Robin talks about this all the time. A short cut is a romance convenience, not just a convention. All genres have them but I’m most familiar with the romance genre and thus my attention is placed on its foibles.

Shortcuts are when an author relies on an archetype or trope in order to draw upon the collective memory of a romance reader to fill in the necessary motivation or backstory for a character. This often results in anachronistic behavior which confuses the reader and results in accusations of the reader not understanding. It can also result in distance between the reader and the story because the reader simply isn’t provided enough information to relate to the characters.

Despite how silly it may appear, JR Ward appears on her boards in character from time to time. She knows her male characters intimately, down to the type of liquor that they like to drink; whether they wear jeans, tailored slacks or leather pants; and if they are a boxer, brief, commando guy. Unfortunately, her heroines are not so well developed. The depth of their characters largely rests on the color of their guns and perhaps their pre-BDB employment.

In TV and movies, the actors themselves bring flavor to the character in terms of facial expressions, body language, and intonations. If an author does not provide this, the reader is required to fill in all of this information.

There are some authors who excel at characterizations: Lisa Kleypas is one. Cam is quite a different hero than Merripen even though they are both of gypsy descent. Nora Roberts and Suzanne Brockmann are equally adept at creating memorable and different characters.

But often you see a reliance on shorthand to provide the flavor of a character. It is this reliance that produces the cookie cutter feel of the genre. So much of how a character acts in the course of the book should depend, not just on the circumstances, but what has gone on before the story ever starts. What was their childhood like? In Lord of Scoundrels, Loretta Chase sets up her story by showing Sebastien as a child, eager to earn the love and appreciation of his father, only to be cast aside brutally for a speech impediment and his swarthy looks. He grows up to despise his appearance and believes that he is not loveable. Jessica Trent, on the other hand, has been a poor relation with a open minded grandmother/guardian and a hapless brother. Jessica creates some of her own messes by constantly bailing out her brother and not forcing him to make decisions for himself.

A character that springs fully formed without backstory or acts with inconsistency often provides a disjointed read. What was their childhood like? Did they have siblings? Where in the order of the family did the character place? Did the character grow up in the country? city? rural? urban? Who were the most influential people in their lives and why? Did religion affect them?

To some extent, I think the worry about writing racially diverse characters can be allayed if authors spend time thinking about the character rather than focusing so much on inserting one or two elements to prove the character’s nationality.

There should be elements of the character’s life that the author knows but we may never see. Where the backstory informs the character’s decision making process. I wish as much time were spent constructing hte character as an author spends constructing the world in which the character’s live.

Robin: It’s interesting, because at first I didn’t notice the genre shortcuts/shorthand. I read books I thought were so interesting and then I’d talk to a friend about them and she was like, “eh, I’ve read hundreds of those.” Now that I have read hundreds of those, I get it. And in many cases it frustrates me.

I understand that authors feel constricted by diminishing page and word lengths, but some of my favorite books in the genre remain the old Laura London (aka Sharon and Tom Curtis) category Regencies. Without explicit sex, often little more than a few hot and heavy kisses, these books, from Love’s A Stage to the Bad Baron’s Daughter, feel so richly layered to me, even upon multiple re-reads. Allusions to classical literature and myth, primary and secondary characters posssessing surprising dimension, interesting plot turns (how about getting the hero and heroine into an escaped hot air balloon and stranding them in a crumbling country manor house for the night?), and tight, elegant prose, books like these make me somewhat impatient with complaints about the limits of space. Especially when book after book seems to be turning out another profligate aristocrat, penniless debutante, quirky widow/divorcee with a fluffy little dog, and Navy SEAL.

Even more problematic, I think, is the was shortcuts become entrenched genre authority, passed between books so readily and indiscriminately that readers will often insist on the authenticity or accuracy of something that is, in fact, completely invented. Although I still don’t understand the system of titles and entailments, I know that these areas are a source of constant frustration for those who know intimately how it really worked, since the genre so rarely seems to conform to historical reality. I get a little crazy every time I see the maurading Viking hero presented as the exemplar of uncivilized lustiness. Or American Puritans as sexless prudes. We see it everywhere, from small examples (red hair in a heroine equals fiery and passionate; the FBI/CIA hero equals mysterious and/or brooding alpha in need of love and understanding) to large (Heyer’s Regency history has been accepted as real and has populated the genre with who knows how many misnomers and mistakes).

Although I do not believe that shortcuts reflect lazy storytelling, I do think that if we don’t spend some time thinking about whether they are still valid and useful, the genre runs the risk of getting stale and, more problematically, of perpetuating outdated and undesirable stereotypes. The sheikh as the “exotic other lover,” for example, or the virgin widow as the sensuous virgin, or the trusty Black sidekick as a dose of ethnic flavor, or the pedophilac villain as everything evil imperiling the romantic couple. And when I see resistance to taking a second look at these shortcuts, I’m always puzzled, especially when I see authors talk about how devoted to the craft of writing they remain. I know that many regard Romance as formulaic (I prefer to see its boundaries as those of form rather than formula), but every good recipe depends on fresh ingredients. If you use stale flour to bake a cake, it’s not going to be comforting and delicious – it’s going to taste like cardboard, or worse.

With all of the ways the genre riffs off its broad history, there is a vertible treasure trove (and we know how much Romance loves treasure, especially if it’s accompanied by a sexy pirate) of types and tropes to refresh and reinterpret. Sure, one day those will become shortcuts, too, but hopefully by then we’ll have moved on to the next interpretive movement within the genre.

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Earlier in this year of 2009, there was a Great Cultural Appropriation Debate, dubbed racefail09, that centred mainly around the SF/F genres. If you clicked on that link, it leads to a set of many, many, many links about race, racism, cultural appropriation and white privilege. (If you’ve never heard of these terms before – or your knee jerk reaction is to say “I don’t have white privilege!” – this is a good place to start reading.)

Romance suffers from the same problem SF/F does. It’s very, very white. It would also seem that readers are far more okay with reading about vampires and werewolves and demons and angels than characters of colour. That is not okay. Think about what this means for a second. And imagine, if you will, being erased in stories or always in the background, a victim, evil, maybe the best friend or sidekick. . .but never the hero of your own story. This is what appropriation does to people of colour. It is not diversity to have white people running around in foreign lands without much thought to the people who are native to those lands. I can’t say I find it romantic when they’re in the middle of colonizing another country either; I’m not sure how I’m supposed to root for our heroes when they’re killing or enslaving other people, or condoning/profiting from it, even if they aren’t actively participating (this is an issue even when white characters don’t visit foreign lands, but it’s a bit harder to ignore, I think, when they’re in the middle of taking over another country).

Is it possible to write white people in foreign lands without it being appropriative? I don’t think I’ve seen this done in a historical. I hesitate to say never (it’s not like I’ve read every book in the romance genre), but at the same time, there’s also the issue of creating yet another story about white people. Even if this story were remarkably absent of exoticism and respectful of the other culture, it still features white people, which means the characters of colour are in the background somewhere; this is a problem in contemporary (and fantasy) settings, as well. The stories of white people are being privileged over the stories of people of colour. If you truly mean to be diverse, write and read about people of colour. Make them the main characters of your stories. Even – or especially – in a historical romance.

I admit to reading less and less romance novels as I’ve grown more aware of these issues. I’ve also fallen out of the fandom quite a bit because there seems to be an overwhelming pressure to keep things “nice” and “polite”; I can understand the need for civil discourse, but not when tone is used as a silencing tactic so these things don’t get discussed. So I read other genres, like YA, which is still mainly white, but seems to be a bit more open to diversity. There’s this YA book I read the other day, Justina Chen Headley’s Girl Overboard, that I fell in love with. It’s everything I mean and want to see in a book when I say there ought to be people of colour in the leading roles.

Girl Overboard is about a Chinese-American teenage girl, Syrah Cheng, whose story is one of growing up, finding herself, dealing with her parents, making friends, thinking about boys, thinking about her future… And snowboarding and drawing manga. I like to think some of Syrah’s emotions and experiences are universal enough that white people would be willing to read about them and perhaps even see themselves in this character; after all, it’s what many people of colour often (have to) do. I appreciate that this isn’t a book about race or racism; they are mentioned, but are not the main focus of the story (there’s a place for those books too, but not what I always want to read). For the most part, being Chinese simply is. And it’s integrated with the American culture of the Pacific Northwest because Syrah is a first generation citizen living in Seattle. This book stands out to me not only as a fabulous story, but also as a story about people of colour by a person of colour. [/plugging]

One way to combat appropriation is to let and encourage people (writers) of colour tell their own stories. I don’t see a reason why this couldn’t apply to romance as well. It already exists, though I’ve only read it in a contemporary setting with Marjorie Liu’s books (her supernatural people don’t bother me because she has actual characters of colour in her books. I mean, I like the X-Men. I see value in metaphors, but the metaphor of alienation, being different, being treated as sub-human, etc, only goes so far when there aren’t any characters of colour in your stories, which ends up perpetuating the problems the metaphors are attempting to address.)

As a romance reader, I’ve grown increasingly wary of books set in “exotic” locations. I never know, if I read that story, if it’s going to offend or hurt me in some way. It’s easier, for me, to suspend disbelief – pretend it’s a kind of fantasy or alternate history – if the story is about rich, upper-class white people doing rich, upper-class white people things. Although this is not to say it’s a good thing to have “wallpaper history” as the setting, or that writers should aim for such a low standard or write alternate histories in which people of colour are erased. I am saying, when writing people of colour or another person’s culture, take the time to know what you’re writing about. If I never see another non-white person described as “exotic” or with “almond shaped eyes“, it won’t be soon enough. If nothing else, I think these are very lazy terms to use to describe someone who isn’t white — it’s an extremely vague description and rather insulting to be lumped together in one or two tired phrases, like all people of colour (POC) look alike (and, for some reason, we always get compared to food. What’s up with that?). I would like to think it’s possible for historical romances about characters of colour, set somewhere that isn’t England or America, and that’s respectful of the culture to exist. And that white people could write these stories alongside writers of colour telling their own stories. I’m just not sure that I’ve seen it, or, actually, looked for it.

I’m not saying writing is easy to do. I’m not saying writers will get writing other people and their culture(s) right all the time. And it’s hard, as a reader, to come across beloved books or authors and find out their writing contains racist or white privileged ideas. I’m not saying you will cure racism. I’m not saying I want authors to defend their work; I’d like them not to continue to further get stuff wrong, though. I’m not even saying you’ll be praised for your efforts (especially if you get stuff wrong — your intentions are only as good as the outcome). I am saying you should try, regardless. And I think supporting or reading books by and about people of colour is one way to do this; as is being more aware of when cultural appropriation, racism and white privilege are occurring in your fiction and perhaps even talking and educating others about it.

Janine adds: Handy Hunter, our guest blogger, has requested that we add this video of a speech given by Nigerian author Chimamanda Adichie, titled “The Danger of a Single Story,” to the bottom of this opinion piece. You won’t regret watching it. It’s truly excellent!

Related Posts:

• REVIEW: Sheikh’s Forbidden Virgin by Kate Hewitt
• REVIEW: Paradise Rules by Beth Kery
• REVIEW: Set the Dark on Fire by Jill Sorenson
• REVIEW: Soul Enchilada by David Macinnis Gill
• REVIEW: Glutton for Pleasure by Alisha Rai
• REVIEW: Scandal in Copper Lake by Marilyn Pappano
• Solutions for Greater Equality in the Romance Market or We Can Haz Help?
• Literary Segregation or Market Specialization?
• Seattle Weekly Explores the Ethnic Divide in Romances
• The Story of the Jena 6: A Miscarriage of Justice

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Amazon for example, says that people with Kindles now buy 3.1 times as many books as they did before owning the device. That factor is up from 2.7 in December 2008. So a reader who had previously bought eight books from Amazon would now purchase, on average, 24.8 books, a rise from 21.6 books.

We romance readers know that from our own experience. Many of the early adopters of ebooks have been romance readers who buy more books than any subset of readers out there.

The negative takeaway from the Times article was that there was a reader who shared a Kindle account with someone else. She was quoted as thinking she was probably taking advantage of a loophole.

Ms. Englin has linked her Kindle to the Amazon account of some nearby friends, allowing all of them to read books like “The Lost Symbol” at the same time — while paying for them only once.

“I read much more, I tend to read faster for some reason, and I read a greater variety of things,” said Ms. Englin, adding that this is nearly the same as lending a physical book to friends. “We haven’t really looked closely at Amazon’s terms of service. But I do suspect we are breaking the rules.”

This caused some authors to start calling her a thief and trying to shame her. I pointed out that the Kindle Terms of Service allow for up to six devices to be registered to a single account.  A number of authors did not believe Eglin was acting lawfully or ethically:

Ross continued:

• We’re in total agreement. RT @zumayabooks: @JoAnnRoss If you’ve only PAID for 1 copy, you’ve stolen the other 5.
• @NinaPierce She says it’s not stealing. But she’s wrong. I commented on the blog, will see if she allows it and what she says in response.

Ross checked with Amazon:

When you hook up a device to a Kindle account, whether it is an iPhone/iTouch or Kindle, every user of the registered device has the ability to charge books to that account so only those you really, really trust would register a device on the same account.

Then the discussion segued into more general copyright issues.  Elizabeth Burton, a publisher, had this to say:

and this:

The problem here is that the very same law that gives authors a property right to their creative work gives consumers the right of first sale and fair use privileges.  Let me state that again.  The VERY SAME LAW that creates intellectual property for authors gives readers rights too.

Here’s how it works.

• COPYRIGHT LAW  gives a bundle of rights to AUTHORS.
• AUTHORS sell that bundle of rights, including the right of distribution and copying to a PUBLISHER in exchange for money.
• PUBLISHER exercises its purchased rights by making many copies and selling those copies in a few ways including, but not limited to, the following two:

1. A SALE which results in a consumer purchasing the book and gaining the RIGHT OF FIRST SALE and FAIR USE RIGHTS granted by same COPYRIGHT LAW.

2. A LEASE which is bound by the terms of an agreement.

In the Kindle instance, the purchase is of a lease of a book for as long as Amazon deems it appropriate for you to have access to a copy.  The contractual terms between a Kindle owner and Amazon allows for up to six devices registered to an account to simultaneously share that book.  This is not infringement as so many authors (looking at you, Toni Blake, and others) have suggested.  What Amazon is allowed to share with a reader is dependent on the rights that are granted to Amazon by publishers.  Hence the turning off of Text to Speech and conversely, the allowance of 6 simultaneous downloads.

To unapologetically call a reader a THIEF when she is exercising a right granted by Amazon and therefore by the publisher is terrible. It’s an affront to all readers.

No laws are being skirted.  No laws are changed.  Except that readers are being given the shaft.  Because some readers prefer to read digital books, our rights have been erased.  We cannot resell a digital book because no one trusts that we have deleted the originals.  We cannot be allowed to share a book because the fear is that pressing the email button with an attachment being feared we are using it as a copy button.  WE ARE PRESUMED TO BE DIRTY, THIEVING CRIMINALS.  I AM VERY TIRED OF IT.

The default position is that we ebook readers are always engaged in some form of wrongdoing.  We are charged more.  We don’t get the book at the same time.  We are constrained in how we use our books, on what devices we read them on, with whom we can share them.  We are not considered legitimate customers if we do not leave our house and buy a paper copy.

Sharing is a fundamental part of reading.  Sharing is a reader’s way of saying “try this, I think you’ll like it. There is no risk here.” It’s a way of building a relationship with another reader so that the next time you are reading a book, you can say, “get this” and that person will go and buy it, solely on your recommendation.  From one reader to another, there is no greater expression of trust than to buy on another reader’s recommendation.

Sharing is part of creating the reading community. Sharing seeds reading.  It creates and generates more interest in reading. Why is this important? Because the biggest threat to authors’ livelihood is not piracy.  It is not casual sharing.  It is a declining readership.  It is rising rates of illiteracy.  It is alternative forms of entertainment.

I am not arguing that piracy is right. It is not.  But sharing between people on one Kindle account is not piracy and to equate piracy with sharing is incredibly insulting and frustrating.  As an ebook reader, I have given up so many rights.

Thank god for people like Courtney Milan and Tessa Dare who blogged about readers’ rights too.  Discovering what seemed like so many authors ill regard toward sharing, that so many would leap to the conclusion that sharing amongst even six readers is piracy, is so offputting that I am reluctant to foster anyone else’s joy in reading.   If authors want us to respect them and their rights, they need to start respecting us and our rights.

Related Posts:

• Author Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Text to Speech Functionality
• Amazon and Two Sides of the Intellectual Property Coin
• Federation of the Blind Pushes Back Against Authors Guild
• Friday Midday News Roundup
• Wednesday Midday Links: JA Konrath Posts a Must Read Article and Dear Author Has Neat News
• Friday Midday Links: It’s All About the Ebook Reader
• Tuesday Midday Review Links: Kindle is everywhere but Canada (WTF?)
• Wednesday Midday Links RoundUp: Big Changes at Simon & Schuster
• Wednesday Midday Links Roundup:
• Friday News Roundup: Positivity in the face of poor quality is cruelty of its own

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

I loved reading the lists that people made up of their top 16 books this past week in honor of Kathleen Winsor.  In making up my own lists of top books (either for the end of the year or for something else), I struggle with competing concepts.  There are my favorite books.  There are books that I think are well written.  There are books that I find to be groundbreaking.  These three types of books don’t always overlap for me.

Favorite Books

I have books that I love to re-read time and again.  Are they the best books ever written in the romance genre? Probably not.  For example, Savage Thunder by Johanna Lindsey is one of my favorite romances.  Savage Thunder is about a half breed who is hired by Jocelyn Fleming, a recently widowed virgin duchess.  It seems hard to believe that Lindsey was able to fit all those iconic (ironic?) tropes into one heroine, but she did.   The hero’s name is Colt Thunder. I know!  It’s hard to type that without giggling.  Despite the cliches, this book works for me.

One of the things I loved about this book was Jocelyn’s world view.  Sex is something to be enjoyed.  She has few prejudices which is believable given that she spends three years traveling around the world.  She decides she wants to take a lover but she cannot take one who may have known Edward, her deceased husband.  She doesn’t want anything to impugn his memory.  When her entourage was in Mexico, she found several men attractive but her interest wasn’t returned.   When she was in the Middle East, she was too raw from Edward’s death.  (She found the boldness of the men to be “sheer arrogance and audacity”).  Now she longs for a bold man.

Instead Jocelyn gets Colt Thunder who aids Jocelyn’s group.

“I’m not associated, as you put it, with anyone, lady. Christ, what is this with all the questions? Either you want out of there or you don’t. Now, I can understand if you feel you’d be dirtying your hand putting it to mine for a lift up”—the impatience turned distinctly bitter here—”but I don’t see much alternative just now—unless you want to wait for the next fellow who comes passing by.”

“Not at all,” Jocelyn said with relief, certain now he meant them no harm. “A little dirt can be easily washed off,” she added with a smile, having misunderstood his meaning.

Colt has been the subject of terrible racial violence.  As a half breed, he is viewed as a non person by both groups.  He has barely recovered from being nearly whipped to death for having the audacity to touch a white woman.   He views whites with suspicion and has a hard time wrapping his head around Jocelyn’s seeming indifference to his half breed status.

“I was born in this country, but folks got a different name for me, lady. I’m a half-breed.”

“How interesting,” she said, aware his tone had turned bitter again, but choosing to ignore it. “It sounds like something to do with stock and crossbreeding. What does it have to do with people?”

He stared at her for a moment as if she were crazy; then he swore under his breath before snarling, “What the hell do you think it has to do with people? It means I’m only half white.”

His tone gave her pause, but still she asked, “And the other half?”

Jocelyn’s refusal to accept Colt’s prejudice (either his own or other’s toward him) provides a great source of humor throughout the story.   Savage Thunder has a heroine looking to rid herself of her virginity; a half breed with a chip  on his shoulder a mile wild; and a secondary romance between the heroine’s best friend and companion, a sexually experienced woman, and one of Jocelyn’s guards.  This book was published in 1989.  I found it awesome when I first read and I get a little thrill each time I crack it open for a re-read.  But is it one of the best books that has been written?

Well written books

One thing that I never really noticed or even paid attention to before I got online was layering or theming in a book.  I never really understood character arcs, patterns or even plots.  I joined Jennifer Crusie’s yahoo group  in 2001 and her contribution to that list provided some of the most illuminating information about writing I have ever read.   I started thinking about romances more critically.  Over the years, I’ve learned to examine books a bit more clinically but I respond to books from my gut.

There are times when my gut and my head don’t work in synchronism.  Flowers from the Storm (pub. 1992) is  book that I can recognize as being an amazingly well crafted story.  When I see it on “Best of” lists, I nod my head in agreement. It is a well written book, probably one of the best in the genre.  If you were to give this book to someone who doesn’t read romance, I think that person would be hard pressed to find that there is anything about it that norms the stereotypes.

The hero is Christian Langland, Duke of Jervaulx, who spends most of his time drinking and whoring, living the life of luxury and ease.  He was also a brilliant mathematician who had been working on a paper with the father of Archemedia Timms.  Maddy, as she is known, despises Christian for his lifestyle and for the attention that he receives from her father.

Christian suffers a stroke after a duel and his family decides to institutionalize him in order to seize control over his assets.  Maddy finds him there and knows that he is neither mad nor stupid, but unable to speak and with diminished hearing.  Maddy is moved to help Christian.

Neither Maddy or Christian are delightful characters. Christian is a selfish cad, even after he suffers his stroke.  Kinsale does a superb job of showing us his personal anguish at being taken for a madman and placed in an institution.  Maddy is self righteous.  She is unbending from her faith and her beliefs even unto the end, although her love for Christian, a non Quaker, is the basis of her greatest break with her religion. The constant criticism that Christian and Maddy receive from external forces (his family, her Quaker friends) only serves to strengthen their bond.

Stunningly, Kinsale maintains the characters’ mannerisms even in their narrative dialogues. In other words, Maddy’s personal thoughts are still in the Quaker-ease, using the thees, thous, and other mannerisms.  Ditto for Christian.  There is nothing trite or frivilous in this book. It’s a serious examination of vulnerabilities, growth, questions of faith, and acceptance of personal frailties.

Having said that, Flowers from the Storm is a book I’ve only read a couple of times.  I find myself curiously detached from the romance.  It’s not an easy read and I don’t count it was one of my favorites.  It’s not even my favorite Kinsale (For My Lady’s Heart and  The Shadow and the Star vie for that).

Groundbreaking Books

There are a few titles that, in hindsight, I find to be rather groundbreaking within the genre.  Groundbreaking for me is a book that sets off a rash of imitators or brings a certain sub genre into popularity.  Some groundbreaking books in my opinion include: Stephanie Laurens, Devil’s Bride (pub 1998); Christine Feehan’s Dark Prince (pub. 1999); Julia Quinn’s Duke and I (pub 2000).

Devil’s Bride wasn’t the first book to feature the hero in pursuit, but I believe that it’s popularity led to a decade long worth of novels featuring the hero doing the pursuing.  Duke and I marked Quinn’s rise to stardom. Did you know that it wasn’t even an NYTimes Bestseller?  In fact, Quinn did not make the NYT list until An Offer from a Gentleman, the third in the Bridgerton series.  Avon has tried to replicate the tone and voice of Quinn in a number of regency romance releases since the 2000s but Quinn is a one of a kind.  Dark Prince by Christine Feehan made the whole paranormal romance subgenre popular.

By virtue of being groundbreaking, to exclude these books from a best of list seems somehow negligent; yet, Dark Prince and Devil’s Bride have been done so repetitively (by the original creators no less) that re-reading the books is almost a chore rather than a pleasure.  Duke and I doesn’t even rate on most people’s list as their most favorite Bridgerton novel.

In composing best of lists, do you choose your favorites, the best written, the most groundbreaking?  Does it matter? Do you think there are conflicts between those categories? Would you categorize the books differently?

Related Posts:

• Best of 2008 List: Reviewer Joan/Sarah F

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

In reading reviews of Tessa Dare’s book, Goddess of the Hunt, and of Louisa Edwards‘, Can’t Stand the Heat, I noticed there were often comments about the female protagonists, or heroines, of the stories as not being very likeable. I know I struggled with Miranda, the heroine in Can’t Stand the Heat. I thought I would ask Tessa Dare and Louisa Edwards to help me jump start a conversation on the likeability of a heroine:

Tessa Dare:
I will first say that I love Lucy, the heroine of Goddess of the Hunt. I never set out to write an “unlikeable” heroine–I set out to write a heroine who felt real to me, and whom I hoped would feel real to readers.

Lucy is young and brash and stubborn, and she makes a lot of mistakes. Many readers love that about her. Some really, really don’t. I’m okay with that. Of course, it’s nice when people love Lucy like I do, but I’m actually sort of proud of the fact that she’s inspired such a range of strong emotions.

Readers read romance for a wide range of reasons. Personally, I think I’ve always identified with heroines who make mistakes. I’ve made plenty of my own mistakes, and I gravitate toward stories where a flawed heroine gets her happy ending. My favorite Austen heroines, for example, Elizabeth Bennet and Emma Woodhouse, make very grave errors in their perceptions of themselves and others, with disastrous consequences. They do take steps to make things right. But earning their happy endings doesn’t mean altering the fundamentals of their characters, just arriving at a better understanding of their imperfect selves and displaying a willingness to grow and change. And they are rewarded with handsome, wealthy (imperfect) gentlemen who know and love them “just as they are.” (Mark Darcy/Bridget Jones, anyone?)

That, to me, is a powerful romantic trope, because I know perfection is well beyond my own reach. And that’s the kind of journey I’ve tried to give each of the heroines in my trilogy.

Louisa Edwards:

Tessa, I love this! I wish I could just say “Ditto.” Although I have to admit that I don’t love Miranda, the heroine of Can’t Stand the Heat, in quite the same way you obviously love Lucy. I knew Miranda was difficult–challenging, even, when I was writing her; she’s a bit controlled and controlling, and she can be abrasive in her self-confidence. She loves her brother deeply, but at the beginning of the book, she’s not prepared to see him as an adult in his own right, and all her misguided attempts at protection and caretaking stem from that.

To take it a step further, I didn’t always like Miranda–but I believed in her. As a writer, I never actively tried to make her likable; I was much more concerned with making her real. And on some level, I think I assumed they were the same thing. That if readers hooked into the parts of Miranda that echoed their own lives or experiences, they would understand her, and that understanding would lead to liking.

Clearly, that’s not the case with every reader, which is inevitable. But it was important to me that Miranda’s reactions flowed from her history and personality in a true and consistent way, and that she eventually reached a new understanding of the people around her, and her own feelings for them, which allowed her to dig deep and atone. In the end, I think I accomplished that, at least to my own satisfaction. And since I can never hope to universally satisfy each and every reader (although that’s the dream!) all I can really do is attempt to write a story that satisfies me.

Miranda won me over by the end of the book because she made mistakes, regretted them, and owned them. She made a journey of self-discovery as a character, and without her flaws and imperfections, there would have been no story. Or at least, not a very interesting one. Perfect people, it turns out, are pretty boring.

Can you have a flawed heroine who makes mistakes and is still generally likeable? Can a perfect heroine be interesting?

Tessa Dare:

Well, I think we need to define some terms here. What do you mean by “likable”? Does a heroine have to be universally liked to be “likable”? Because I consider Lucy to be a very likable heroine, and a lot of readers (I would venture to say the great majority, at least that I’ve heard from) have found her likable, too. It’s just that those who don’t like her, REALLY don’t like her.

Maybe what we’re talking about here is the completely inoffensive heroine. A heroine to whom hardly any readers will react negatively. Yeah, I guess I don’t write those! Though some authors do, and manage to do it brilliantly.

Can a heroine be both inoffensive and believable? I think so. Off the top of my head, can think of a few heroines who are interesting, strong, believable, and almost entirely inoffensive, and they star in some of the romance novels that are frequently named as all-time favorites.

But I think that’s verrry hard to pull off. An author runs the risk of making a heroine inoffensive to the point of being uninteresting. I guess thus far, I’ve preferred to err on the other side, and write heroines who have big flaws, but also big dreams and big hearts.

In the series I’m working on for 2010, though, my heroines are all a little older and have more responsibilities. Their struggles come less from growing into themselves and more from conflicting loyalties, as they are torn between obligations to family, work, community on one side and romantic love on the other. Again, I don’t know whether that makes them “likable” or not–but they feel real to me, and I hope readers will agree.

Louisa Edwards

I’m not saying likable heroines are too perfect–sort of the opposite, actually, because I think perfection is boring and intimidating enough that it’s really hard, for me, to like and relate to characters with no flaws. An inoffensive heroine seems like a different thing–not boringly perfect, but probably also not the driving force of the plot. Flaws are helpful from a storytelling standpoint, unless you want all the conflict in your book to be external.

It’s certainly possible for a flawed character to still be liked by many readers, and in fact, I’ve gotten a lot of fanmail about Miranda–as with Tessa’s heroine, the hatred is certainly not universal. But she does seem to evoke strong emotions, one way or the other, which I can only be glad about. Whatever else you can say about her, Miranda seems to be memorable and she gets discussion going.

Even so, I’ll admit it was a bit of a relief to write the second Recipe for Love novel, because the heroine of On the Steamy Side is a total love. Very different from Miranda, and in some ways, more fun to write. Of course, her hero isn’t the happy Alpha that Adam is–because it’s about balance, too.

What do you prefer in a book? The “inoffensive but likeable” character? The thoughtprovoking character? I know I want to root for characters and if I don’t like them, I can’t. But as Tessa and Louisa point out, “likeability” is hugely subjective. What makes you like or dislike a character?

Related Posts:

• For whom should the author write?
• REVIEW: A Lady of Persuasion by Tessa Dare
• Readers Opinions Wanted: Unfamiliar Terms
• Author Talk with Louisa Edwards
• Poll: What do you like in your heroines?
• Dear Author Recommended Reads for September & Sept eBook Promotions
• My First Sale by Louisa Edwards, The Book of My Heart (and other clichés)
• REVIEW: Surrender of a Siren by Tessa Dare
• Ponderings on the Golden Era: Perspectives of a Seasoned Nerd and a Nerdy Novice
• GIVEAWAY: Bantam/Ballantine’s Fall Release Preview

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

This past week, Amazon announced that it would sell its Amazon Kindle to 100+ countries and those Kindles would have cellular access so you could take advantage of the on Kindle book purchasing.  (which is really the only advantage of the Kindle at this point).  Two problems emerged from this announcement.  First, the release of the Kindle didn’t do anything to make more books available to international readers.  Amazon confirmed that it would be observing all territorial rights agreements.  Second, Amazon will actually be charging more for books sold outside the U.S.

Territorial Agreements

As I discussed in this article published in May of 2009, rights have traditionally been sold with translation and territory rights sold as one bundle known as “foreign rights”.  I argued that rights should be decoupled.  World digital rights could be granted while reserving translation rights.  One of the drawbacks of this is that it can inhibit the growth of a regional publishing industry.  Martin Taylor, Director of the New Zealand Digital Publishing Forum, argues that if the US published writers were to grant world digital rights to their publisher, it would serve to diminish the publishing power of the other countries:

Territorial rights are important to preserve. They allow countries to develop their own economically sustainable publishing industries and to reflect the specific dynamics of each market. The profits from country-specific international editions help sustain the infrastucture needed for local book publishing that is important both economically and culturally. Local pricing, and the ability to profit from locally generated sales and marketing initiatives are also important parts of this.

Language/translation rights can be a useful alternative to achieve this but only if you have a unique language. If, for instance, you’re a small English language market like New Zealand, it’s no barrier. The only way to have a chance of developing a local market is to have territorial rights.

Martin’s point is an important one, but in the meantime, what do readers do?  With no legitimate source, do readers in New Zealand, Australia or even the UK simply go without?

Higher Prices

Hidden behind the fluff of the news announcement of the great Kindle being available worldwide was the fact that Amazon intends to charge more, not only for the device itself, but also for the books.

When asked by the Guardian precisely how much downloads would cost, an Amazon.co.uk spokesman revealed that foreign customers – including those in Britain – would be paying $13.99 (£8.75) per book instead of the American price of $9.99 (£6.25). That amounts to a 40% premium for the same title.

“International customers do pay a higher price for their books than US customers due to higher operating costs outside of the US,” said the spokesman. “Additionally, VAT rates in the EU are higher on ebooks than on print books.”

Increased prices engender bad will for consumers. We don’t understand why the prices are higher (particularly if VAT rates have to be paid in addition to higher costs). The only thing we know is that the digital file is easily to store and deliver. It seems to us that there can be no extra cost. Indeed, we see there a savings for retailers and publishers.

The Result

The result of the digital rights confusion is readers not willing to adopt the ebook platform or for those who do adopt the platform, piracy is becomes a more attractive option. As guest blogger at Teleread points out, the seeming artificial boundaries prevent the customer from giving the content creator money.

I am not wanting to do something illegal. I want to make a perfectly legal purchase of an item on the Internet. I want to give the publisher (and hence the author) real, actual, genuine cash. Can I get the e-book any other way? No. So the old relict boundaries are preventing me from giving the author my money. What the…?

…

These kind of restrictions, in fact, do just create incentives for people to find ways around them, and thus almost certainly ending up meaning that the original creator gets nothing.

I’m not sure what the answer is – how best to balance the ability of countries to foster a publishing industry but still providing readers the books that they want. I do know that the internet is making boundaries seem superfluous and if those who want to make money from consumers must respond quickly or the boundaries will indeed be illusions as will profits. Publishing, worldwide, needs to start solving the problem of how to get books to the readers who want them.

Related Posts:

• Weekend Links: Goodbye Romance Novel TV
• Link Round Up Tuesday
• Taking Advantage of a Global English Reading Market
• Copyright: It’s not just for authors (Part 1 of 2 or 3 parts)
• Aspiring Author Attempts Own Auction
• What’s Appropriate for Public Consumption
• Yaoi/Manga Publishing Issues: Iris Print and Tokyo Pop
• Simon & Schuster Agrees that You Can Leave Them without Getting a Restraining Order
• Why You, the Reader, Should Care About S&S’s Contract Changes
• With Rumors of Amazon Selling DRM Free Music, Will Books Be Far Behind?

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

I had a different post planned for today. Really. It was from Louisa Edwards and Tessa Dare on the topic of the unlikeable heroine. But yesterday news broke that the new revised Guide from the FTC on endorsements was going to go into effect on December 1, 2009.

Let me start off with saying that I believe in transparency. When I remember, I almost always state in a review whether the book was provided to me for free or whether I purchased it because I’ve always thought that a reader’s decision making process is interesting. To some extent, DA serves as reading journal for myself.

If you note, we have ads in the feed and it says that we are paid an affiliate fee. When we had an Amazon bookstore, we told you we received an affiliate fee from that. When we got the Sony Readers, we told you that as well. We believe in transparency. We believe that it is one of the most important parts of our relationship as bloggers with you as the readers and commenters.

However, I don’t believe that the new FTC guidelines actually help to further the goals of transparency but rather, instead, the new rules will be rife with abuse and misuse and uneven application.  Here’s why:

1.  Adversely affects smaller blogs. Small blogs like ours do not have editors.  We don’t get paid to review and what we do is truly a labor of love. Yes, we are starting to host ads but we cannot afford a full time editor for our reviews.  Blogs without editorial staffs will be subject to the new rules while blogs and mainstream publications, regardless of other issues and relationships, will not.  Let me state it this way: the blogs with the highest earning capacity will likely be exempt while the blogs with the lowest earning capacity will not.  I found it fascinating that Richard Cleland of the Bureau of Consumer Protection said this:

Cleland said that a disclosure was necessary when it came to an individual blogger, particularly one who is laboring for free. A paid reviewer was in the clear because money was transferred from an institution to the reviewer, and the reviewer was obligated to dispense with the product. I wondered if Cleland was aware of how many paid reviewers held onto their swag.

“I expect that when I read my local newspaper, I may expect that the reviewer got paid,” said Cleland. “His job is to be paid to do reviews. Your economic model is the advertising on the side.”

From Cleland’s standpoint, because the reviewer is an individual, the product becomes “compensation.”

2.  Uncertainty. Looking at the interview Ed Rants had with Cleland, it’s unclear who will be held to this new standard and what will be the trigger.  Each situation is viewed on a case by case basis and dependent on the “degree of relationship between the advertiser and the blogger.”  By having buy links at the end of the blog, we are engaged in activity that would “raise the eyebrows” of the FTC.  To avoid scrutiny, Cleland suggests that we return the ARCs and, I suppose, remove the buy links.

I’m even uncertain if I buy the book post review but still hold onto the ARC whether I am in violation of the Cleland interpretation. The fact is that a) none of us keep our ARCs because we aren’t supposed to sell them. All of mine go into the recycler and b) I often buy ebook copies of paper books that I have enjoyed.

Again, the lack of clarity in the drafting is so difficult for the blogger in trying to comply.

3.  Inappropriate publisher involvement. The new Guide makes advertisers (or those that provide the product so in this case either authors or publishers) liable to the FTC for any misleading statements made by the blogger.  Thus, if a blogger says something misleading, then the advertiser (publisher/author) is responsible for misleading the consumer as well.  The Guide, in fact, says

In order to limit its potential liability, the advertiser should ensure that the advertising service provides guidance and training to its bloggers concerning the need to ensure that statements they make are truthful and substantiated. The advertiser should also monitor bloggers who are being paid to promote its products and take steps necessary to halt the continued publication of deceptive representations when they are discovered

Like I want publishers breathing down my neck while I try to write fair and honest reviews. We’ve already turned away publishers who wanted to have oversight over our reviews. And frankly, I feel like I should be giving instruction to publishers on labeling issues.

4.  Encouraging negative reviews. Sarah Weinman jokingly said that FTC guidelines would be encouraging bloggers to be snarkier and meaner.  This is because the FTC equates endorsements with positive reviews.  According to Cleland, publishers send product in the hopes of a positive review.  In the examples in the FTC guidelines, a blogger who receives product and then gives a “positive review” will be said to have given an endorsement requiring appropriate disclaimer.  Therefore, the F reviews at Dear Author will be named FTC Review (because these don’t require disclaimers).  Alternatively, if we never gave another positive review or recommendation, we would probably be okay.

5. Author endorsements. Author blurbs are some of the worst offenders of the Guide in the business. Some of the authors giving endorsements haven’t even read the book. Some will give endorsements to everyone who asks. Read this piece by Jenny Crusie on author blurbs. The FTC Guides have long covered these as inappropriate but has enforced its own rules against publishers?

6. International Effect. A commenter on Mashable noted that ‘Anti-Cyber Squatting Act’ extended to Canadian bloggers

For example the ‘Anti-Cyber Squatting Act’ has seen Canadian companies suing Canadian citizens under US law because the servers that were used (to perform domain registration in this example) resided on US soil.

But the effect could be that publishers will refuse to send books to bloggers, no matter where they are located, if the blogger isn’t complying because the possibility of publisher liability.

7. Eliminating any relationships. § 255.5 requires disclosure of “material connections”.

When there exists a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement (i.e., the connection is not reasonably expected by the audience), such connection must be fully disclosed.

I’m not sure what this pertains to. I have attended luncheons, parties with publishers. Do I need to explain each and every piece of swag I am ever given? Could I even possibly remember every pen and mint tin I picked up? I doubt it.

It’s important to note that in various interviews around the web and in the Guide itself, the FTC contemplates that any comment, tweet, post on a facebook page, participation on a message board, must be accompanied by the relevant disclosure.

As for Twitter, the FTC isn’t letting you get a pass with the excuse that 140 characters–Twitter’s famous text limit–is simply too short. “There are ways to abbreviate a disclosure that fit within 140 characters,” Cleland said. “You may have to say a little bit of something else, but if you can’t make the disclosure, you can’t make the ad.”

8.  Violates the First Amendments. The reviews at Dear Author go far beyond a product description.  Commercial speech is speech by a manufacturer or seller designed to sell a product. It’s pure advertising. I defy anyone to say that a review, even an A one, is pure advertising.  Yes, the government can regulate commercial speech and it can regulate truthful, accurate commercial speech. I would argue, though, that Dear Author reviews are not commercial speech.

9. Potential for abuse. You might not be aware of this but there are people who not only hate Dear Author but despise me personally. There are people who enjoy posting my legal name and place of employment on the internet, I’m sure in hopes of getting me to shut up.

The FTC says that it is going to focus on advertisers and not bloggers but if the FTC  gets enough complaints, there is no doubt the blog will be investigated. The fact is that this sort of thing will actually serve to chill speech instead of encourage honest dissemination of thoughtful opinions. The end effect will be that fewer discussions of books will take place. Fewer books will be reviewed.

Book bloggers’ compensation is so tiny that it’s not likely to influence a reviewer. I mean, do you really think we are for sale for $7.99? Relationships are much more likely to influence reviews.  There are plenty of established review sites that don’t divulge the private breakfasts, meet and greets, email exchanges and so forth that aren’t subject to these sorts of regulations. You have to rely on those reviewers to be impartial without knowing everyone who is in the inbox. This is the reason that we have always tried to disclose these relationships because we know that you all rely on us to tell you these things.

The FTC issue is not about whether transparency is good or bad. It’s about placing an uncertain burden on those who are least able to manage the compliance. This doesn’t protect the consumer because the most insidious relationships aren’t required to be disclosed. (For example, we disclosed that Janine is critique partners with Sherry Thomas and Meredith Duran. The FTC Guide would not require this).

I would like to see the FTC Guides revised to include some kind of monetary floor.  I think that there should be a warning system so that the blogger gets the opportunity to cure the defect.  The Guide should require the complainant to show links, tweets, comments, that would be considered to be violative of the new regulation.  There should be some qualification in the guide that reviews that are not commercial speech should be exempted. There should also be some time expiration so that a person doesn’t have to keep receipts or proof of payment for products after a significant period of time.  The fine should be equal to to the value of the product. (i.e., I could live with paying a $7.99 fine, not an $11,000 fine). These are all I can think of for the moment. The problem is that the Guide is now a new Federal Regulation and short of a lawsuit, I’m not sure we’ll get more clarity.

Until the FTC regulations are more clear, I don’t feel comfortable stating my positive opinion outside of Dear Author but don’t blame me, blame the FTC.

Related Posts:

• Tuesday Midday Review Links: Kindle is everywhere but Canada (WTF?)
• FTC Guide re Endorsement Update
• Monday Midday Links Roundup: ABA Wants DOJ to Investigate Discount Pricing
• Friday Midday Links: It’s All About the Ebook Reader
• Thursday Midday Links: FTC, one more time
• Weekend Links: Goodbye Romance Novel TV
• Readers and Reviewers Online Don’ts
• Ethical Reviewing: Transparency, Consistency, and Community
• Would I Lie To You?
• Professional Review Question

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

You never really know what you may get when you pick up a category romance. Will it be another tale of cookie-cutter characters, much-peddled-and-tired old story line, and insane fillers that makes you want to bang your head against a wall, wondering why you spent money on something wasteful?

Or will it make you sit quietly after it ended, musing about how much you enjoy being a romance reader?

The Daily Beast, a blog run by Tina Brown, has inked a deal with Perseus Books to create “Beast Books”. Beast Books will release the titles in digital format first, followed by a print run, the quantity of the print run determined by the sale of the digital title. The books will be primarily political and cultural and about 45,000 words.

Perseus is paying The Daily Beast a five-figure management advance to cover the costs of editing and designing the books, and Perseus will distribute the titles through its existing sales force. The writers will receive low five-figure advances from Perseus, then split profits from the sale of both the e-books and paperbacks with Perseus and The Daily Beast. Ms. Brown said writers were not required to give Beast Books a right of first refusal on any book ideas they might generate.

John Biggs of Tech Crunch writes a…something for Washington Post (I’m not sure if it is an editorial or a tech piece) about Disney’s move to provide a subscription ebook service. For under $10 per month, you can allow your child access to over 500 Disney titles. The book can be read aloud to your child or they can read along, clicking words for pronounciation help. Biggs is strangely outraged at this:

You can add up to three kids for $8.95 per month or $79 for the year. $8.95 so your kid can prop a laptop on your kids bed and let him or her read Toy Story while you fix yourself a Tom Collins. Seriously. Is this what Disney wants? We have enough trouble convincing the kids not to ask to play Mario Kart Wii all day let alone equate reading with dragging a pointer across a laptop screen.

I’ve been a user of kidthing.com, a similar digital book experience for my tot since kidthing’s release. It is certainly no replacement for a parent reading to the child, but neither is it the sign of the apocalypse. And frankly, if I had the choice of my child playing Mario Kart Wii or accessing the Disney digital books, I’d much prefer the Disney digital books. And 500 titles for under $10 per month? I can see paying that. BUT! We need a better, cheaper tablet device folks.

Self published authors can now reach a broader audience by selling through the Sony eBookstore. Smashwords is providing a self publishing portal in conjunction with Sony.

Self-published authors can now visit the Sony Publisher Portal and click on Smashwords to sign up for a free publishing account. Then they can format a book in Smashwords’ style andchoose their distribution preferences, and their book will be made available for immediate sale at Smashwords.com. The book can show up a few days later on Sony’s eBook Store.

There are some lovely tributes to Kate Duffy around the web:

• Smart Bitch Sarah’s post. Kate Duffy is the Julia Child of romance.
• Squawkradio: She ate buttered scones on Wednesday.
• Sue from Borders: Kate & I came from similar spirits — that direct, no nonsense kind of approach — man could we dish it!

Kate Duffy, for those who don’t know, was the founding editor of Silhouette Books at Simon & Schuster, founded Worldwide Library at Harlequin and Tapestry imprint at Pocket. At one time, Kate edited a stable of who’s who in romance: Jude Deveraux, Julie Garwood, Lori Foster, Heather Graham, Judith McNaught, Mary Janice Davidson, Jacqueline Frank and Mary Jo Putney.

It’s Banned Book Week and despite the ridiculous opinions of the editorial in the Wall Street Journal to the contrary, books are being challenged all the time. According to the ALA, over 70-80% of the challenges are never reported. A Google map was created of all the banned book challenge in 2008. Of Mice and Men was challenged in Newton Iowa. Really Newton? How embarrassing for you.

Related Posts:

• Remembering Kate Duffy
• Thursday Morning News Links: ePub May Be Winning the Format War
• Monday Midday Links: Kensington Loses a Family Member in Kate Duffy
• Monday Midday Links: It Is All Gloom and Doom (today at least)
• Tuesday News Roundup: Sony & iRex Out With 3G Wireless Readers
• Weekend Links Round Up: Is Print Back?
• Tuesday Night Links Round Up: Jessica says categories are the Iron Chef of romances
• Thursday Links Round Up: Rupert Murdoch Is Unhappy
• Thursday News Links: More Digital
• A Tale of Two Technologies: A Mac User’s Experience With The Sony Reader

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Last week, I posted an “If You Like” query looking for good werewolf romances. I commented that the Urban Fantasy genre is replete with werewolves but that the werewolf is much rarer in mass market romances. Indeed, in the comments, many a reader referenced popular urban fantasy series like those from Patricia Briggs and Carrie Vaughn were mentioned, but there really weren’t many romance authors mentioned. Given that there are hundreds of published romance authors and paranormal romances are one of the more popular sub genres, I figured that there were dozens of series devoted to werewolves. Alas there is not. There are the odd scattering of werewolves amongst larger paranormal groups but few series devoted solely to the werewolf.

There is even a debate about the wolf shifter v the werewolf:

IMO, a werewolf is a person who has no ability to shift into the wolf mode at will. A person involuntarily shifts into the wolf mode because of, say, the moon or an extreme emotion, which means he or she has no control over his or her ability to shift. Examples: Guy Endore’s The Werewolf of Paris, Oz from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, etc.

A wolf shifter is a person who has an ability to shift into the wolf mode whenever he or she wants, which means they have the full or some control over their ability to shift. Examples: Kelley Armstrong’s Bitten series and Annette Curtis Klause’s Blood and Chocolate.

I admit to not thinking about this division but I think its an interesting one because it connects to a larger issue of why I think there aren’t as many werewolf stories.  joanne asked:

Does werewolf equal wolf shifter? I think of werewolves (not so much) as people ‘infected’ or affected by something that makes them change into a wolfish looking human. Wolf shifters change completely into wolves. I think of one as frightening and one as a romantic. Does any of this matter to anyone but me?

Kresley Cole’s Lykae do not shift into wolves, but instead transform into man beasts. Lora Leigh’s Breed men are not shifters. Instead, they are genetically engineered to have beast-like traits and do not shift as Mireya notes.  Some readers have problems with the werewolf story because of beastiality.  Others because they have dogs and the things that dogs do are disgusting.

I emailed some editors and asked why there weren’t many romances featuring the werewolf.   Cindy Hwang, Executive Editor for Berkley, disagreed with my assertion that there was a paucity of werewolf books, just that the werewolf was part of a larger group of paranormal beings:

I think there are a lot of werewolf  heroes–but there aren’t a lot of werewolf only books. Most of the books currently published feature werewolves as a part of a bigger paranormal universe, so werewolves exist with vampires, dragons,
fairies, demons, angels, etc. For instance, we have werewolves in Angela Knight’s Mageverse, and a werewolf hero in MASTER OF WOLVES, but they’re not the only paranormal creatures roaming around.

Even authors who started writing exclusively about werewolves have started to expand their universe–MaryJanice started her paranormal career with stories about the Wyndham Werewolves and also did a single title romance DERIK’S BANE featuring one of them as the hero, but they exist in the same universe as her Undead books about Vampire Queen Betsy Taylor, and Davidson started bringing more and more of her werewolves into her vampire books, culminating with UNDEAD AND UNWELCOME when Betsy actually visits the Wyndham werewolves on their home turf.  We see this mingling of paranormals again and again–THE ACCIDENTAL WEREWOLF by Dakota Cassidy has the heroine bitten by the furry hero and turned into a werewolf, but in the next book her friend gets turned into a vampire.

Of course there are still some books that the werewolf is the primary focus–MOON AWAKENING by Lucy Monroe and and AWAITING THE MOON by Donna Lea Simpson were both werewolf romances, and both historical, interestingly enough.

And don’t forget Lora Leigh–her Breeds aren’t shifters in the traditional sense, but the appeal is the same. And most of her current books are about the feline Breeds, but she does have books about the canine breeds too–both wolf and coyote (see COYOTE’S MATE). And these are just Berkley examples–I’m sure there are many more from other publishers.

I do think that some authors and readers may not be comfortable with any kind of shifter romance, because of the possible bestiality aspect, and some books definitely graze the line deliberately. And some readers may not like werewolves for many other reasons. But I do think there’s a real primal, raw appeal to werewolves that’s very sexy–werewolves are all about violence, power, strength and unbridled lust–what’s not to love?

Tara Gavin, Senior Executive Editor at Harlequin, informed me that there were many a werewolf book in the Silhouette Nocturne series:

We have many stories which focus on the werewolf myth. Karen Whiddon has written a multi-year miniseries entitled The Pact, which Nocturne readers love. Karen continues to grow and develop the series, and she gains many new fans each time a book is published. In addition, Vivi Anna has written books with werewolves and vampires in them, as have Bonnie Vanak, Linda O. Johnston, Doranna Durgin, Lori DeVoti (though Lori calls them Hellhounds). Rhyannon Byrd also has written a very popular werewolf series for Nocturne called Bloodrunners.

This upcoming February and March 2010, we have a duo by Linda Thomas-Sundstrom entitled WOLF MOONS. The first book, RED WOLF, contains a bonus story for readers—Linda’s initial story of the miniseries, published in 2009 year as a Nocturne Bite e-story. A bonus story is also featured in Linda’s second book, WOLF TRAP, which we are publishing in March. The bonus story is called WOLF BAIT, which was published as a 2009 Nocturne Bite e-story, as well.

I love the werewolf theme because of the many facets the twist can exhibit. I see the werewolf as a protector, and also as very sexy. The alpha element—the strong alpha male—is contained in the werewolf fantasy. The werewolf hero is stronger than the human male, and can protect the heroine when in danger. The werewolf has a flaw, too—containing the beast within. In addition, there is the beauty and the beast archetype that an author can use with the werewolf fantasy—and readers enjoy that as well.

Werewolves are very popular in Nocturne, and I think are coming more into their own as the paranormal romance arena grows. A werewolf played a role in the Stephanie Meyers series, and that leads to one more aspect of werewolves that I feel readers find attractive—the sense of community. There is always a pack, or some larger type of group in which the werewolf theme plays out.

I think the bestiality issue is an interesting one.  I have my own lines in werewolf books.  I’ll be the first to admit that I only want the animal part to go so far.  In other words, I want zero animal sex.  No hairy wolf on wolf sex. No demon tail action.  No barbed penises.  None of that.  It all makes me shudder and not in a good way.

But as Cindy Hwang said, there is a primal, raw appeal to the story.  In Bitten, the hero, Clay, bites the narrator, Elena, to make her into a wolf so that they can truly be together.  He’s always been  more animal than human, having had little parental guidance in his formative years and allowed to roam the swamps without any interference.  Even Elena, though, has an edge to her. In fact, the entire story of Bitten centers around Elena giving up her dream for normalcy and embracing her beast.

In Tempting Danger, Eileen Wilks presents a fascinating structure for her werewolves including a regional political system whereby the werewolves are divided by clans and a distinct hierarchy.  The leader of a clan is called the Rho and the heir is called Lu Nuncio.   There are mate bonds wherein the mated pair cannot be separated by any significant distance.    This book more closely resembles the stories in urban fantasy with its interspecies politics and emphasis on strong worldbuilding but centered around a romance.

I love the werewolf romance when they involve the raw primal appeal but also when the Pack plays an important role. I love to read about the sense of family created by the Pack and how the parties navigate within it.  I would love to see more of these.  To me, it’s not so much about the beast and sex, but about the complicated dynamic of the beast and the Pack itself.

I ask you, the reader, if you like werewolf romances and if so, what you like about it. If not, what don’t you like.  Share your opinion in the comments.

Related Posts:

• If You Like Werewolves
• REVIEW: Hunting Ground by Patricia Briggs
• REVIEW: Caleb by Sarah McCarty
• REVIEW: Witch Craft by Caitlin Kittredge
• REVIEW: Moonburn by Alisa Sheckley
• REVIEW: Atlantis Unmasked by Alyssa Day
• REVIEW: Branded by Fire by Nalini Singh
• REVIEW: Desire Untamed: A Feral Warriors Novel by Pamela Palmer
• REVIEW: Magic Strikes by Ilona Andrews
• CONVERSATIONAL REVIEW: The Better to Hold You by Alisa Sheckley

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

I have a question, as a writer, about one of the comments. This isn’t a loaded question, or any sort of commentary on this excerpt itself, it’s input for me.

DS said

I had to look up “drafts on collection” to find out what he entrusted with,

As a reader–and I think I mean a romance reader here, vs say an SF/fantasy reader where world-building is more common in the genre–when you come across a term you don’t understand, do you tend to feel uncomfortable until you look it up? Are you willing to trust the author to define it for you in context?

I tend to do the latter as a writer, try to define the term in context without spelling it out in a dictionary sort of way. But having lost my ability to read as a non-writer many moons ago, I was intrigued by DS’s comment.

Which would you prefer, for an unfamiliar technical term like “drafts on collection?”

To try to figure out the meaning from the context? To stop and look it up? To avoid the term entirely? For the author to describe it in more detail, even if that is info-dump? To just go on, not being quite sure?

I’m sure there are many different attitudes about this but I’d like to hear some of them.

For me, I prefer the term defined by the author within the story. When a foreign language is used, I like it translated for me. In a paranormal/fantasy/science fiction romance, I want the author to explain the new terms within the text. I don’t mind looking up singular words that are new to me in the dictionary. I will say that anything that takes me out of the story likely means I will be putting down the book and that may mean I will get distracted by any number of things. What about you readers out there? How do you feel?

Related Posts:

• Ponderings on the Golden Era: Perspectives of a Seasoned Nerd and a Nerdy Novice
• For whom should the author write?
• The Case of the Unlikeable Heroine
• Poll: Do you like the beginning or the end of the book the best?
• Poll: What reasons do old favorite books not work for you anymore?
• Poll: Are older heroines under-represented in the romance genre?
• Memorable Romance Book Moments
• Genre Labels Poll
• Readers and Reviewers Online Don’ts
• Essay: Why I Read by Keishon

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Dear Author earns a small referral fee if you use these links to buy Harlequin books. Click only if you are interested. (Thank you to those who have been clicking and buying!).

• It's a Moonlight Madness sale.

• eBooks Backlist Bookshelf: Get 15% Off Newly Released Backlist eBooks! More eBooks just added this month!

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh