Thanks to an anonymous tipster, we have a title that literally makes me ill to my stomach:
Seriously. The title makes me ashamed and nauseated.
And on the flip side, from the same tipster:
Teddy Pig, what’s your comment on that one?
My comment:
Hey!
Categorized:
Comments are Closed
Comments are closed.
By posting a comment, you consent to have your personally identifiable information collected and used in accordance with our privacy policy.
Sweet baby Jesus and his pet panda. Have you read the excerpt? I want to shoot that bastard “hero” right in the nuts!
The Sheikh’s chosen queen apparently has no lower legs. SRSLY, look at that picture!
And yes, that other title is just wrong.
Oh, dude. I just read the excerpt, too. How’ pitiful is this woman? Also, how dumb is the premise that throws them back together? Answer: beyond my capacity to measure. Let us simply say that the stupidity is immense.
The Sharif dont like it
Rock the casbah
Rock the casbah
The Sharif dont like it
Rock the casbah
Rock the casbah
The king called up his jet fighters
He said you better earn your pay
Drop your bombs between the Harlequin Presents
Down the casbah way
What the hell did that poor baby do that was so shameful??
The Guy on the Sheikh cover is so a white boy. And aren’t all babies innocent?
Spam -foreign47: There’s less an a 47% chance that model is foreign.
Teddypig, ILU.
That first book though…whut? Just…ugh.
That guy’s name is Teddy Pig?
That is exactly as over-the-top as these book titles.
I would be ashamed too if I were hanging out with somebody named Garth.
I’m particularly struck by how much that “sheik” looks like the high school basketball star that I had a crush on. You know, pale, muscular, crew cut?
I’m holding out for “The Sheikh’s Chosen Baby of Shame”.
The title alone is nauseating. Read the excerpt and you will throw up in your mouth.
They’re used the “baby of shame” title motiff several times… truly revolting.
Teddypig you’re so under the top.
Ugh. I threw up a little. Can I kick the so called hero in the nuts? That would really make my day.
Do you suppose that Melanie Millburne threw up a little in the back of her mouth when she got a gander at what the publicity gurus at HQP were titling her book??
Maybe the husband-of-shame gets a horrible comeuppance and must apologize on bended knee? After which she runs off with a hot doctor, after denouncing him and his mistrustful ways? *is hopeful*
Shameful is the editor who either came up with this title or allowed it to stay. Yikes!!!!!!
A baby is a wonderful, wonderful thing—sometimes scary and confusing, but ultimately wonderful. I hate it when anyone, fictional or otherwise, condemns a pregnancy, no matter what the circumstances.
spam detector: above 92—as in, that title was above 92% insulting
If my five month old could talk, he’d agree with you.
I just about to buy the Harlequin Blaze that Jayne really liked, but after seeing that Presents title up there, the thought of giving money to any division of Harlequin makes me ill.
Memo to Harlequin: STOP DOING THIS SHIT.
Last month, when my company was converting these little steaming piles into eBooks, I was hoping I’d see some righteous snarking go down here.
There are some real screamers coming up next month, but sadly I think I’m contractually prevented from sharing them.
Is naive.
the thought of giving money to any division of Harlequin makes me ill.
Chicklet, that’s how it strikes me too. I’m all for including category romance in critical discourse, and I’m sure someone will (very reasonably) say “Don’t punish the author for the marketing”, but. BUT. Every time I see these titles, I’m less inclined to support the company.
I don’t see Harlequin changing their marketing any time soon. These titles have been on the rise for a decade. As I said a few weeks ago,
So THAT’s is why HQ sales are down.
http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94300
I strongly suggest a number of hugely wanking letters directed to the HQ editorial department for putting the words “shame” and “baby” together in the same line. (Keep in mind it might not have been the writer’s title.)
Let them know they are asshats and you’re not buying any book that indicates such a disgusting concept that a baby is a bad thing.
And tell them to stop recycling those old Harum-Scarum 1950’s movies for their “Presents” line. They’re bloody insulting to women of the 21st century.
Sure, it’s fine to cultivate a safe read for great-grandmama, but the old girl’s not going to last forever. Her daughters and their daughters are not interested in turning back the clock to the bad old days when an asshat hero was about the best that could be expected.
Now WHERE did I put my eye-bleach and spork….?
Here’s where to write if you don’t like something.
public_relations @ harlequin.ca
I suggest being polite, but firm. Let them know how you feel, just no cussin’ and name-callin’.
Save the more entertaining wankage for here!
(omg—the word I have to put in is “blood64.” HA!)
It’s not the baby part that bothers me the most. If anything, surely it’s the mother who’s shamed in that title and blurb. My outrage is stronger on behalf of the enormous number of “virgins” and “mistresses” than for this fictional baby. But in all cases, what bothers me is the apparent yearning for the (elegantly fictionalized) bad old days when women were property, women and babies were to blame for everything, etc, etc, etc.
I do believe that what’s *between the covers* of category romances may subvert these awful messages in ways not apparent from the titles and blurbs. But that doesn’t at all reduce the wrongheadedness of the titles. It’s pretty difficult to claim that romance is a woman-oriented, woman-friendly genre when the most visible publisher puts out this kind of marketing—and people buy it, by the thousands.
I don’t care what it makes me, I still hope that the ‘innocent wife’ gets together with the guy she had an affair with, finalizes her divorce, and they make a nice, quiet life for themselves in a town where the gossips are few and far between, and he turns out to be an awesome dad.
If she hooks up with the guy who, in the preview, speaks to her like she’s a child, I’ll have to punch something.
I think I’ve just thought of the best romance title ever.
The Shiek’s Virgin Mistresses’ Shameful Pregnancy.
No? Not doing it for you?
Hunh.
Honestly, what are these people thinking? Reading the excerpt, all I could think is that this guy is such a jerk, no wonder she had an affair. And why is an affair catagorized as a “final act of defiance,” isn’t the implication that as her husband, he’s been giving her orders, the further implication being that she was wrong to ever defy his orders in the first place?
That is so wrong.
Hmm . . . what about The Virgin Shiek’s Demanding Mistress? The CEO’s Boardroom Boytoy? The Mad Scientist’s Pregnant Husband?
I love you, Molly.
And I hate myself for being so addicted to Harlequin Presents.
*heads to Harlequin’s site, checks current Presents titles*
See, things could be a lot more interesting if just a few pronouns were switched.
The Mad Scientist’s Pregnant Husband
Taken By His Greek Boss
From Hubris to her Husband
At The Billionaire’s Bidding
In Bed With His Italian Boss
. . . why the hell are so many ‘Convenient’? It’s basically making it clear that the hero has no standards beyond going for a hottie, and just opts for the girl who’s the least trouble for him.
After checking out the backlistings in an attempt to parody more, I want to hit things. I’m starting to think that at least some of these authors write out all the standard title words on slips of paper, put ‘em in a goldfish bowl, and draw out 1-4 with each new book they start. Using those, they form a plot.
I read the excerpt for the “Innocent wife” one, and blurk. It’s hideous! Check this bit out:
He’s denied her right to speak and to correct his false impressions of her, he’s insulted her, and she’s “petty” and in the wrong here for trying to protest? What the fuck kind of lame message is this? It leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Okay, some commentors here clearly are not reading enough Presents. Of course she didn’t REALLY have an affair! No, I haven’t read the book. But I know my Presents.
Danielle,
the passage you quoted was what stuck a fork in it for me. Imagine me putting my hand on my hip and going, “Oh no he didn’t…”
No Presents for me. EVAH.
My word: she72, as in “she must think this is 1872”
I think it was supposed to be Shameless Wife: Your Brother Fucks Better Than You Do. But the verbiage would have detracted from the cover art.
I said to myself, “Self, could Harlequin come up with any worse titles than this one? Let’s see if we can brainstorm any for them!”
Her Vagina is His Property
Take Her—She’s Yours!
Barefoot and Pregnant
Solid-Gold Chastity Belt
The Greek Tycoon’s Secretary is Bent Over His Desk
He Sticks it in Her
She Had His Bastard
In conclusion: Harlequin, please to be joining us in the 21st century, kthxbai.
Spamblocker: times77, I AM NOT EVEN KIDDING. This thing is psychic.
Chicklet, you are funny. But I think I may have already read some of those!
My word: child 11. Or is that…child11OFSHAME?
Oh, no! Kathleen O’Reilly, who is as innocent as any Presents heroine, should not be made to suffer! In fact, everyone should throw more money her way, just because what she does is great and hopefully if lots of people buy her, there would be more Harlequins like hers across the board.
All ya’ll:
After reading that excerpt about the Innocent Wife gestating the Baby of Shame, I realized that you could lift that entire excerpt out and place it in its entirety in a Harlequin Presents from the 1960s, 1970s 1980s or 1990s.
I really think that they are just recycling the text.
Do any of you remember reading those books? I remember a few of them and thinking, even at 12, that those women shure were dumb. And that the men were all mean and who would want to put up with that?
I just had a great vision of a world-wide Harlequin boycott.
That’s right! Women will not purchase Harlequins until their demands are met!
Sarah and Candy nailed the Romance-reader’s 95 Thesis to the doors of Harlequin’s corporate HQ.
Oh, what a vision!
I love Molly’s titles.
Actually, those would make GREAT subject lines when writing in about our continued displeasure that such books are even being published and revulsion in the subject matter, characterization, attitudes, well, everything about these books.