Bitchin' Blog Posts
What subgenres do you read?
by SB Sarah | by SB Sarah | March 05, 2011 | Saturday at 12:55 pm | 98 Comments I flip around a great deal between the subgenres that I love, and I was curious what you like to read. If you're so inclined, would you share with me what subgenres you like? Please click all that apply - and thank you!Filed: General Bitching, Random Musings
joanne said on 03.05.11 at 02:59 PM • [link]
Before someone comes along to pile grief on your Saturday morning bedhead: F/F Romance should probably be listed.
Juliana said on 03.05.11 at 03:12 PM • [link]
I’m a little uncertain by Paranormal versus Urban Fantasy, since I’m assuming we’re talking about Romance subgenres?
I always thought Paranormal was a Romance marketing classification, whereas Urban Fantasy was a SF/Fantasy marketing classification.
(I’m also assuming SF/Fantasy listed refers to the Romance subgenre, and not the SF/F main genre.)
...So, I’m not sure. Some clarification? Have I made it unnecessarily complicated for myself?
Anony Mousse said on 03.05.11 at 03:14 PM • [link]
COuld someone recommend some well-written M/M and F/F novels?
I’d like to try them, but they’re difficult to find at bookstores and I don’t want to waste my money ordering a DNF from an online store.
Laura K Curtis said on 03.05.11 at 03:47 PM • [link]
I read regular urban fantasy and regular sci-fi, the stuff that’s shelved in the Sci-Fi section of the bookstore, but I don’t read them (or paranormal) in romance, so I didn’t mark them. Granted, many of the UF/SF/F books have a romantic element, but they’re not romance-focused, so I don’t count them. (I read the plain jane subgenres, I guess - historical, contemporary, romantic suspense!)
Nadia said on 03.05.11 at 04:22 PM • [link]
I’m not sure what the official difference is, but in my head I think of Paranormal Romance as including psychics, time travel, ghosts, that sort of thing. Nora Roberts’ Three Sisters and JAK’s Arcane Society, for example. When I think UF Romance, I think more vamps, shapeshifters, etc., with lots of ass-kicking involved, like J.R. Ward, Lara Adrian, Showalter’s Alien Huntress, Larissa Ione.
Lindsay said on 03.05.11 at 04:33 PM • [link]
I pretty much like to bounce around from sub to sub (while trying to avoid “contemporary romance” that is really “chick lit” and also romantic vampires. I used to love them, but now I’m drowning in ‘em). My go-to and always favorite is definitely historical. Particularly ones set in little used time periods.
ms bookjunkie said on 03.05.11 at 04:49 PM • [link]
I also read Futuristics.
@Anony Mousse I recommend you go to Dear Author, where Sarah Frantz has lots of reviews on said novels. You might also look at the GLBT finalists at DA BWAHA. http://dabwaha.com/2011/03/glbt-finalists-for-2011/ Hope this gives you a place to start. :)
Sarah W said on 03.05.11 at 05:04 PM • [link]
Urban Fantasy always seems like those series focused on one character, that may have a romantic element, but doesn’t always follow romance genre requirements. The relationships may develop over a series, or there may no one relationship.
Captcha parts22, there may be parts of UF I like, but not enough to not get my HEA
TaraL said on 03.05.11 at 05:55 PM • [link]
I was a little uncertain about paranormal and urban fantasy, too.
When I hear urban fantasy, I think more of a sci-fi, futuristic feel to the stories. When I hear Paranormal, it seems it can mean anything from vampires and weres, which I mostly avoid like the plague, to ghosts and psychics, which I’m always looking to find good examples of.
So, based on that, I marked that I don’t read urban fantasy, but do read paranormal.
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 06:30 PM • [link]
Many genre definitions are very modern, they are changing all the time, and they have huge areas of overlap, so they can never be exact. Our own tastes change (I read a lot of erotica and pornography in my youth, but find them comparatively boring these days, and prefer sex in its place, rather than dominating the landscape), and many of us will read the work of specific authors regardless of genre.
Having said that, and also echoing what TaraL has said above, I think that ‘paranormal’ may encompass rather too wide a range, and at the same time, may overlap too much with ‘fantasy’. Like her, I often enjoy stories with elements like psychic powers, but I heartily detest the fairy-story/magic/pseudo-mythology genre. Vampires and shape-shifters and such make my eyes glaze over, but human characters whose perceptions, intuitions and communication go beyond what is actually humanly possible, an exaggeration of reality, rather than a total negation of it, can be intriguing.
hollygee said on 03.05.11 at 06:33 PM • [link]
‘…while trying to avoid “contemporary romance” that is really “chick lit”’
I go more toward women’s fiction or hen-lit. I like the senior citizen or peri-menopausal protagonists. Life isn’t over at 30.
Tina M. said on 03.05.11 at 06:45 PM • [link]
I don’t normally read this subgenre myself, but I’ve dowloaded freebies that fall under medical romance.
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 06:51 PM • [link]
That used to be a MAJOR sub-genre of romance. In British Mills & Boon books it used to be a specific line, with distinctive cover designs. I have the impression that it is no longer a specific sub-genre, though I suppose there must still be plenty of contemporaries around that have medics as major characters or hospitals as the settings.
michellekcanada said on 03.05.11 at 06:55 PM • [link]
I’m not exactly sure what Steampunk is since I haven’t really read any. I do have the Iron Duke on my TBR list but there seems to be a following with that genre.
Tee said on 03.05.11 at 07:00 PM • [link]
Another popular category used to be Time Travel, which I am not as much a fan of so I didn’t listed it. Another is Paranormal, which used to be ghosts, charms, or general psychic stuff like warnings/omens/telepathy.
I am a big fan of Vampire Romances, but they seem to be mixed up with werewolves, demons, and other stuff like Urban Fantasy now.
Is Inspirational supposed to cover all religious romances? I think there is a Christian Romance sub genre, and another for Amish Romances.
ReganB said on 03.05.11 at 07:01 PM • [link]
I’m always a little confused when people say “historical” vs. “Regency” are they now all lumped into one category? It seems to be the case… Once upon a time Regency had it’s own category, set in the time of the Regent (early 1800’s) and were relatively light on the sex as well as light in content, whereas “historicals” tended to be deeper in content (and history) and spanned any where in time and generally contained some steamer scenes. Is this no longer true?
Regan
Tee said on 03.05.11 at 07:06 PM • [link]
Read some more of other people’s comments - Medieval used to be one of my fav’s! I still pick them up when I see them although a lot fewer of them published, like Laura Kinsale, Jude Devereaux, Julie Garwood, etc.
An few more categories - Westerns (related to westward expansion of US into the territories after Civil War 1860s-1890s),
REGENCIES - how was this not on the list!! This is beyond historical, this is a major genre lol.. 1810-1820s in England or former British Empire. I like the full length romance novels like Judith Ivory or Julia London, lot of little grittier romance novels that are regencies that have less erotic situations too, some published more like series where less brand name authors.
I’ll make a small case for revolutionary war romances, as these were published in fairly large numbers when i was reading them 10 years ago or so. Based in 1770s US and British Empire areas.
Kristen A. said on 03.05.11 at 07:16 PM • [link]
@Anony Mousse:
If you like (or are at least open to) historicals, try Alex Beecroft’s books.
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 07:30 PM • [link]
The assumption that romances set in the Regency have to be light, witty, upper-class drawing-room comedies is based only on the influence of Heyer (and ultimately Austen). American authors simply followed Heyer’s lead, some more blindly than others. But there is no reason at all why a book set in England in 1816 should not be full of danger, squalor and dark deeds: there were plenty of them about. The period that took in the Napoleonic Wars, the early Industrial Revolution, the rise in numbers of the urban poor, the struggle over the abolition of slavery and many other important social changes was no more dominated by witty drawing-room conversation than any other.
I should say that ‘historical’ should cover any book set in a period that was before the lifetime of the author, which would mean anything from ancient Egypt to the 1930s for today’s writers. Consequently, there are infinite numbers of historical sub-classifications, and any of them can use the historical setting in either a cheerfully sanitised way or with gritty realism.
We don’t actually have a designation for books that were written as contemporaries, but which have now been around long enough for their setting to seem ‘historical’ to present-day readers. If they have been around a really long time (like Austen) we tend to call them ‘classics’, but I am thinking of Heyer’s contemporary novels (1930s-1950s), Mary Stewart’s earlier titles (1950s-60s) and the like.
diremommy said on 03.05.11 at 08:01 PM • [link]
@ anony mouse:
try Amy Lane (Keeping Promise Rock is awesome), ZA Maxfield (Crossing Borders is my favorite, ignore the horrid cover) or Marie Sexton’s Coda series, starting with Promises.
If you like mysteries, you can’t lose with Josh Lanyon, he is great and the Adrien English series is fantastic.
m-m mouse said on 03.05.11 at 08:20 PM • [link]
@Anony Mousse
Josh Lanyon, K.A. Mitchell, Ginn Hale, Harper Fox, Marie Sexton, Astrid Amara
Can’t go wrong with these authors. They write contemporary, suspense, mystery, fantasy, sci-fi, slice of life m/m books.
These authors know how to pen novels, and I’d consider them the top writers of the m/m genre.
Lori said on 03.05.11 at 08:22 PM • [link]
There are very few subgenres that I don’t read at all. On the survey I only checked the ones that I actually seek out, like contemps, although I do wish there had been a way to indicate that for me contemps do not include ChickLit. Other subgenres I’ll read if I get a strong recommendation from someone whose taste I trust or if a particular book catches my eye, but I don’t seek them out.
For me “Historical” is too broad a category. I love some historicals and others don’t interest me at all. I didn’t check it on the survey because as a broad category it seems to be dominated by Regencies and unless I get a very convincing recommendation I don’t even look at those.
Other subgenres I’ve enjoyed in the past, but have sort of stopped reading. I love some M/M but others really bother me for a bunch of reasons I won’t bore people with. I’ve found that I have so much trouble avoiding the stuff that I don’t want that I’ve all but given up on the subgenre, which bums me out.
I have the same issue with UF. I’ve loved some of what I’ve read and would read more if it weren’t for one thing—-I hate love triangles and they’re everywhere in UF. It’s a subgenre that seems to be virtually all series rather than stand alone books and it seems like no series gets to book 3 without introducing the love triangle. Yuck. If there’s good UF out there than doesn’t go the triangle route I wish someone would point me to it.
I apparently have more Thoughts about subgenres than I realized, so I’m going to stop before this comment gets totally out of control.
LG said on 03.05.11 at 08:23 PM • [link]
@ Nadia
“I’m not sure what the official difference is, but in my head I think of Paranormal Romance as including psychics, time travel, ghosts, that sort of thing. Nora Roberts’ Three Sisters and JAK’s Arcane Society, for example. When I think UF Romance, I think more vamps, shapeshifters, etc., with lots of ass-kicking involved, like J.R. Ward, Lara Adrian, Showalter’s Alien Huntress, Larissa Ione. “
I don’t think of Urban Fantasy as romance at all - it brings to mind books like Patricia Briggs’ Mercedes Thompson books, or Any Given Doomsday by Lori Handeland. Urban Fantasy might have sex in it, but I don’t see romance as being a big thing in books I’d categorize this way, so it was a little confusing for me to see it on the list.
Paranormal romance, to me, is romance with any kind of paranormal/supernatural aspects. That runs the gamut from a Nora Roberts book with fairies or ghosts in it (where the “paranormal” is so light the book is almost a contemporary) to Sherrilyn Kenyon’s butt-kicking Dark Hunters.
You know, I’m betting the way people define the subgenres listed would be just as interesting as the results of the actual survey.
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 08:31 PM • [link]
On the assumption that the classes are all sub-genres of Romance, then I think that goes without saying, since Chick-Lit is surely not ‘romance’ in the current conventional definition. There are plenty of contemporary romances which contain elements of Chick-Lit — e.g. a series of relationships, hopelessly unfunny attempts to be amusing, half-witted heroines with less emotional and intellectual maturity than the average 13-year-old — but I have the impression that the typical Chick-Lit story does not have a HEA resolution.
m-m mouse said on 03.05.11 at 08:36 PM • [link]
@AgTigress
It’s interesting re:categorizing sub-genres. I view paranormal romance as romance with paranormal elements. I’d expect the series to be 80% focused on the romance.
Urban fantasy in my mind = chick lit + paranormal elements. After I thought of it that way, I can’t unsee it. I just don’t see a lot of guys reading books by Patricia Briggs or Karen Marie Moning - I could be way off base here, but that’s my general impression based on reviews and reader comments online.
BevQB said on 03.05.11 at 08:37 PM • [link]
To me, PNR and UF ARE two very distinct subgenres. Yes, there’s a bit of crossover here and there, but I usually know which one I’m reading and in fact have found that I can get burned out on one while still actively seeking out the other.
Easy way to tell the difference between UF and PNR?
UF: When in danger, H/H openly admire each other’s fighting skills
PNR: When in danger, H/H get IMPOSSIBLY harder and IMPOSSIBLY wetter.
Cheryl said on 03.05.11 at 08:37 PM • [link]
Seconding, thirding, and fourthing any recommendation for Marie Sexton’s Coda series. I read Strawberries for Dessert first, but starting with Promises is a good plan.
Heidi Cullinan is an extremely talented m/m writer. She writes both contemporary and fantasy. My favorite of hers is Double Blind, though you may want to read Special Delivery first, as the characters in that book are part of the story in Double Blind. Her stories tend toward the kinky, but with good character development.
If you wants lots of hot manloving, you could try KA Mitchell’s Collision Course. Lots and lots and lots of action, but still has actual plot. For a little more character exploration, try Regularly Scheduled Life.
I just started reading Josh Lanyon, and I love the unresolved sexual tension in the Adrien English series.
There is a m/m reading group at goodreads that you might want to check out.
There are also a lot of free reads out there if you want to just dip your toe in the steamy hot tub of manlove . Dreamspinner Press has a free short story anthology called Wishing on a Blue Star. I’ve only read a few of the stories there, but the ZA Maxfield story alone is worth the download. If you can stomach christmas stories in March, there is an anthology at goodreads called Stuffing my Stocking which features a lot of well known m/m authors. I’m saving it for next Christmas, but the two stories that I read so far are pretty kinky. Also, Zathyn Priest has a free story available on his website that’s really fun.
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 08:42 PM • [link]
Yes, It would. The definitions are constantly changing and evolving, and they are not mutually exclusive.
If you go back to Pamela Regis’s definition of romance, which is also the basis of the current RWA definition, the story centres on one or more relationships, and ends with the implication that it/they have become a permanent bond: a HEA, in fact. If that core element is present, the story is a romance, whether it is populated by normal human beings or hairy entities with fangs and bloody great bat-wings. Conversely, sensitive ‘women’s fiction’ soap-opera-like thingies that follow intricate family relationships, etc. etc. are not romances.
Virginia Llorca said on 03.05.11 at 08:51 PM • [link]
@michellekcanada Just quoting here and not from myself: “SteamPunk is what happens when goths discover the color brown.”
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 08:51 PM • [link]
I agree on the romance. But I don’t regard fantasy/fair-story/faux-mythology as ‘paranormal’. A character with telepathic powers is not normal, but ‘beyond-normal’, which is what paranormal means, a human whose ability to ‘read’ other humans is of a different order than the normal levels that actually exist. But shape-shifters and fairies and dragons and so forth have no relationship with normality: they are fantasy inventions.
I don’t think it is unreasonable to draw that distinction, especially as there are people who find the former acceptable and the latter not. This suggests a fundamental difference that is more than just semantics.
m-m mouse said on 03.05.11 at 08:58 PM • [link]
Ah, this is interesting. So would you consider all the books with vampires and shapeshifters to be urban fantasy (urban if it’s set in modern times). For example, the Black Dagger Brotherhood would be urban fantasy as opposed to paranormal romance? Off topic, but I would love to see these genres standardized in the near future.
Virginia Llorca said on 03.05.11 at 09:00 PM • [link]
@AgTigress. Awww Geez. You went and used the word “guys’ somewhere along this thread and I got my hopes all up. The constant appearance of certain mythological characters in almost every culture, in almost every part of the know world, seems to indicate they are somewhere grounded in reality.
Lori said on 03.05.11 at 09:02 PM • [link]
This is true. My impulse to make extra double sure about the distinction is driven by the fact that I really like contemporaries and I really dislike ChickLit. I understand why other people enjoy it, but I absolutely don’t and that makes me want to create a very clear line.
It’s pretty much the same issue that I have with historicals and Regencies. There are certain eras that are on my must read list, but it seems to me that when people discuss historicals as a broad category they’re most often talking about Regencies, which are not the book I like to read.
Tamara Hogan said on 03.05.11 at 09:02 PM • [link]
BevQB said:
To slice and dice the romance sub-genres even further, my debut, TASTE ME, is being marketed as an urban fantasy romance. Both of the above are true. ;-)
There’s so much sub-genre mash-up goin’ on in PNR right now. I think this is really exciting - I’m reading so many great books! - but it makes contest submission and judging a bit more complicated. How do you categorize a historical paranormal - say, Regency vampires? Tough call.
Allison said on 03.05.11 at 09:06 PM • [link]
The genre that I saw a lot more of when I was stealing my mom’s books in elementary school and junior high was the cowboy/western book. I didn’t really know if they’d fit the historial (because so many are set in a different time) or contemporary (because some aren’t), that, and they seem to be their own distinct subgenre. Boy howdy, I sure do love a cowboy book…
Cara said on 03.05.11 at 09:11 PM • [link]
While I strongly agree about the lack of a f/f romance category, I think it’s also just an unfortunate reflection on the popularity of m/m to primarily a female audience, as compared to this bizarre mentality I’ve seen of “eww, girl parts” regarding f/f romance. It’s frustrating (and a totally different topic altogether), but m/m really dominates the top reads lists on places like ARe compared to f/f, or heck, even f/m. But in essence some things are crazy popular, others not so much, for whatever reason. I mean, I think in today’s day and age we could easily have a list three times the size of this one for sub-genres. I actually run into this problem a lot with how I organize my ebooks (one thing about my device I wish they would hurry up and finish in devlopment). I have so many different types of “Historical,” I’d go nuts correctly categorizing them. Same for paranormal/urban fantasy/sci-fi fantasy. How does Nalini Singh’s Psy-Changeling series fit in there, really? It’s has a little of all of those elements. And I do miss a good Time Travel story - it’s just not a popular trope lately, I guess.
Cara said on 03.05.11 at 09:13 PM • [link]
I just wanted to add, MORE REGENCY VAMPIRES, PLZ!!! lol. It *is* exciting, though. I’ve half given up trying to organize anything beyond tags for BDSM, historical, contemporary, 1st Person POV, and “other”
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 09:14 PM • [link]
I have no idea what ‘urban fantasy’ denotes, but I would certainly call all those elements ‘fantasy’ rather than ‘paranormal’. To be ‘para-’ something, there has to be some connection with the something (cf. paramedic, paramilitary). The prefix literally means ‘beside’ or ‘beyond’.
It is very unlikely that any standardisation of terminology can be achieved, for the reasons already given — there is continual change, and the classes bleed into each other anyway. Taxonomy is always challenging, but it is particularly difficult when the things to be classified are extremely complex and can mutate into one another with ease. Nobody really agreed on ‘romance’ till Pam Regis took it on in 2003 (I discount all the Northrop Frye stuff, which seems to me irrelevant in the present context. And most others…) Note that the label ‘romance’ was not applied to Heyer, nor to Stewart, who really established ‘romantic suspense’ before anyone called it that. (Not counting early 19thC Gothic, but that’s another story).
I suspect that now romance has started to become a respectable genre for academic study, attempts to classify more tightly will proliferate. One author, whom I know well, particularly liked the fact that the lack of such analysis when she was first writing in the late 70s and early 80s lent a degree of freedom: she still had to convince her agent and her publisher when she wanted to write science-fiction-influenced romance, but as there wasn’t a name for it, it was harder for them to argue against it.
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 09:17 PM • [link]
Where? Citation, please.
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 09:18 PM • [link]
‘Regency vampires’: fantasy. Doesn’t matter when or where.
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 09:22 PM • [link]
Virginia: no, not reality. The human imagination is what they are grounded in, and imagination is frequently diametrically opposed to reality.
It’s not difficult to think of a winged horse, or of a person changing into an animal. Any child can imagine it. Doesn’t mean it has anything to do with the world we inhabit.
Cara said on 03.05.11 at 09:25 PM • [link]
@AgTigress but suppose a reader doesn’t want the historical element? Wouldn’t it be misleading then to categorize it as just fantasy, then? Point being, then you’d have to have Historical-Fantasy-Romance… What about historicals that have paranormal elements?
This is all rhetorical, of course. Much like with the digital media debacle, the publishing industry is also mirroring the music industry in this regard, too. “Now there’s a category for every song.” - Blue October
I don’t think it’s a *bad* thing, necessarily, either. Just - amusing. :)
Emily said on 03.05.11 at 09:37 PM • [link]
@Ag Tigeress
I would consider anything by Georgette Heyer a classic. Also Mary Stewart. Likewise I agree with you classics were left off the list.
It always bother me a smidge when people classify an austen as a historical, because she wrote in her own time. Actually it bothers me more when some- any -author is referred to as the Jane Austen of our time because she writes regencies/books about JA characters.
As for Heyer comtemporaries, Dude where did you find them?
None of them have been reprinted as far as I can tell, and Heyer herself tried to repress them. I have read a fair amount of Heyer about half of eveything she wrote, but none of her contemporaries.
Sorry but Waterloo was in 1815.
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 09:38 PM • [link]
I’m strongly tempted to say ‘what historical element?’; since vampires did not exist in the Regency (or any other time or place), then the book cannot be historical in any meaningful sense.
But to answer more constructively, this is why we read blurbs and reviews. :-)
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 09:54 PM • [link]
Emily, Heyer only suppressed her four early contemporary romances (and at least one of her early historicals, The Great Roxhythe, which I have read), but her 12 contemporary whodunnits, published between 1932 and 1953, are available. I have all of them. Like Christie and Patricia Wentworth, Heyer tended to incorporate a romantic element into these detective stories.
I know when the Battle of Waterloo was!! I was commenting on the general period of the Regency, 1811-20 and indeed, into the reign of George IV, and the many things that were going on during the first quarter of the 19th century.
TaraL said on 03.05.11 at 10:00 PM • [link]
I have to agree with AgTigress’s definition of what is paranormal and what is fantasy. I do wish that some of the genre labels were a bit more precise. It would make searching for specific types of stories so much easier. It seems that the category “paranormal” has become a catch-all and is defined as “any damn thing an author can dream up that we don’t feel comfortable putting in another category.” Come on publishers, you work with words all day long. Feel free to slap a couple of them together and come up with a few new genres/categories to help us readers find what we want.
And I have to disagree with the above. I do believe such things as vampire and shape-shifter myths are grounded in common human fears or psychologies, or whatever you want to call them, but I highly doubt that they are grounded in reality. But then we’d need to discuss what is the precise definition of “reality.” :o)
And “Historical.” Yes, way to broad a category. I like a lot of historical romances: Regency, Medieval, American West, Viking, and on and on. I’ve read good examples of all of them, but it would be helpful if they were listed more specifically on book selling sites, for when you’re in the mood for a certain type of read.
And, yes, overall, this HAS been an interesting discussion of everyone’s interpretations of what defines different subgenres.
Virginia Llorca said on 03.05.11 at 10:03 PM • [link]
@AgTigress. Oh, man. I so heartily apologize and curse mildly at myself. It was m-m-mouse replying to you. I shoulda known better. I promise to be so much more careful in the future. Public humiliation, even when administered to and by myself just kinda ruins my day. I so admire your erudition. I almost couldn’t believe it myself. It is actually kind of a relief to have been so wrong.
SheaLuna said on 03.05.11 at 10:04 PM • [link]
Oh, and I forgot to mention under “other”... post-apocalyptic romance. I dig it.
TaraL said on 03.05.11 at 10:07 PM • [link]
Me too, somewhat. I understand it though, because for today’s readers, the setting IS historical and they read like a historical, although probably a more realistic version of that history.
Virginia Llorca said on 03.05.11 at 10:15 PM • [link]
Okay. There are certain genetic anomalies that crop up now and surely cropped up in ancient times where physical deformities and certain behaviours gave rise to perhaps folklorical explanations and, strong in my memory, but not clear enough to cite, is the description in one of my Arthurian legend “fictional” books of the hairy dark little Pictish dude clinging to the neck of his hairy dark little horse and appearing as one with it. I hate to go here, but a terrible little man with a weird moustache that was not Charlie Chaplin, had some people do kind of a lot of research on the subject and there is photographic evidence. Of the first example, not the second. I am not an academic and I have to empty the dishwasher. Keep on keepin’ on. . .
m-m mouse said on 03.05.11 at 10:16 PM • [link]
@AgTigress
I certainly hope so! It would make my purchasing choices that much easier - go into a particular category, play roulette, and check out. I jest (somewhat).
Thank you for the thorough explanation - you’ve given me some food for thought. Since I’m a lazy reader, I never really questioned the paranormal romance category publishers tagged onto books, nor have I considered their etymology too closely. I only hope the field will come to some standardized terminology soon.
SB Sarah said on 03.05.11 at 10:18 PM • [link]
You’re right - F/F romance was a TOTAL brainfart on my part. My apologies to every awesome lesbian everywhere. Feel free to add it to the ‘other’ field as those will be included when I do the final tally.
As far as paranormal romance, and how to define it, I honestly think the definition shifts so much every year, it’s harder to say what is and what isn’t. Some UF is, some isn’t paranormal at all. Is post-apocalyptic UF paranormal? Not always. GAH. Science Fiction/Fantasy romances can contain worlds that don’t involve paranormal elements at all, such as vampires, campy vampires, ghosts, etc. Developing the list and keeping it SHORT was tough. So I well understand where folks disagree with my delineations. My goal was to keep the subgenre terms as simple and clear as possible.
Becky said on 03.05.11 at 10:24 PM • [link]
@Anony Mousse: I recently read the Adrien English series by Josh Lanyon, and I absolutely loved them. Definitely worth reading.
JL Langley is another good m/m author. I like her Sci-Regency series, starting with My Fair Captain. Her With or Without series is popular, although I haven’t gotten to that yet. And I plan to pick up Tin Star, a cowboy book, as soon as I finish up a few library books.
Duck! by Kim Dare was good. It’s a retelling of The Ugly Duckling, with BDSM. The romance is really kind of sweet and made me tear up a time or two.
And I read The Happy Onion by Ally Blue the other day and enjoyed that quite a bit, too.
I second the recommendation to check out the m/m group at Goodreads. It’s a big group and can be kind of overwhelming at first. But they’re very helpful and willing to make suggestions based on the kinds of stories you like. They claim to be the #1 source for info on m/m books on the internet, and I believe them.
Nadia said on 03.05.11 at 11:02 PM • [link]
@LG
But to further confuse the issue, in my mind, you can split Urban Fantasy and Urban Fantasy Romance into two different sub-genres. The distinct HEA or HFN is the line for me, along with the romantic relationship being central to the plot. So if you have a long series where there’s no romantic resolution, or the romance is decidedly back seat (if even in the car) to the action and world-building, then that would be UF. I’ve not read them, I think the Dresden books might be an example here? But something like the BDB series would be UF Romance because each book provides the completion of a romantic arc that is key to the story. And something like Moning’s Fever series, I’d call that UFR because the story arc did resolve the relationship between the two leads. It’s just one big-ass book in five volumes, LOL.
But I’m not sure what one should do with Anita Blake. ;)
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 11:06 PM • [link]
Virginia. You had me worried there about the word ‘guy’. It is in my vocabulary only as (1) a proper name and (2) the term for the effigy burnt on November 5th (derived, of course, from the proper name). If I found myself saying ‘guys’, I would know I had been possessed by an alien entity, an entirely paranormal event. To say the least.
Natural events and manifestations that have been claimed as the origins of certain mythological/fantasy concepts may conceivably be valid. Everybody knows that aberrations occur in nature, such as two-headed lambs, so perhaps it is not too big a stretch to suggest that the first riders of horses in the Bronze Age gave rise to the idea of Centaurs, and so forth.
But the thing is, these ‘explanations’ are simply not necessary. Any human can imagine them with no difficulty whatsoever, and they don’t even have to have taken quantities of mind-altering substances to do so. We can extrapolate from the natural to the fantastical without any prompting from objects in nature. I can remember imagining a winged horse when I was a small child, long before I knew about Pegasus in Greek legend (and I was delighted when I did encounter him!) As I said, anyone can do it.
Tamara Hogan said on 03.05.11 at 11:07 PM • [link]
AgTigress said:
I don’t disagree, but the thing that’s interesting to me about this is that Romance Writers of America has no such category in its Golden Heart and RITA contests. Every romance that’s paranormal, UF, time travel, fantasy, futuristic, or has sci-fi elements competes in a single category - Paranormal - which, as you might imagine, is hyper-competitive. It’s an interesting conundrum.
RWA’s definition: Paranormal Romance
Romance novels in which the future, a fantasy world or paranormal happenings are an integral part of the plot.
http://www.rwa.org/cs/category_descriptions
SusannaG said on 03.05.11 at 11:15 PM • [link]
Get LKH a good therapist?
AgTigress said on 03.05.11 at 11:28 PM • [link]
Tamara, I think that the RWA broad category probably just reflects the fact that the genres are changing and evolving at a rate that makes it impractical to subdivide too much. The moment one tried to cover all the possibilities specifically, someone would come up with something new.
Tamara Hogan said on 03.06.11 at 01:00 AM • [link]
AgTigress, I agree 100%. I don’t think creating more sub-categories or further slicing and dicing PNR would accomplish much, for the very reason you cite. Also? Even here, amongst some of the most passionate, informed readers of romance I’m aware of, we have strong differences of opinion about sub-genre categorization. No easy answers.
I’m finding this discussion fascinating, in case you can’t tell. Such a nice break from doing taxes. ;-)
HelenMac said on 03.06.11 at 01:57 AM • [link]
@Anony-Mousse in addition to all the recs you’ve received further up the thread (and totally seconding the recs for everything that JL Langley has written), try Madeleine Urban and Abigail Roux’s books. ‘Caught Running’ was reviewed by SBSarah here a while ago, and another stand-alone, ‘Warrior’s Cross’ made me cry and cry, but I think their best work is their ‘Cut and Run’ series.
Maria said on 03.06.11 at 02:05 AM • [link]
@Anony Mousse:
I was reluctant to try m/m, but am a big fan of Joey W. Hill’s “The Nature of Desire” series and didn’t want to miss one, so I read “Rough Canvas” anyway. Absolutely loved it. It is an erotic romance and BDSM to boot, but if that’s not too much for you, I can’t recommend this one highly enough.
Dark Divas also reviews a lot of GLBT books.
I like all paranormals except for shapeshifting that involves wolves/canine, cats/feline. That is an eww for me. Dragons and birds of prey are fine. I consider futuristic (also post-apocolyptic) to be sub-sub-genres of sci-fi and urban fantasy a sub-sub genre of fantasy (and my preference in that genre). Cowboy/Westerns are sub-sub genres of Historical (unless they are Contemporaries).
Steampunk is in a wonderful genre all by itself.
Joy said on 03.06.11 at 03:42 AM • [link]
Whether it’s a marketing category or not, I do see “western” as a subgenre, with some books being historical and some not. While the historicals may deal with the settling of the American West, the contemporaries also deal with aspects of the modern “western” lifestyle—cowboys, ranches, rodeos, remote rural living, etc.
captcha: average44. I’d average reading about 44 cowboys a night if I had more time.
JamesLynch said on 03.06.11 at 05:46 AM • [link]
While my taste runs to erotica—usually historical—there’s one area virtually untouched in either romance or historical writing:
Superheroes.
There’s something very sexy about gorgeous women in revealing outfits and hard-bodied men wearing tight spandex. There’s often a love/lust-vs.-duty (Batman and Catwoman, Spider-Man and the Black Cat), and I’ve lectured on the parallels between BDSM and many hero-villain relationships. And the mysterious masked romantic figure goes back to Zorro. Yet the closest romance/erotica books come to this genre are the “paranormal” folks who seem to be more of a subspecies of human (vampires! cat-people!) than uniquely powered beings.
(Incidentally, an area where this is starting to get covered quite a bit is porn. There have been x-rated movies of Batman (‘60s show and THE DARK KNIGHT), Wonder Woman, and Superman; upcoming ones include THE JUSTICE LEAGUE (yay!), Spider-Man, and the Incredible Hulk.)
jayhjay said on 03.06.11 at 05:50 AM • [link]
Becky, the With or Without series is really good. I would definitely recommend them. There is a new one coming out this month that I preordered. Also, Tin Star has a sequel called the Broken H (just in case you didn’t know about it)
As far as other m/m, I LOVED Marie Sexton’s Coda series. A definite must read for m/m, imho. And I really liked KA Mitchell’s Florida series - Diving in Deep, Collision Course, No Souveniers (the second two are better than the first I think) I also love ZA Maxfield. My favorites are Drawn Together, EPistols at Dawn, and Crossing Borders (as another poster said, ignore the awful cover). Her St. Nachos series is good too.
Happy reading!
Lisa said on 03.06.11 at 08:21 AM • [link]
I love reading fantasy and YA books. They seem to take up about 90 percent of what I read (and review).
Great question! Is there any way you could tell us what the most popular genres were?
Like a lot of people who commented, I gotta love a good paranormal romance!
minna said on 03.06.11 at 10:36 AM • [link]
@ SheaLuna “Oh, and I forgot to mention under “other”... post-apocalyptic romance. I dig it.”
I’ve read Joss Ware and have really enjoyed her series, but haven’t found any others as yet. Would anyone recommend other authors for me to try?
orangehands said on 03.06.11 at 11:42 AM • [link]
Anony Mousse: For m/m, I recommend Maritime Men by Janey Chapel and the sequel Anchors Aweigh (contemporary SEAL story), and second the recommendations of No Souvenirs by K. A. Mitchel (contemporary, on the border of erotica) and something by Amy Lane [either Keeping Promise Rock (contemporary), Talker (contemporary; heart wrenching), or Truth in the Dark (fantasy; re-telling of Beauty and the Beast)]. If you like shape shifter stories there’s JL Langley With or Without series (more erotica) and Joely Skye, maybe Feral (its more complete than some of her others seem). If you want to read the story from the emotionally-unavailable hero’s perspective, Resistance by LM Turner (contemporary) was good too. Like someone else said if you want a more kinky/open sex book, I’d suggest Double Blind by Heidi Cullinan (its technically a sequel but I liked it much better than the first one.) If you like stories with some kind of military guy (contemporary), I’d suggest Sarah Black too, maybe start with Idaho Battleground.
Still haven’t found a good F/F author, but please share if you do, as I am looking.
LMAO! Also, BevQB, thinking about it I kind of agree.
Hmm, its interesting where we place books in a sub-genre. For example, I read some cowboy romances, but they’re usually m/m or contemporary, so I didn’t even think of adding “western” as “other” because two different things I clicked would have covered them.
Hell Cat said on 03.06.11 at 12:32 PM • [link]
Personally, for me, UF can be romance. Look at Mercy Thompson. It’s not her singular defining feature, but it’s been one of her biggest triggers for awhile. It’s lead her to a lot of mix-ups in the past couple books. It’s definitely something she thinks a good deal about. It’s a part of the world-building. Especially for pack type behavior that tends to use the trope about one-mate for life typically. But the women also kick serious ass with or without the male around. Usually with a mindset of preferably with back up, but hey, a girl can’t everything in life. (I tend to think of it like Underworld 1 and 2 but in book form. I’d say the prequel was more like PR.)
For Paranormal Romance, I tend to fall into the Linda Wisdom, or MJD side of things. Both deal with genres deal with supernaturals (paranormals) but they’re vastly different in the content. PR, I’ve found, tend to be more light-hearted. Or the Jane Jameson the Librarian series that I’m in love with. Michele Bardsely, too. The focus is primarily on the impact of love in a new world for most of the authors. Not all. But most.
They are both favorites and bulk of my reading is about them. Lately, I’ve been reading a lot of YA Fantasy Romance, like Melissa Marr. It’s definitely Fantasy, what with the faeries. But for me, I love that type of stuff. I get utterly bored by doctors, architects, and billionaires. I love some contemporary, like the apparently much dreaded Chick Lit. I’m a sucker for it. I’ve no idea why, but I love it nonetheless.
Ros said on 03.06.11 at 12:46 PM • [link]
@AgTigress Medical Romance is alive and well in Mills and Boon! They recently ran a big campaign to get more new Medical authors, so the demand for the books is obviously there. I believe that in the US you can get them too but only from the online store, not in shops.
AgTigress said on 03.06.11 at 01:15 PM • [link]
Good heavens! I associate them chiefly with the 1950s-70s! I think I like the new covers better than the ones I remember.
:-)
Lisa A said on 03.06.11 at 03:01 PM • [link]
Sarah, I hope you’ll share the results with us. I’m curious to know what everyone else is reading.
orangehands said on 03.06.11 at 03:17 PM • [link]
Based on the recommendations above I finally tried Z. A. Maxfield (Crossing Borders) and liked it so I’d add her to the list, Anony Mousse. (Contemporary)
Ben P said on 03.06.11 at 03:22 PM • [link]
@Anony Mousse
I can also recommend Josephine Myles for British m/m romance.
Desiree Holt said on 03.06.11 at 05:17 PM • [link]
I’m with Hollygee about “older” h/h. Life does NOT end at 30. IN fact, I find writing about more mature h/h brings a new dimension to the stories I write. And read.
SharonS said on 03.06.11 at 06:32 PM • [link]
@Anony Mousse
One of the best m/m love stories is by Tere Michaels “Love and Fidelity series”
best mystery m/m Adrien English Mysteries (there are 5)
Warriors Cross- just loved that book
Rebekah Weatherspoon said on 03.06.11 at 07:40 PM • [link]
@Anony Mousse
I actually write F/F , Lesbian Romance for Bold Strokes Books. They have a great catalog of book from every subgenre. http://www.boldstrokesbooks.com/ (I’m actually typing this comment from our Lesbian Book Festival in Palm Springs)
I would also try Bella Books. http://www.bellabooks.com
bookstorecat said on 03.06.11 at 08:10 PM • [link]
I went through a phase in high school where I read every romantic novel I could find about f/f relationships. The two I remember being really good were Curious Wine, which at this point must be considered a classic of lesbian fiction, and the YA novel Annie on My Mind, which is much loved—just check out the customer reviews online.
Jacqueline said on 03.06.11 at 10:08 PM • [link]
I now require suspense in ALL my fiction reading, regardless of subgenre. I think of subgenre as more of a setting than a type of book. What I happen to really dislike at this point in time is chick lit. I do read some inspirationals, but I really hate being preached at so these are not my favorite but will do when nothing else is available.
AgTigress said on 03.06.11 at 11:30 PM • [link]
I don’t think the classification would work like that, Jacqueline. ;-)
Classes and sub-classes are hierarchical, so if we take ‘Fiction’ as the main class (level 1), ‘Romance’ is a genre within it (level 2), and ‘Historical romance’ is one level down again, level 3, alongside the other classes or ‘sub-genres’ that Sarah listed. But within that level 3, ‘historical’, we can go down another level (4) taking chronology as the crucial parameter: e.g. Ancient Egypt, Classical world, other Ancient World, Early Medieval, Medieval, 16th century, 17th century, 18th, 19th, 20th. Those would be a broad-brush coverage of sub-sub, or level 4, classifications. But they can also be further subdivided (for example, ‘Regency’ is rather a major subdivision of ‘19th century’, and ‘Roman’ is a subdivision of ‘the Classical World’). These would probably be sub-typed under the level ‘4’ headings. And then, as so often happens in typology, there are parameters that cut right across the chronological divisions, namely geographical settings. One would obviously need very different sub-classes for, say, a European setting in the 2nd century AD, and China in the same period (Han Dynasty).
Classification is not for wimps: it’s quite challenging to assess which similarities and differences are significant, and to ensure that the levels are consistent. One does not want to finish up with every unit being in a separate category, or there is no point in the exercise, and the framework devised must also be flexible and logical enough for new types to be slotted in. For example, I doubt if there are many Han Dynasty Chinese romance novels around, but there needs to be a logical place for them if they suddenly become popular!
Sometimes one can only classify satisfactorily using a table with horizontal and vertical lines, each subdivided with clear titles, and the classes consist of the patterns made by ticking or leaving blank the cells where the two intersect. That system can deal with the problem of overlapping classes (the case with classifying novels), which is always a big problem with a simple hierarchy.
Probably too much about taxonomy. Sorry. :-(
Ann Somerville said on 03.07.11 at 12:50 AM • [link]
Why yes, yes I can.
But if you haven’t read Whistling in the Dark by Tamara Allen, start there. Now.
AS said on 03.07.11 at 01:00 AM • [link]
Since you asked, I’m just going to put a request in the comments for more erotica reviews. I like reading erotica - or at least romantica, anything with a hot sex scene, I guess - and I feel like there are just aren’t many places to go for good, reliable reviews of those genres.
AS said on 03.07.11 at 01:03 AM • [link]
Check out Josh Lanyon’s books. He is an excellent writer and writes excellent, well-characterized M/M romance (mystery subgenre).
StephanieL said on 03.07.11 at 02:29 AM • [link]
I mainly read Contemporary Romantica and Romanitc suspense. I will read some Paranormal stuff (such as J.D. Ward, Shiloh Walker’s “Hunter’s” series, and Lora Leigh’s “Breeds”). I also enjoy a good Western romance.
Virginia Llorca said on 03.07.11 at 06:08 AM • [link]
I spend too much time on this site in what sometimes has to substitute for conversation in my daily life. And sometimes I forget about, and am a little taken aback by, the bitchery that is probably implied by the title “Smart Bitches. . . ” Maybe cuz I am kinda cowed by the word “Smart”. Just sayin’, you guys.
Cleo said on 03.07.11 at 06:23 AM • [link]
To add to the What is Paranormal Romance? discussion - here’s a good iRoSF article from a few years ago on the history of the genre - http://www.irosf.com/q/zine/article/10337
Rosa said on 03.07.11 at 06:38 AM • [link]
I like bisexual romance but I’ve only ever found 3 marketed as “romance” - Butterfly Tattoo & Ann Herendeen’s two. I love lesbian romances too but I guess I think of them as different than genre romance (maybe because they come from different publishers/bookstores and seem to mostly be in trade paperback size?)
I used to love medievals, Revolutionary War stories, and time travel, but I feel like I haven’t seen a new one in a decade!
And, SheaLuna, name me some postapocalyptic romance names! I would SO read those! I love postapocalyptic novels.
(higher28 - it’s higher than 26!)
Virginia E said on 03.07.11 at 11:26 AM • [link]
Another catagory missed was multi-cultural, which seem to be romances aimed almost exclusively at African-American readers. I’ve seen about 4 aimed at Hispanics in the last twenty years and none at Asian Americans. I’ve read some, but I’ve given up on them. The ones I read had a lot of angst in their romance and you were lucky if you got a happy for now. Apparently HEA’s aren’t allowed.
Even if I don’t get a personal HEA, I want to have hope. That’s why I gave up on Multi-Culturals, Chick Lit, and Women’s Fiction.
Juliana said on 03.07.11 at 05:46 PM • [link]
Interesting discussions on genre definitions! In the end, I think I agree that they shift hellavalot often, and are just as often arbitrary, so, I, uh, picked both just to be safe. :-P
Rebekah Weatherspoon said on 03.07.11 at 06:04 PM • [link]
@Virgina E I would check out Beverly Jenkins. She writes wonderful multi-cultural/ African American romance with HEAs. For Hispanic romance I would try Lynda Sandoval.
maybeimamazed02 said on 03.07.11 at 08:28 PM • [link]
A good F/F YA is Keeping You a Secret, by Julie Anne Peters. I don’t know if I’d categorize it as romance, but it’s definitely interesting and well-written. Peters does a lot of LGBT-themed YA.
Second the recommendation for Annie on My Mind. I read that in college and revisit it every once in a while.
Can anyone recommend some good contemporary erotica? I’ve discovered Lauren Dane and I absolutely love her. Tried Megan Hart and found her just okay.
states69: hee hee!
henofthewoods said on 03.07.11 at 08:48 PM • [link]
Mysteries can be romances without being Romantic Suspense.
There was a time when romances featured a lot of questionable behavior. There were some wonderful mysteries being written at the same time that had strong women who meet decent men and fall in love; no kidnapping, no rape, no forced marriage set-up that is so far fetched you can’t finish the book. (And I love a good arranged marriage set-up.)
Charlotte MacLeod had three series (one as Alisa Craig) that I loved for the relationships between the H/H. (The last of the series become absurd instead of fun, but her first 4 or 5 in each series are really great.)
Orania Papazoglou’s mysteries about romance writers work as romances.
I am blanking on other favorites, and a lot of the books faded into obscurity, but they are as much romances as Urban Fantasy.
This is different from Romantic Suspense, which seems to imply a serial killer and at least one shoot-out.
AgTigress said on 03.07.11 at 09:53 PM • [link]
I would say that that is quite a narrow view of ‘Romantic Suspense’, though as I think we have all agreed, defining these genres is not an exact science, and there are probably nearly as many definitions as there are readers!
I would not regard murder (let alone a serial killer) or a shoot-out as essential elements of romantic suspense. I should say that there has to be a mystery, some form of perceived danger, and fear and uncertainty on the part of the hero / heroine. Those elements create the suspense. Justified fear of being attacked can be as effective, when well-written, as an actual attack, especially if the reasons for it, and when it might strike, are not properly understood.
:-)
henofthewoods said on 03.08.11 at 01:43 AM • [link]
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Romantic Suspense doesn’t always have a mystery, it is separate. The characters may be racing against time, or trying to block an action.
I was kidding about the need for a serial killer - it just seems that there are an awful lot of them in fiction, enough to depopulate a small city. There are almost as many serial killers as there are vampires. When I get annoyed with a series - like Patricia Cornwell’s Kay Scarpetta or Kay Hooper’s Bishop/Special Crimes Unit - it seems like the total number of deaths by serial killers is climbing past the number of deaths by auto accident.
AgTigress said on 03.08.11 at 02:03 AM • [link]
Thinking about it, henofthewoods, you’re quite right. The thing that matters is the tension, and that tends to include a lot of uncertainties, but ‘mystery’ in the classic sense is not essential.
Hey, if we all work at this, we might build up a full (albeit temporary and provisional) typology of sub-genres. It will have about a dozen classes, each of which will have around 5-6 sub-classes, most of which in turn will have a few sub-sub-classes…
Or why don’t we just forget it?
:-D
Carrie said on 03.09.11 at 02:41 AM • [link]
I added steampunk to the list because it differs from sci-fi romance, which is often futuristic and/or focused in space. Steampunk is alternative history, usually Victorian and involving steam operated gadgetry beyond the scope of the actual time period. It isn’t always Victorian, although that’s the most common. It doesn’t fit the usual fantasy tag because the phrase “fantasy” too often conjures up elves and ogres.
I was frustrated this year when there wasn’t a category on the AAR pole for sci-fi romance, much less steampunk romance. Where to put excellent books like Linnea Sinclair’s Rebels and Lovers or Meljean Brooks’ The Iron Duke? Putting them in the PNR group doesn’t work. The closest category was romantic suspense, but then I couldn’t have put The Naked Edge by Pamela Clare where it belonged!
MaryK said on 03.10.11 at 03:14 AM • [link]
I just submitted my form and then immediately realized I should’ve added something. I don’t generally read Contemporary unless it’s a favorite author or highly recommended - it’s not one of my go to genres. BUT ... I do read a significant number of Category Romances from the “modern fantasy” lines like HP. In my mind, there’s a definite distinction hence the non checking of the Contemporary option.
To me, the main distinction between Paranormal Romance, Urban Fantasy, and the like is the Romance aspect. It’s not PR because it has a vampire. It’s PR because it’s Romance with a vampire. I.e., Dead End Dating is not PR because it’s not a Romance novel; it’s Chick-Lit, UF, whatever but it’s not Romance because it doesn’t have an HEA. When I made my selections on the form, I assumed that they were subgenres of Romance, “UF Romance” as opposed to the free standing UF genre.
Virginia Llorca said on 03.10.11 at 04:45 AM • [link]
Geez. Enough already. No one can be that elitist. Splitting hairs. Putting too fine a point on each and everyone of the splits. Beating the horse until its dead and then beating it some more.
roserita said on 04.06.11 at 11:20 PM • [link]
This discussion reminds me of the ones that go on in taxonomy. There you have “lumpers” and “splitters.” Sarah tried to make some nice simple “lump” categories, and all of the splitters jumped in, on account of, geez, there’s a difference between historicals and Regencies, and paranormal romance and urban fantasy, and even weres and shifters. For me, as a congenital splitter, urban fantasy is what happens when you cross hard-boiled mysteries with fantasy. You have your first person narrator/hero/antihero, your mean streets, your world-weary cynical tone, the world going to hell, etc. I also like paranormal mysteries, like Madelyn Alt and Victoria Laurie, but I consider Diana Rowland’s books to paranormal police procedural…
By now, I think Sarah is sorry she asked.
My capcha word is wanted53: yes I wanted 53 or less sub-categories for my fiction, but guess what? Ain’t gonna happen.
Care to comment?
Comments are now closed for this post.
Subscribe to These Comments