely never use anything but so-called positive reviews. And what will the criteria be? How would reviews that might, from a reader’s perspective, be the most informative and the most persuasive compete against sweepingly positive generalizations? Again, not a rhetorical question.

I am very, very wary of pushing the idea that the primary purpose of reviewing is for authors, publishers, or marketing departments, because that simply leads us right back into the “if you can’t say anything nice” trap. Reviews DO promote a book, but I don’t think that is or should be their primary purpose. I think they should 1) offer a perspective on a book relative to the genre as a whole (although I don’t think they need to directly address the general level), and 2) provide a forum for discussion of a book. Anything that is aimed ONLY at selling a book is marketing, plain and simple.

Although it might be unfashionable these days, I think critical discourse on any genre is good for its own sake. If people don’t want to engage in it, that’s fine with me. But I think the genre has already suffered under the weight of the utilitarian directives of factory editing and publishing practices. Authors may or may not write to those directives, but I don’t ever want to get to the point where I submit to them, as well, because as a reader, they too often seem incompatible with my interest in reading the best damn books I can get my hands on.

I’m not quite sure what you mean by this. Are you talking about how authors would respond to such reviews?

Yes. Or their friends. Maybe their friends? Laughing. Flame Wars. Personal Attacks. The Internet can be a brutal place. I like the reviews here, but I don’t always agree with them, but I’d never attack the two Ja(y)nes. I figure they are doing the romance community a valuable service.

Maybe at the forum mentioned up posts, someone could create a way for readers and writers to AGREE to DISAGREE.

But still, how much value would good criticism be, and think how time consuming? For example, I really liked Eloisa James latest work. I thought it was excellent, in many ways. Maybe she failed in *some ways* to maintain the needed focus on the main couple, but look at what else she achieved. It was a highly mannered piece of fiction. Written well. It’s a piece of romance fiction that could go mainstream.

Example: Author Graham Joyce offered a review of The Ladies of Grace Adieu by Susanna Clarke in the Washington Post.

What a WONDERFUL review! Beautifully written itself, mindful of the strengths of Clarke’s writing but incisively focused on why TLOGA didn’t work for him. I actually thought it was a very positive review despite the less than glowing recommendation for the book at hand. And what I really loved was the fact that Clarke’s work has both literary and genre status and is part of both worlds (e.g. won the Hugo and was long listed for the Booker). OMG would I adore seeing more reviews like that for genre Romance, although I think we’re still far from seeing Romance authors review each other like this (despite the valiant efforts of a few to break that taboo).

I think in the romance community, this kind of detailed criticism would be chaotic. And does the genre need it? I don’t think so.

I’m not quite sure what you mean by this. Are you talking about how authors would respond to such reviews? I am not so optimistic that the separation between authors and books in genre Romance is going to be fortified until MORE critical reviewing is done. In other words, IMO the reader community has to become so strong in its willingness to talk critically about Romance that no longer can authors reasonably see reviews and commentary as about, for, directed at, or in response to them.

Lately I’ve even begun writing my own reviews, more for practice than for public consumption. But the exercise of thinking my way through a book has, I think, given me a greater appreciation for the genre and the ability to make better reading choices.

Keep writing those reviews, Phyl! I can totally relate to your point about being more appreciative of the genre by reading the books more critically because that has been my experience, as well.

I saw nothing wrong with Graham Joyce’s review, nothing overly personal or vitriolic. It’s the kind of review I find useful as a reader, and would love to see more of for romance novels. I should hope no one chastised him for it! He was critical in a reasoned way. He even prefaced the review with the caveat that a newly successful author is under crazy pressures to publish anything they have ready, ASAP, etc, etc.

I don’t see a (reasonable) negative review as something done “to” an author; it’s a service to readers, not a personal attack on the author. That’s the kind of critique that can really be helpful to a career, once the author gets over the natural sting.

It also confuses the issue that Amazon isn’t very discriminating in what they call “reviews”. Sometimes their “reviews” are just the cover copy; sometimes they’re taken from press releases. I understand why it happens: Amazon needs something about the book. And Amazon’s busy gnomes can’t even be sure that writings that are called reviews are really reviews.

(Benjamin Schwartz, literary editor at The Atlantic, pointed out recently that some types of “review” are more an essay or collection of cultural reflections on the book. This type of riffing on a novel may not be intended as a definitive thumbs up/down, though fragments of the essay may be quoted as reviews on Amazon or on the book jacket.)

[I think there’s a world of difference between authors talking about craft for the purpose of their own writing and readers (and authors) talking about craft in the larger context of particular books and the genre as a whole (or parts of it, at least). One has to do with the process of writing and the other has to do with the effect of the writing product on the reader.]

Agree, but I’d add that there has never been any established references in which to discuss romance writing as a skill and style. For example, *how the story is written* is just as important as *the story told–* I just don’t see that happening within the romance community. But it would be interesting to see. I haven’t seen it anywhere.

Literature, on the other hand, has a long history of reference points where there are general associations as to what is good writing and what is not. In some ways, the Internet is providing this discussion, but how well it works, I do not know. Example: Author Graham Joyce offered a review of The Ladies of Grace Adieu by Susanna Clarke in the Washington Post. Here is the link to Amazon. (I chose this because I am reading Susanna Clarke’s work.)

Review Link Here

What author in romance would do this to another romance author in a major magazine? No one chastized Joyce for this review. Not even Clarke. This kind of reviewing goes on all the time in the literary world.

I think in the romance community, this kind of detailed criticism would be chaotic. And does the genre need it? I don’t think so.

Good discussion. Great comments.

Ashley, Phillipa, 2006. Decent Exposure (London: Little Black Dress).

Cohen, Julie, 2006. Being a Bad Girl (Richmond, Surrey: Harlequin Mills & Boon Limited).

Joyce, Lydia, 2005. The Veil of Night (New York: Signet Eclipse).

McClone, Melissa, 2006. Blueprint for a Wedding (Richmond, Surrey: Harlequin Mills & Boon).

Neels, Betty, 1999. Discovering Daisy (Richmond, Surrey: Harlequin Mills & Boon Limited).

I’ve also found symbolism/metaphor in books by Mary Balogh, Loretta Chase, Jennifer Crusie, Marion Lennox, Nora Roberts, Claire Thornton and there are probably lots more who aren’t springing instantly to mind right at the moment and there are also so many authors whose work I’ve not yet read. Even for the ones I have listed, I haven’t read every single book by them (well, that would be a lot of books ;-) ), and when I have, I’ve often found symbolism/imagery in some books by a particular author and not in other of their works. That doesn’t mean it’s not there, though, because sometimes things spring out at me and at other times I only notice the symbolism/metaphor after a period of reflection. And in some novels it’s more complex, and in others it’s less so.

Colour symbolism (e.g. the colour of the hero’s hair, or the heroine’s dress tells us something about his or her personality), is really, really common in romance novels and one can often deduce things about the characters from their furniture/décor. Romances also sometimes use time of year/the weather to express something about the characters or the state of their emotions.

Not so long ago Janine wrote about romance authors with lyrical styles, which is slightly different, but that might be a starting point if you’re looking for lyrical prose (obviously) and rich descriptions.

Some romance authors spend a lot of time trying to create subtle layers of meaning, motifs etc and I appreciate it when I find it (which I quite often do) but it doesn’t seem to be something that’s discussed as frequently in terms of ‘craft’ by romance authors on their blogs/websites.

Laura, I would love a list of the romance authors who meet your above criteria. I really appreciate it when I find metaphor, symbolism, imagery, etc. in a romance genre novel as well (it’s like the best of both worlds for me!), but I know that others may find such books “too wordy”.

If you want a forum in which to undertake thoughtful criticism of romance, you should create one. The initiation of such discussion should not be dependent upon the participation of the NYT or any other party.

Laura beat me to pointing out that Teach Me Tonight is doing this type of work, as are — less formally — other blogs, IMO, too, including here and the Smart Bitches. But as to your point about the NY Times, I totally agree. My view is that Romance should not have to seek legitimation because the genre is *already* legitimate, and inclusion in a pub like the NY Times is simply equitable treatment with other genres, not a badge of validity.

My concerns are more related to what do people want vis a vis that wider inclusion. Do authors, for example, really want the critical attention that will come to the genre if it’s regularly reviewed in certain print media, or will they resent it, fight it, circle the wagons? I have no doubt that the *genre* is ready for that kind of attention, but I’m not so sure about the *community,* thus my questions.

Laura: I think the distinctions you draw regarding different elements of craft reflect exactly what I was trying to say about craft-talk among writers working on books and craft-talk among readers (perhaps including authors) about a published work. Sometimes those elements overlap, but I also think that the *way* they’re talked about is different. For example, writers may exchange ideas about how to use POV to achieve a certain effect, and readers may then comment on how well a certain POV worked for them in the story. An author may intend to communicate a certain theme, and readers may find things totally different from that in the work. In one case, craft-talk is part of the writing process, and in the other it’s part of the reading process. And in terms of reading, it’s also about how a certain work fits into the genre, how it relates to other works, how it comments on the genre, how it adds to a certain discussion about the genre, etc.

That’s what we’re doing at Teach Me Tonight, at least some of the time. And there are the volumes of essays we’re working on. I’m not sure if that’s what you mean by ‘forum’ but the TMT blog is a location where analysis takes place and where comments from other romance readers and from romance authors or, in fact, anyone else with something constructive to say, are welcomed.

I think it would be great if an author were to help in leading that discussion as Crusie used to do on her yahoo list (and maybe does in other places). Or have someone else moderate that discussion who has the knowledge to delve into those things because it is interesting and there are romance books that can handle that type of introspection.

The Crusie-Mayer writing workshop’s going to be looking at metaphors, symbols, motifs and themes in September/October and Kate Moore of the Fog City Divas posted questions about Loretta Chase’s Lord of Scoundrels to get people started and then led a discussion about the book. The links are here. It’s a time-consuming thing to do, though, rather like preparing a lecture, setting essay questions and leading a seminar and I would imagine that most authors are already rather busy trying to fit in writing, promotion and their existing online activities. It’s also only something worth doing if there are enough people who’ve also got a copy of the book and are prepared to put in time to read it and analyse it in detail.

I came over here this morning to tell you about my article on Gather, only to find out you already knew… Okay, who’s watching me? lol

I began that conversation *because* of this one. :) I wanted to see what people who didn’t already read romance thought of the genre.

The basic jist is that people believe there are no layers, the books are too formulaic, why read it if they’re just going to get together in the end? These same people would be the ones who’d bitch if the H/h *didn’t* get together, you know. :P

Someone at Gather mentioned no creativity in romance and I almost spewed my coffee. They obviously don’t read the books I read. If anyone wants to come on over and join the fun, you’re more than welcome. I’m currently the only romance author on the discussion.

~~Becka