On Dec 2nd, Alan Elsner, the author of Romance Language wrote an entry on the Huffington Post called How Romance Novels Take the Romance out of Romance. Inspired by misinterpretations of his own book (which is a novel with romance in it, but not romance genre fiction) to pick up a selection of genre romances and see what they’re like. Unfortunately, what he wrote turned out to be a bunch of generalizations denigrating the genre as a whole because the handful he picked up were terrible. I consider this entry to be irresponsible for a forum like the HuffPo, which is supposed to be a sort of Internet-based and -driven newspaper, with higher standards. Elsner’s entry reads like a blog post you find on any unmoderated site.
Thankfully, the Internet does its own moderating.
Over at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books, the bitches were rightfully angry (this, after all, being one of the MAJOR reasons SBTB exists). Sarah wrote a post at SBTB (HuffPo Books Disses Romance, Stupid-to-Solar-Power Conversion to Come) in which she dissected the points Elsner listed in his article. The frustration is clear.
Then the HuffPo invited Sarah to write a rebuttal for their site, and here she is! Pride and Prejudice and Pedantry. The Smart Bitches really are smart, and it shows clearly in Sarah’s HP article.
I invoke Smart Bitch Law #1: Thou shalt not diss the reading material of another person merely to elevate one’s own. By doing so, thou art passing the buck, and verily thou art being a douchebag.
To his credit, Elsner has responded to comments on his post, and has offered to read any suggestions given.
What’s irritating is the casual way in which he denounced the entire genre, as though it didn’t matter. His phrasing reflects that attitude, indicating that it’s formulaic and doesn’t do its job. I won’t argue that he found a lot of the hallmarks of romance novels, but he clearly hasn’t found any of the depth that occurs when these hallmarks are used as tools, or inverted or replaced. I hate the tropes, too. But mein gott, I could write up a similar denouncement of other genres from some tawdry examples. It wouldn’t be hard–I don’t like mysteries, horror, or literary fiction anyway. But I won’t dismiss them as trivial.
For whatever reason, there is still this widespread view of romance fiction as unimportant. It’s just an excuse for erotica. It’s escapist (what fiction isn’t?). In the words of Elsner, “It turns out that one stiff nipple is much like another; one engorged penis pretty similar to the next.”
I hate to play the feminist card so relentlessly, but here it is. Romance is seen as “for women.” Much as chick flicks are poo-pooed by “serious” critics, chick lit will never be given serious attention except from the people making money off it. And doesn’t that encapsulate the treatment of women, womens’ products, womens’ entertainment and womens’ health?
No one tells guys that sports are silly. Gawd knows, for eons women have been saying things like, “This is just an excuse to watch things blow up,” and it’s never made an ounce of difference. Cars careen off the track, men cheer, and advertisers swoop in to collect, all the while stroking male egos. They’re praised as manly when they hoot and thump one another on the back.
Romance novels are one more example of women being shamed for being women. As Sarah so adroitly makes clear, what women want in good romance novels is the emotional engagement between characters. The sex is fun, but it’s not the point. If it were, the various sub-genres that don’t include sex (or freaking HAND HOLDING–I’m looking at you, Evangelicals) wouldn’t be a rising force. It’s been demonstrated time and again that women are less visual, more verbal, and more emotionally-engaged than men. Romance novels key into those, and (should) deliver a story that makes the heart sway with the heroine’s.
If anyone thinks the sex in the average romance novel is explicit or shocking, you need to take a step back. I just read one that included face-sitting in the first 60 pages. THAT shocked me. For all that romances are descriptive, they’re also pretty vanilla. And nothing like hard-core erotica.
That’s my rant for the night. Less pissed about what Elsner said, than the way in which he said it, and the method he used to reach his opinions. Oh, and the forum. Craptastic opinion piece of the HuffPo indeed. (We can get into HuffPo’s less than stellar headliners another time.)
Recent Comments