If I'd had a blog day for the 14th, I might've written about romantic love between people. What is it? Is it real? Does it last? etc. etc. But this is the day after the day devoted to romance (and buying cards, candy and flowers), and I don't have any specific subject in mind.
Usually, I start thinking of blogs, sometimes weeks ahead of time, but this time, it was Tuesday and nothing had popped into my head. Then I saw this article.
It's a very real prejudice that some would never read a romance novel, but they have no idea what is even in them-- since they never read one. OR they read one from years back, when as that writer suggests men had more to do with what made it into the novels than what evolved once writers took charge through indie publishing.
Romance novels today vary for what they have in them. Some are virtually novels with complex problems for the characters to work through. I prefer them for my own reading. I like to write and read a story where the main characters are working through something to which most of us can relate. Sure the romance is fun and at the heart of the story; but if that's all it is, it becomes boring to me.
Why can't a romance novel inspire us to deal with issues we also face, as well as entertain? Isn't it nice to have a story where we know the ending will be happy? When it's historical, it can reveal what life was like in a bygone era. When it's contemporary, it can have emotional issues where we can relate-- even if they are not ours.
There are romance novels where the story is all about the romance for those who need that moment of escape. Fortunately, today, there is room for more complex stories where there are readers who like that too.
4 comments:
As I wrote long ago, I used to be a big romance novel reader. I was addicted, but did like the historical ones better. I also was a big reader of science fiction. My tastes have changed. Now I do like historical fiction, non-fiction (reading The Library right now) and mystery. I also like biography. I think with age we get perspective and biographies are more meaningful.
I can see that but also that we can change. If we are open to something different, at any age, I think it's a plus. Before I published my romances, I hadn't read a romance in years. I read some after that of friends, interested in what they wrote. I still don't read many but that's to avoid being influenced.
The latest thing for us is a book called The Happiness Equation, which I had gotten last year but put off reading. What we're doing is Ranch Boss reads a chapter or less every morning. Some of what the author says, I don't agree with but it's something to think about. I used to read a lot of those kinds of books. Mostly now, I am about research. I used to but currently am not much on biographies/autobiographies, as so many have rewritten history to suit an agenda. I saw where there is a new one out on George Washington that literally tears him apart.
My reading tastes have varied over the years and they do periodically even now -- sometimes wanting "lighter" reading than at other times. At least for right now I'm not reading nonfiction, but enjoying some biography of a limited number of individuals who have some personal significance to me. I don't look for movies that have to have a happy ending as the gal who used to do my hair said were the only kind she would view, and I don't seek books like that either. I was very much into historical novels, though probably not in which romance was a focus, for a period of time years ago, but have gravitated to other types in the years since. I'm not keen on series type books which in my experience soon become basically the same, somewhat predictable, after I've read a few. That has been true for me with some best seller authors books which I long ago ceased reading after the first couple or so. They' re not exactly formula stories but they do lose my interest so I don't even bother with them.
Interesting. I think we all do that with changing our reading. I don't watch movies with negative characters and so many today are like that. The same thing is true with movies. A villain is fine but if every character, including the ones you were supposed to root for, are druggies or those on the other side of ethics, I just grew up in the wrong era to enjoy that, I think. What I remember watching as a kid had hero, heroine and a clear cut bad guy/gal.
Post a Comment