After the discussion about labels on romance novels, and prior discussions about series books in the romance shelves, one author and I had a rather lively discussion via email about series books and whether the same rules and expectations should apply to them as to romance novels. Since this author doesn’t want to be seen as trying to sell her own books, she asked that I post her rant anonymously so that it would be evaluated on content and not as a potential marketing attempt. Normally we’re all about owning your comments, but I can see her point – she wants her argument to stand on its own without being judged as an attempt to build buzz around her series. So – Anonymous Author defends Series in Romance, take 1.
AnonyAuthor says:
Ignoring the whole OMG-bad-language-naughty! aspect of what Madeline Baker wrote, her comment that “Lately I’ve read several books that have ‘paranormal romance’ on the spine. In my opinion, a good number of them haven’t been romances at all…” got me thinking: are there still hard and fast romance rules? Or has there been a gradual change with the new guard of readers taking over the old when it comes to what a romance “should” have?
With the recent popularity of paranormal series novels, where happily-ever-afters aren’t automatic, does the Romance label on the spine still imply to people that there are certain formulas inside? Or has the romance genre changed to where formulas/guaranteed HEA’s/Heroes with Big Cocks are more, to quote Captain Barbosa from Pirates of the Caribbean, like ‘guidelines’ than actual rules?
I could be biased but I think there should be some leeway for series novels when it comes to a HEA. If a book is a true stand-alone with NO other novels being written containing the same characters and it’s labeled a romance, then I can see how people get their bacon burned when there isn’t a HEA. But if you have a series, be it paranormal or mystery or whatever, then you know there’s more to say and the HEA might be just delayed, not eliminated.
I guess what bothers me is how readers blame the authors. Unless you’re an established money-making author, you have NO say over how a publisher markets your novel. Especially if you’re a new author, you do a lot of smiling and nodding, not much else, because the publisher doesn’t give a shit that your newbie hasn’t-made-them-a-dollar-yet ass disagrees with their marketing scheme.
But when some people get upset about a book not having a HEA if it’s labeled a romance, they don’t email the editor or pub house – they bash the author. If a book has “romance” on the label, yet no HEA, or perhaps half the plot isn’t about the romance, remember that the author didn’t chose the marketing label. The publisher did. After all, it’s not like an author can pull a fast one and sneak in a non-HEA after a novel’s been edited – the publishing house would have known it wasn’t there when they bought it.
Several of my author friends are in the same boat, having a “romance” label when their books don’t follow old-school romance formula, but what’s a new author to do? Pull out of their contract in protest when they see how their book’s being labeled?
So to wrap up a loooong ramble, IMO, I’d say series books should have a somewhat different set of rules when it comes to romance. But if that still doesn’t appease, then readers who are unhappy about not having their expected formula/HEA should go to the person who did the labeling with their complaints, not the author (unless the author is self-pubbed, then yes, readers can bring on the bitching to us!)
I personally am not fond of series, though I do see this author’s point. She’s right that the issue isn’t that the publisher said to the author, “Hey we really like this romance but it should be a series – think you can hack off the happy ending and make it so the book doesn’t really come to an end?” The series idea was there from the get-go, and the publisher knew it when the book was sold. There are also plenty of series books in romance now – from paranormal to contemporary to historical – and there are those readers that LOVE series books and write the date of the next issue down in their planners so they can buy the next one.
I, with my shoddy memory and inability to remember things and my terrible recall and…um… oh, my bad memory, am not one of these people. I like my happy ending in hand, thanks. Not only will I not remember to pick up the new book in the series, I’ll likely not remember what happened in the last book. And I’ve said a few times how irritated I get when I am 30 pages from the end and I realize there’s no way the romance and the plot can be sewn up satisfactorily in that time. But is the publisher subject to a smack on the wrist for putting the label “romance” on the spine? Does the designation “romance” demand a happy ending? Is there another subgenre descriptor we need to use to designate a series with a pair of primary protagonists and a plot that continues over multiple books? I think the term “series romance” is already taken.
But really, my biggest beef is one that I bring to the author AND the publisher: there are several series that start out fantastic and fizzle . I don’t even have to name them – I’m sure you can tick them off on your fingers for all they’ve been discussed here and elsewhere. And I blame both parties for that problem – neither the author or the publisher seems to have an end or at least a resolution in sight, and both keep churning out new issues of the story without the larger story arc in mind. It reminds me of everything that went wrong with television shows I loved – characters change into villains for no reason other than easy tension, the triangle of “who will s/he choose?” gets old and stale far too fast, and there’s no consideration for the larger story and the smaller story within each issue.
So if the publisher hangs a “romance” label on a series that doesn’t have an end point in sight, much less a HAPPY ending, I do get irate. It’s not a question of violating formula; it’s neglecting to mention that the book in my hand is not going to meet what I hold as the most important tenet of romance: everything will be ok in the end. With a lot of current series, there is no end and it’s definitely not ok!
I don’t need an out and out HEA but there has to be character progression. I am about the zillioneth person here to tell Stephanie Plum to make up her mind already, not only for her character but because she is making the men look stupid for putting up with her puerile antics. On the other hand, I still enjoyed the plot and dialogue in number 13 – if I hadn’t read the other books it would be fine.
For series romance to be effective to me, as a reader, I don’t necessarily need an HEA. I need it to be fresh and I need to be worth hanging in there for.
Suzanne Brockmann’s Troubleshooters series has expanded and folded in new characters to root for, but not all of her HEA payoffs have been great. Max and Gina, who I waited for several books to see get their shit together had was what probably her weakest book in the series, Breaking Point. But other characters like Jules in her most recent Force of Nature have fared much better. Brockmann very much has a “Here’s one HEA, but here’s one pair to tune in for next,” thing going on and that’s the kind of thing that tends to work. Give the reader a small victory and then a carrot to keep them coming back.
But then you turn to someone like Janet Evanovich or even Brenda Joyce and the need to straddle both the mystery and the romance genre gets in the way of them resolving anything emotionally. The mystery there becomes what is tied up Happily Ever After in each novel, while readers are forced to keep tuning in to see if Stephanie will pick between Morelli or Ranger or if Francesca Cahill and Hart will break up and she’ll go back to Bragg. And that uncertainty gets tiring.
Of course, the thing is, all three of these examples don’t quite fit in the traditional definition of romance, nor do they fall under the paranormal/urban fantasy umbrella where series work seems to be the formula du jour.
First point; I am that nut who thinks order of genre hyphenation really matters! 🙂
Romantic-
just doesn’t have the same requirement for HEA by the end of each book for me as
-Romance, where it’s an iron law of my expectations.
But the problem is that all the romance publishers label everything they put out as
-Romance even if it really should be Romantic-
. Whilst all the
publishers will label everything they put out as Romantic-
if they’ve even got fortitude to stick the romance label on it all (which they probably don’t).
Second point; yes I think there is a missing genre for series that have significant romance content in them that that I would like to have a separate label for, mainly so they can be grouped together rather than be spread across umpty different sections in different genres where I can’t find them unless I have detailed specialised knowledge of which precise titles they’re disguising themselves behind.
These are ones where the protagonists get themselves to a state of ‘Happily Together’ by the end of the first book—or indeed competely offstage before the series starts if we’re being radical—and then spend the rest of the series wrapping up the big complicated non-romance parts of the plot (with lots of intricate and funky world-building) whilst being totally hot together and making me go all gooey over their obvious ongoing luuurrvvvv thang.
Yep, I’m a soppy old coot.
‘
-Continuing Romance’, ‘
-With Established Lovers’, or something. I selfishly want this genre to exist really quite badly because I actually prefer that sort of story to the traditional ‘relationship and circumstance angst followed by HEA’ of your straight-up Romance.
I know of one series romance (if two books can be called a series) that worked wonderfully. I read the first book and loved it! The ending was great and when I picked up her next book I was surprised to see the same H/h. The author is Jayne Ann Krentz and the books are “Gift of Gold†and “Gift of Fireâ€. She also did this with “Dreams Part One†and “Dreams Part Twoâ€, but I think the reissue has these two books packaged together. Both were published in the late 80’s and had great HEA’s. They just continued and built onto the relationship in the next book.
Personally, I’m just waiting for Stephanie to give up on choosing and attempt polyamory…
Question(s):
Other than the authors mentioned (Evanovich, etc) what are some examples of romantic series? I confess, I’ve never really experienced one. I mean, I’ve gone to the bookstore of course and headed directly to the romance section, naturally, but it’s never been my bad luck to find a set of books among the Kinsales, James and Dodds where the romance, which is the primary thrust/conflict of the plot, goes on and on for books.
Many have posted here that they don’t like series for a variety of reasons, but is the “no likey” factor an issue of the books being badly written or soley an issue of impatience/instant gratification? Cuz I hate me a badly written book too, but are you saying that you’d hate a really well-written one of twelve because you’re on one and two et al aren’t on bookshelves yet?
I just reread the previous and it sounds kinda condescending which I don’t mean to be at all. I’m simply bewildered. (And apparently too lazy to rewrite.)
Like others, this is a discussion that has been on my mind for a while. I was supremely disturbed by the Cameron Dean series and felt that its labeling as a romance was a gross injustice to the romance reader. (Yes, in all its hyperbole, I mean it).
I think that romance sales are falling because marketing, publishers, authors, whomever, have decided to avail themselves of the holy romance label to be placed in the section of the bookstore that accounts for 50% of the mass market sales. The problem is that with the increasing hybridization of romance by the “powers that be”, the label “romance” is being diluted and thus is training readers to be more cautious in making impulse buys. Unfortunately, you cannot tell for sure, based on the back cover copy, that a book is going to end in an HEA. The reader is at the mercy of the publisher.
It’s not good for the genre; it’s not good for the author. Take, for example, Colleen Gleason’s series. I read somewhere that it will take 8 books before I get a resolution. No thanks. I am not going to invest time in reading 7 books where the h/h are jerked around. And it’s got the dreaded romance triangle which means that the h/h will vacillate a dozen times before its resolved. And even if that is not what actually happens, that is what I perceive will happen and it deters me from reading and buying the books.
Another series which I won’t name but the first book will be released in November ends with the couple completely apart. I can see that it is trying to be a series but how successful will it be when the first book lands with repeated thuds against the wall.
I understand that it is not within the author’s power to change her label, but there are some things within her power. If she doesn’t want to be a romance author why submit to editors that primarily specialize in romance? Why not submit to Roc, Tor, Ace?
It’s not as if fantasy books can’t garner a strong cross over audience. Look at Patricia Briggs. I suspect Ilona Andrews will also be a Briggs like author in the future. These are two urban fantasy authors who have romance threads in their books and there is no promise of the HEA and no one expects it. Slap a romance label on those same books and I bet readers are up in arms because those expectations are going to be met.
Ultimately readers will blame the authors for this “deceit” because it isn’t the marketing dept on the front of the book and it isn’t the publisher whose picture is in the back.
While I’ll say I’m all about the HEA, I am preferring other genres with romantic elements these days. Not of the wham-bam now you must die so I can move on to my next honey James Bond type elements, but one where the characters and the relationship evolve. So series really work here provided there is the evolution. The finest example of this is undoubtedly the In Death series. Wow, 20 books and still working. Impressive!
This thread has brought up a question in my mind – do we have different criteria for romance movies than for books? I seriously doubt anyone would still be talking about Casablanca today if Bogie and Bergman had waltzed off into the sunset together. Dr. Zhivago (movie, haven’t read the book) just haunted me. I honestly can’t remember how it ended, but I’m guessing it wasn’t an HEA given how much it haunted me.
It seems that romantic comedies give you the HEA (though perhaps not much else) while the romantic epics (English Patient, Titanic (yeah, I know there were the historical elements here like the ship sinking to work in here)) go for the Oscar winning ending aka not happy.
“For series romance to be effective to me, as a reader, I don’t necessarily need an HEA. I need it to be fresh and I need to be worth hanging in there for.”
I completely agree with this. Right now my favorite “series” is Stephenie Meyer’s “Twilight” et al. There’s technically a HEA in each, however, there are unresolved plot points that have my panting for the next book. Others I’m awaiting are Meg Cabot’s third and final Heather Wells mystery “Big Boned” (I’m not sure how this is classified—its in YA at my library, but it’s listed as adult on her website, and while there’s mystery, there is the love plot buildup of all Cabot books. Technically no HEA yet, but it’s coming!). Also Libba Bray’s “The Sweet Far Thing.”
The problem I often encounter has been discussed already—indefinite story line turning the series into “Days of Our Lives.” To me it seems that the less books the series contains, the better. I love me some YA, which is full of series books. I recently finished the YA SWEEP series (Cate Tiernan) which started out very interesting and by book ten, the point of view began to change and I had lost interest. I was lucky that I discovered the books AFTER all 15 had been released, otherwise I probably would have driven myself crazy.
Well said, Wry Hag! I’m with you 100%.
No, it’s about GENRE definition. The discussion here centers around GENRE romance, which (like all other GENRE fiction) makes certain promises to its readers. The promise of GENRE romance is a happy conclusion to the romantic relationship (and here I’m willing to have a great “breadth of definitionâ€).
Many stories may be ROMANTIC, while not being GENRE romances. These books are generally considered fiction, women’s fiction, literary fiction, etc. A tragic ending precludes these stories from being a GENRE romance. That does not mean these books are bad, unsatisfying, unworthy, or anything else. It simply means that when I plunk down my $$ for a GENRE romance, I want a fucking GENRE romance. Just as when I buy a GENRE mystery I want to find out “who done it†and when I buy a GENRE sci-fi/fantasy book I want whatever challenge the characters face to come to a satisfactory conclusion.
GENRE = fulfilling a promise to the reader, plain and simple.
One of my top two X-files favorites was Jose Chung’s It Came From Outer Space. It managed to get more UFO lore in one hour than the entire rest of the UFO arc. I think that Carter lost or stopped using his best writers after the first 3 or 4 seasons. I pretend seasons 5-9 never existed.
Anyway, back to romance. The Rosemary Rogers Steve/Ginny series were books in which the main couple would get together and then when it seemed everything would settle down, they would be separated for another big chunk of text (whoa, having flashbacks, I just wrote “sex” for “text”). I’ve never read all the way through them but what I did read seemed pretty awful.
Although I enjoy a romance in a story I am honestly having to dig in my memory to come up with the last book I read and enjoyed where the relationship took center stage alone. i guess my reread of Heyer’s Devil’s Cub comes the closest this year. I’ve tossed a couple of romances partially read into the Goodwill box because I wasn’t enjoying them.
I don’t bother with interconnected romances, especially if there are a group of men with a sophomoric club name and there is always a saccharine epilogue. I don’t mind family series. Roberta Gellis and Elswyth Thane come to mind although both are probably as much historical as they are romances. Each book also has a couple at the center whose romance needed to be sorted out.
If I had to name an author who managed to successfully sustain a romantic relationship in a nonromance series over a long period of time and bringing it to a satisfying conclusion it would be Dorothy Sayers.
“I know of one series romance … that worked wonderfully… Jayne Ann Krentz and the books are “Gift of Gold†and “Gift of Fireâ€. “
Ditto on this. I loved these books because the second story took you to the “other side” of HEA and really explored the next step. At the end of the first book you knew they would be together. The second book defined what that meant and all the conflict that comes with two people making a life together.
I would definitely read more books like these – but there has to be a limit.
After reading HP from beginning to end -I think I’m going to be more picky about this. That was essentially an 8,000 page book. And to my way of thinking that’s how a series needs to be done. One large story arc that has a beginning, middle and end. As many mentioned the Plum books are going no where. And worse there is no development of character for me. Hence Steph’s endless indecision.
What I keeps me reading the “In Death” series – aside from the satisfying mystery – is I still feel that Eve and Rourke are growing. Individually and together. If I ever think they’ve figured it all out – that will probably be the time for me to walk away.
And as an aside – I think we have to give TV writers some slack. They simply don’t know when they start a show how long it will go. They can’t “reasonably” plot an end when that end could be 4 shows from start or 4 years from start. I don’t know how they do it.
I will say that the tired will-they won’t-they plot line in most TV “romance” relationships really needs to be overhauled. There HAS to be a better way to do this. It’s so tired – it’s almost turned me off watching any show where I think a couple might get together. I just can’t invest in something when I KNOW exactly how it’s going to play out.
In fact, I’ve found many tales of love to be far more satisfying without a Smiley tacked on after the final period. Written well, nonHEA stories can be profoundly moving—much more so than many standard romances whose feel-good conclusions seem gratuitous, silly, and/or unrealistically saccharine.
This is absolutely true and to insist on an HEA in a GENRE romance does not mean there are not love stories that are tremendously moving (Time Traveler’s Tale). But, when reading a Genre romance there are genre expectations. There is a reason that thousands of romance books are sold and it isn’t because the books end unhappily.
One of my top two X-files favorites was Jose Chung’s It Came From Outer Space.
That was a great one. My favorite was the one with Peter Boyle.
Funny… I just read my comment…“I just can’t invest in something when I KNOW exactly how it’s going to play out.”
And I thought – no wait I can if it’s a romance novel. Even knowing I’m going to get my HEA – I still want to read it. I think the difference is I know that time period for the story is limited and the time it will take me to read it also pretty defined. It’s the endless teasing that TV offers that drives me nuts.
So it’s a pretty good bet – depending on how it was done – that a straight series romance with no end in sight… Nope. Not going to be my cup of tea.
Just wanted to comment on this:
Jane wrote (Is that Dear Author’s Jane?)
I think that romance sales are falling because marketing, publishers, authors, whomever, have
decided to avail themselves of the holy romance label to be placed in the section of the bookstore that accounts for 50% of the mass market sales. The problem is that with the increasing hybridization of romance by the “powers that beâ€, the label “romance†is being diluted and thus is training readers to be more cautious in making impulse buys. Unfortunately, you cannot tell for sure, based on the back cover copy, that a book is going to end in an HEA. The reader is at the mercy of the publisher. snip
Despite the fact that Romance (like sf and mysteries) likes to root into the past to claim books for their genre, Genre Romance As We Known It, only crawled out of the primal ooze in the middle 70’s. While there were Harlequins before then and they had most of the qualities that any definition of genre romance would include today, they were, for the most part, not very good reading experiences.
Genre Romance As We Know It probably didn’t become completely formed until very late 70’s/early 80’s with writers like Johanna Lindsey and Jude Deveraux. This might be growing pains.
I hate to drag sf back into this, but anyone who remembers the New Wave of sf remembers the outcry among people liked linear stories versus those who enjoyed the more free-wheeling literary style of the New Wave. Or perhaps a better analogy would be the tension between sf and fantasy that erupted with the first popularity of LotRs. Sf is nuts and bolts versus sf is speculative fiction. The result of all of this was that both nuts and bolts and soft sf and fantasy and Star Wars and Star Trek in all its flavors are all available under the sff umbrella.
I think that Genre Romance will eventually end up accommodating the different flavors of romance now emerging under its umbrella. I would expect die-hard HEA fans to give up reading romance, just to be more cautious about what they buy. Hopefully it will also attract other readers who care nothing about 18th-19th century Europe but who enjoy the supernatural or erotica or erotic supernatural or whatever else is on offer.
I ordered all three of the Shomi books based on comments written here and on Dear Author. I also have about six Juno books (love the covers) stacked in my office that I want to read. All ordered new from Amazon—so I’m buying more new books published as romance this year than I have in the past two years combined but it’s not traditional romance.
Oh gosh, I just reread this. I meant I would not expect die-hard HEA fans to give up reading romance.
And anyone who is worried about the HEA situation should take a look at the Amazon review and comments on Stephanie Meyers third book. There are a lot of upset young women because apparently the heroine kissed some other young man besides the heroine. There also seem to be a lot who are upset because the heroine is so invested in the hero without a thought to her own development.
My feminist side finds that last bit very encouraging.
Phooey, hero, not heroine. Although I might find the other situation interesting also.
The promise of GENRE romance is a happy conclusion to the romantic relationship (and here I’m willing to have a great “breadth of definitionâ€).
YES, YES! Exactly! Millions of wonderful books out there, and I don’t always need what I’m getting written out in picture symbols for me, but when I buy me some Genre Fiction and it doesn’t conform to the general expectations of that genre, I’m gonna be mad even if it’s written by Arundhati Roy (God of Small Things). Well, maybe not…. but you know what I mean!
PS. Speaking of which, Kalen Hughes, I just read Lord Sin and I thought it’s a great example of romance ‘rule’ stretching while staying within the genre framework nicely. Liked it a lot!
This was supposed to be a short comment. 🙂
The promise of GENRE romance is a happy conclusion to the romantic relationship (and here I’m willing to have a great “breadth of definitionâ€).
YES, YES! Exactly! Millions of wonderful books out there, and I don’t always need what I’m getting written out in picture symbols for me, but when I buy me some Genre Fiction and it doesn’t conform to the general expectations of that genre, I’m gonna be mad even if it’s written by Arundhati Roy (God of Small Things). Well, maybe not…. but you know what I mean!
PS. Speaking of which, Kalen Hughes, I just read Lord Sin and I thought it’s a great example of romance ‘rule’ stretching while staying within the genre framework nicely. Liked it a lot!
This was supposed to be a short comment. 🙂
“And worse there is no development of character for me. Hence Steph’s endless indecision.” Great point. That’s just it. I don’t see Stephanie as being any different in book 13 as book 1. And I know that the Plum books are not labeled as “Romance” (they are shelved in the “mystery” section of my library). But there is a romantic element that makes me nuts and that is it. No matter what the series is labeled as the characters should show some growth.
I also agree with all of those that have said that there are great books out there without the HEA, but that in GENRE romance the HEA is expected. HEA also can have many definitions~to me it just means that the relationship is going somewhere and the characters know that.
I like knowing there will be an HEA b/c when I read, I read to enjoyment and to relax. My books don’t have to emulate “real life”. There is enough crap in real life, I want to escape a little when I read.
FOR enjoyment.
verification word LOOK51. As in “look at the post before you hit ‘submit’” 🙂
Well, just to be odd person out, I have to confess that I enjoyed the stand alone X-Files episides, but I absolutely adored the mytharc episdes and those tend to be the ones I watched over and over. I also enjoyed the thematic connetctions between the stand alones and the mytharc in a given season and how the Mulder/Scully relationship developed in both. I actually liked the development of the Scully/Mulder relationship through season 8. I pretend season 9 never happened :-). And I’m still in denial about the series finale of Alias.
I also love series books where relationships develop over multiple books (and I totally agree that the Peter Wimsey/Harriet Vane books are a brilliant example of this). In my Charles & Mélanie Fraser books, Charles and Mélanie resolve a major issue in each book but their relationship continues to develop through-out the series. And I have ideas for love stories for other characters in the series that I’d like to play out over multiple books. Which is why the books aren’t marketed as romances and I don’t think they should be (I was trying to articulate this in a recent interview on Fog City Divas when Monica McCarty asked how the books differed from my romances). They defintiely contain love stories, but als mysteries and poltiical intrigue, and each book doesn’t end with a happily-ever-after for one couple.
Do I expect a HEA when I pick up a Romance novel? yes
Do publishers drive me insane with creative labeling? Yes.
Tor is the biggest offender, I find myself hesitating to purchase books by established authors I am familiar with because I have this instinctive flinch when I see Tor on the spine.
Note to any Tor editors who might read this blog: If you kill the hero don’t put romance on the cover. I realize that Fournier’s The Wanderer and Goethe’s Sorrows of Young Werther are considered Romance, but it’s a different kind of romance. I respectfully recommend a remedial course in Popular Fiction.
The sad thing is after months of trying to scrub the book that provoked the reaction from my brain and leaving it on the floor of the garage in hopes that the flood coming would destroy it so that I wouldn’t feel guilty about throwing the book away I confronted my nausea and re-read the book. Going in with the knowledge that it wasn’t a Romance I was able to acknowledge that it was a great book. But not a romance.
Series Romance can be done right. Someone mentioned the Riley Jensen series, I don’t consider it Romance, rather Paranormal/Urban Fantasy so the lack of a HEA doesn’t bug me. Because I like the character, however, I want her to get a HEA or HFRN eventually. My preference is for series like Nalini Singh’s Psy-Changeling Series, individual HEA with an overarching story line that connects them all.
I rarely blame an author for the rampant mislabeling. I’m more likely to write it off as lingering, “The main character’s a woman, she’s only emotionally involved with one guy (so what if its not really the point of the story) lets stick it in Romance” attitudes.
I have given up on my tradition of purchasing one completely new to me Romance author each month because I can no longer trust what I’m getting by picking up a book with Romance on the spine (see my longwinded off topic rant on killing the hero above). New authors are approached cautiously with multiple recommendations from people I trust. The only time I buy unknowns now is Sunday night at the grocery store when I’m desperate and haven’t read anything new in a day or so. The good news for other authors is that I’m spending more on nonfiction, fantasy, and science fiction. I don’t expect HEA’s when I pick up one of them.
DS – yes, unfortunately it is me from Dear Author and I am glad to hear that you have purchased the Shomi books. I think its an innovative line. You’ll heave to let us know what you think.
I don’t think that diehard romance readers will stop buying romances but impulse buys account for a great majority of all retail sales. I suspect that is true for romances as well. Impulse buys require, on some level, a belief that you are going to get something that meets your expectations. The expectations of a romance reader in the romance aisle is that the book will end with a HEA – whatever that may be.
I also don’t think that the HEA is generational or confined to the romance genre as witnessed by your example of the unhappiness of the Stephenie Meyer fans. Meyer’s books are not labeled as romances but the expectations that she built for her readers was that they would end in a certain way. The way in which she has chosen to stray from the expectations has led to alot of disappointment. What does disappointment do? It negates the impulse purchase.
So while there are still purchases, it is in lower numbers as readers who once sought gratification in the romance aisle are turning to other forms of entertainment.
Hi Eli, this is Heather Osborn, editor for Tor Romance!
Which particular Tor Romance books were you talking about? As far as I know, although Tor has done a 3 book, same hero/heroine series for the romance line, those books each ended with the hero and heroine still together, and no one was dead. All of the Tor romance books have ended HEA, or at least hopefully ever after, as far as I know.
This is only in regards to the books that fall under the Tor Romance logo, of course, I can’t speak for the science fiction and fantasy books. I do know that Tor has a “Women in Fantasy” program that they advertise in romance friendly venues like Romantic Times magazine, but they are advertised as “fantasy” and not romance, so the HEA is not guaranteed.
I would love to hear which book sent you over the edge!
I would love to hear which book sent you over the edge!
That would be Natasha Mostert’s Windwalker.
This one wasn’t part of a series, it was, as far as I know, a stand alone. It was more toward the subconversation regarding HEA & Romance.
To make it clear: This is a great book, but I snagged it when it came out because I was excited when I heard Tor was doing a Romance line. Devoured it, got to the end, sat stupified and dry mouthed for about 10 minutes then spent the rest of the day muttering to myself, and generally convincing my family I’d finally lost it. Literally left it on the floor of my garage as we evacuated. Decided it was a sign when the flood waters stopped in the front corner of our yard and put in in the re-read pile.
If it had not been so well written I doubt I would have felt so betrayed at the end and it wouldn’t have stuck with me to point that when frantically trying to lift things up pending evacuation I saw that book and took the 20 seconds to toss it on the floor instead of sticking it in the plastic container I was wrapping with duct tape. Great book, but not a romance.
Thanks. I think I like the idea of being a “rule stretcher”. LOL!
Eli,
Ahh, Windwalker was before my time, and I haven’t read it yet. Sorry the ending crushed you! If it makes you feel any better, I believe Natasha’a next book is being published as Women’s Fiction and will not be in the romance section. Hopefully we have learned from that mistake!
Heather
Regarding Colleen Gleason: the series is supposed to have 5 books total. And I think it’s pretty freaking obvious at this point who she’s going to end up with (albeit uh…it might take 3 books to get there for a reason).
I tend to think that it’s all in how you handle it. I hate series books where the h/h break up very sadly by the end of them (unless they get back together in the next one)- I like to have some kind of temporary happy ending for now sort of resolution from series book to series book.
Re: the whole Stephenie Meyer deal. It is a lot more than just the heroine kissing someone else. Watch out spoilers-kind of ahead.
Spoilers/Spoilers
Twilight to me was magical. The entire hero fighting his basic urges to kill the heroine, his attempt to be “more” than a monster, was set up beautifully. The book was basically how they were soul mates, that one in a lifetime connection. Then in the last book Eclipse the heroine does a total 180. Oh by the way I have always loved hero #2, and I would really rather have a life with you but its kind of too late since I am addicted to hero #1 and he is my drug. But we can all be happy together and friends coz you really are my other soul mate. Sadly even though it was fairly well written it did ruin the magic of the first book for me.
Anyway I don’t mind series as long as there aren’t major cliffhangers and the hero and heroine will eventually end up together. Kind of like Katie MacAlister’s Aisling series.
Genre romance. Okay, I get it. Yeah, writers and publishers of genre romance are pretty much locked into the HEA gig. Readers expect it. End of (predictable) story.
italics fixed?
Italics fixed – thanks CC for giving me the heads up.
Diana Gabaldon
I said it. Ok, this is where I originally found my confusion with the genre of ‘romance’.
Side note: That, and a snotty UBS owner informing when I grew up, I would appreciate a more thoughtful romance. All I could think was Hey bitch, I got kids, you’re younger than me and don’t….backhanded complement?
Anyways, I enjoyed her books later, as along as I didn’t think of them as having a HEA. But dammit, I expected something different and it pissed me off at first. Once I knew what I was getting, I was able to enjoy them. It took a bit of calming to reach that point, though.
Ms. Osborn- see comment #2. Both characters were alive and had an HEA, but it was not about Tony and Sue, it was about Tony, which was not the tone set by the first book. Made me want to pluck my hair out.
Oh, thanks Sarah for fixing the italics. I was wondering if it was my drink or lack of V8 after a while!
I think that romance sales are falling because marketing, publishers, authors, whomever, have decided to avail themselves of the holy romance label to be placed in the section of the bookstore that accounts for 50% of the mass market sales. The problem is that with the increasing hybridization of romance by the “powers that beâ€, the label “romance†is being diluted and thus is training readers to be more cautious in making impulse buys. Unfortunately, you cannot tell for sure, based on the back cover copy, that a book is going to end in an HEA. The reader is at the mercy of the publisher.
It’s not good for the genre; it’s not good for the author.
Very interesting, Jane. I couldn’t disagree more 🙂
I think hybridization (both directions: other genres admitting they’re dabbling in romance territory, and romance authors trying new things) is saving romance. Look how sales of paranormal romance have taken off—there’s clearly a market for darker stories. I don’t think that harms romance; I think it provides more variety.
Speaking for myself, I can’t live on a diet of entirely Harlequin Presents or entirely pointy-teeth-creatures. But if I read a variety of types of books, I enjoy all my reading more.
Also, your hypothesis about impulse buys is the opposite of my intuition. I make two types of impulse purchase:
1. I know I’ll like that
2. Wow, that looks different.
If all I looked at in the bookstore were the “safe HEA” section, half the time I wouldn’t see anything that really caught my eye. (I went through years of this, and sometimes ended up buying utter crap out of sheer desperation. Believe me, it didn’t make me feel very positive toward romance.) But if I find a variety of books that provide something romance-related, I always walk away with something I’m interested in.
Ultimately, I think it’s like any other area where a “brand” is trying to keep a lock on its ownership. It’s hopeless anyway—the cat’s out of the bag; people are figuring out romance can be good reading and good sales. As a reader, I’m all for variety. And as a supporter of the genre, I think it can only be good to bring in new readers. Even if they like their own weird unhappy geeky spaceshippy pointy-toothed version of romance.
Since we’re quoting Jenny Crusie today, here’s another interesting tidbit. She’s talking about category romance. When I read it, however, it rings true of romance in general.
I would rather some of those badly written romances with awkward, forced happy endings be allowed to NOT have happy endings, or not as explicitly so—to make the overall book better. I think sometimes an author produces a book that just doesn’t wrap up tidily, and that’s OK. I’d rather my happy endings be really good and satisfying. I feel more betrayed by uterus-less women having miracle babies and reconciliations with formerly-dead brothers on the final page than by a semisweet, 75% cacao, or even bittersweet ending.
Crusie also talks about romance being treated like a commodity, like soup. In that light, that last line I quoted really gives me pause:
Jane: It’s not good for the genre; it’s not good for the author.
As I said, I don’t think this can be controlled, nor would I want to, because romance fiction isn’t just a customer service business. It’s also an art. If authors inside OR outside of conventional romance are excited about trying some crossover stuff, even if it’s stuff I hate, I’m glad they’re jazzed about it. That’s all part of genre growth. The publishers and bookstores can shelve it wherever they like—I’ll still read the cover, flip through to read a few pages, take a chance, and see where it goes.
BTW, I’ve been curious about these reports of romance sales falling. Is that as compared to last quarter? last year? last five years? The numbers I’ve seen, 1998-2004, trend upward for that period, so if there’s new data I’d love to see it. (Graph here, a couple paragraphs down.)
BTW, I’ve been curious about these reports of romance sales falling. Is that as compared to last quarter? last year? last five years? The numbers I’ve seen, 1998-2004, trend upward for that period, so if there’s new data I’d love to see it.
I doubt the information I want is released to the public: raw numbers of actual books sold, not the percentage of all readers who read a particular genre. Because then we could see if sales are rising or falling, and discuss what might be influencing that.
My gut feeling is that hybridization is expanding readership of the romance genre, since people who wouldn’t have read a traditional romance might pick up a paranormal or suspenseful romance.
Ha! My spamblocker is reading81.