Back in March, Candy and I were interviewed on NPR’s All Things Considered, and oh, what a glorious thing. “Magic Hoo Hoo” and “heteronormativity” were said within moments of each other – on NPR? Win.
The producer of the show that day, a marvelously savvy woman named Petra, is a romance fan, but alas, the host, Rebecca Roberts had never read a romance novel, and wasn’t sure what to think of them – aside from all the negative stereotypical things one usually hears about romances. When Candy and I recommended a few during the course of the interview, we weren’t sure if Roberts was interested, but Petra assured us as we signed off after the taping was done that she would make sure Rebecca read one. Or two.
I honestly didn’t think she’d read one – so imagine our giddy fist-bumping when Candy and I received the following email from Rebecca, who read Chase and Crusie and, it seems, understands a piece of how powerful and evocative a well-written romance can be.
To: Sarah and Candy
From: Rebecca Roberts
Subject: Turning an NPR snob (redundant!) into a romance readerCongratulations on the success of Beyond Heaving Bosoms.
Let me just reiterate that getting to say Magic Hoo-hoo on National Public Radio was the highlight of my professional career. Of course, Weekend All Things Considered has not asked me back to guest host since then. But I’m sure that’s just a coincidence?
As promised, I have now finished a couple of trashy books. I really can’t groove to the supernatural thing (I’m too literal, I suppose. My willing suspension of disbelief only goes so far) so I chose, on your recommendation, Anyone But You by Jennifer Crusie.
The first thing I wondered was why is Crusie is considered Romance and not displayed on the table with the pink and blue “Fun Beach Reads!!” sign with the other Chick-lit? (I know, I know, the term chick-lit is degrading and patronizing and all kinds of wrong. But Sophie Kinsella sells a lot of books) Is it the single-minded focus on getting the couple together? The line seems awfully blurry, genre-wise.
Anyway, I thought the book was hilarious and devoured it in one big gulp when I really should have been doing other things. I had such a good time that I went back for more, and read Crusie’s Getting Rid of Bradley. Mistake. They’re the same book! Newly single 40ish woman trying to prove her independence falls for inappropriate man because he is polar opposite of her ex and is kind to her dog(s). Both newly-single-woman and kind-to-dogs-man are hesitant to get together yet secretly having serious lust issues. Both come complete with best friend/sibling who sees that NSW and KTDM are perfect for each other. Finally NSW jumps KTDM and, after a few lame subplots are disposed of, they live HEA. Reading it once was totally entertaining, sexy, and satisfying. Reading it twice started to edge into a waste of time.
So…I decided to try another of your faves, Lord of Scoundrels. I proudly displayed that cheesy ripped-bodice cover (and what’s with the swirly pink title font?) on the DC Metro. I was so into it I missed my stop. TWICE. I started to resent any demands on my time that weren’t Lord of Scoundrels. Like work. And motherhood.
When I was done, and the spell was broken, I tried to figure out why I had been so spellbound. The swaggering hero brought low by a woman who wasn’t afraid of him? The super hot sex scenes (in other words, swaggering hero brought low by a woman who wasn’t afraid of him)? I think, actually, it was the fact that the author seemed to not take herself or her characters too seriously. I think maybe that’s why I was so willing (before I was enlightened by you bitches) to dismiss Romance novels as crap—all that throbbing loins and pulsing womanhood seemed so deadly earnest and tedious.
So, I tried another Loretta Chase, Not Quite a Lady. Loved it. I love that her female leads are unapologetically delighted by sex. I love that the male leads find that hot, not suspect. The books were similar, but different enough that I stayed interested.
So thank you, bitches, for knocking off some of my blind assumptions. I think romance novels for me are like warm chocolate donuts: a steady diet would be a little much, but now and then they’re exactly what you want.
Damn, now I’m turned on AND hungry.
Rebecca
WOO HOO! I love introducing sharp people to romances, and helping them realize that everything they’ve heard about them is most certainly not accurate.
I am telling you, Lord of Scoundrels needs a special title for being a most effective tool in the “Bring Them Over to the Romance Side” arsenal.
this is so funny. i recently had someone ask me to recommend a romance novel to them. the first thing i told them was Lord of the Scoundrels and then every Laura Kinsale they could get their hands on.
This is one of the reasons I really dislike libraries moving to shelving by genre. It is sometimes hard to guess where a book will land. I just don’t see most of Evanovich’s work as mysteries but that is where my library shelves them.
It seems very limiting to place a genre label. There are some many works that cross the boundaries. But readers often won’t look at a genres they don’t read.
Chase’s Mr. Impossible was the romance that brought me over to the dark side, and is still my favorite of hers even over LoS (though that comes in second of her books).
As a converted former snob, I didn’t find what Roberts said offensive. You gotta remember, she’s only just been introduced to the idea of GOOD romance novels, as opposed to years of the old “romance=stoopid”. It takes time, and I think she’s definitely on a positive road.
Cheers for SBTB!
VW: read33 – Pfft! Only 33?
A friend of mine who would probs win the prize of intellectual snob of Europe, asked what i could reccomend her. Unfortunately, i only had a thin Barbara Cartland paperback ( Not my favourite by any means) with me at the time, but gave it to her, thinking she would toss it aside after a few pages. Imagine my surprise when she called me two days later saying she devoured the whole story in one sitting! As long as people are receptive, it will become obvious what the attractions of romance are. ( Though the Barbara Cartland reeling-in was a fluke )
What intellectual snobs often don’t realize is that just because you read romances, it doesn’t shut out the possibility of you being interested in anything else.
My husband likes the Crusie/Mayer books. He was also into LKH’s Anita Blake in the early days.
Sometimes, whilst in the bookstore, I have trouble finding books because they’re not in the romance section, but in the Sci-fi or Fiction sections.
Personally, this was my favorite bit of the email:
LOL!
Also, two or three books does not a convert make. I think she’s off to a good start. I agree with the general consensus the two Crusies picked were not the cream, but Fast Women was my first Crusie and it’s the one I’ve made it my personal mission to make EVERYONE’S first Crusie, Welcome to Temptation being a photo finish second.
As for this: “I am telling you, Lord of Scoundrels needs a special title for being a most effective tool in the “Bring Them Over to the Romance Side” arsenal.”, how about: Weapon(s) of Ignorance Destruction?
Ooo! Or maybe: Better Living Through Heaving Bosoms?
I feel like I should turn in my Romance Reader membership card, since I did NOT like or even finish Crusie’s “Bet Me,” so if that had been my first romance novel, I would not have been impressed. I also did not enjoy the ending of “Lord of Scoundrels.” Just didn’t like it.
“Anyone But You” was rather cute, and I looooved “Getting Rid of Bradley” (my first Crusie), so clearly romance readers are not a monolithic entity with the same novel pleasing everyone. How this adds to the conversation, I’m not sure, but when introducing people to romance novels, I can definitely see even the most sure bets failing to entice the newcomer.
when I tell people how I came to start reading books in the romance section, it always starts with “it’s all Georgette Heyer’s fault!” I picked up a Heyer novel in the library due to the recs of sff authors (Lois McMaster Bujold, Pat Wrede, Sherwood Smith..) I then systematically devoured each and every Heyer the libraries in my area had to offer. when I ran out of books, I tore my hair, combed the aisles and came upon a Lisa Kleypas novel (It Happened in Autumn). now the Heyer copies I read were all ancient library bindings, so if I had a preconception while reading them it was historical fiction. but I looked at the Kleypas, thought ‘sheesh same elements’ and read it. then read every Kleypas I could find, and never looked back! so hooray for Heyer and Kleypas! *g*
LoS is insane, insane, I say!
I DLed it a while ago, but the mention here made me decide to start it, and it’s like crack. I have out of town guests—must clean, I have a book to review for Amazon Vine—must read, I have dogs—must walk,, I have a grandmother who lives with me—must converse, I have a husband—must kiss *his* prominent nose on occasion.
I’m at 76% and it won’t leave me alone—even as I try to ignore it, it calls to me.
It should be driving me nuts, because Jess really wants to fix him, and he really has been a jerk to her, and yet…
*Sigh*
And now I’m done. 🙂
Polly- I am with you on Lord of Scoundrels. Although I think that it was less the illegitimate child angst (though not my favorite trope) that lessened my enjoyment of the second half than that the clueless bewilderment of the hero (so delightful early on) began to wear thin.
KB- I agree that the genre shelving in libraries can be a problem. But it is also helpful for patrons dedicated to a particular genre when they are looking for new authors. Of course, at our library romances (with the exception of the Harlequin/Silhoutte categories) are blended in with the rest of the fiction titles. And some authors, like Evanovich, are shelved in both Fiction and Mystery.
So I finally read Lord of Scoundrels. In two sittings. And yes, it was great. Not flawless, but pretty damn good. I read Mr Impossible too, and enjoyed it a lot, although I didn’t think it was as good as LoS.
And now I have to find time to read my way through yet another author’s backlist.