It’s time once again for a round up of romance in the news, brought to you by Google:News and by my typing in the word “romance” in the search box.
Usually I come up with a few celebrity romance articles (Zach Braff broke up with Mandy Moore, allegedly) and some random small-town paper articles about new romance author book signings . This time: I got cutlery!
There’s a new exhibit at the Cooper-Hewitt, which is one of the best museums in NYC, especially for children who are too old for kids museums but a bit too bored by the vastness that is the Met or the MOMA, because usually there’s an exhibit of something really cool and based in current popular culture. One time I went: the art of the fragrance. Cool! Smelly stuff! Demeter fragrances that smell like dirt and tomato! Other times there’s been three dimensional displays of cars, motors – and one time a collection of advertisements and the design history that went into their creation. Either way, wicked cool.
So now? The Romance of the Place Setting. The history of the fork, knife, and spoon, and how cutlery was to the 17th century woman what your shoes and handbag are today – a symbol of style and status.
Not sure what it has to do with romance, but there you go. Romance! Forks! And Spoons!
And in other Romance Google News, the Daily Times of Pakistan reports that US Senators write books! Why didn’t I know that Barbara Boxer wrote a “steamy political romance?” Anyone out there read A Time to Run? Ah! I see from Amazon’s listing that she wrote it “with Mary-Rose Hayes.”
Moving on, we have a very tepid round up of summer movies, one of which, a romance titled The Lake House, stars Sandra Bullock and Keanu Reeves as two people simultaneously living in the same lake house—exactly two years apart. There’s a billboard for this movie over the Lincoln Tunnel – I’m betting this will be a big summer date movie, but I can’t tell if it’s going to be a quality romance. I will keep looking for spoilers.
And in a rather curious column, Tom Purcell at MensNewsDaily.com writes that, judging by the lyrics of hit songs on the radio when compared with the lyrical schmaltz of Dean Martin, romance is dead. Course references to sexuality, “fear, anger, and cynicism” are more prevalent in today’s music, prompting Purcell to ring the sweet notes of the death triangle with his mourning of the innocent romance of Dean Martin’s lyrics.
Sexuality means romance is dead? Ellora’s Cave might have something to say about that.
So might Christina Aguilera, whose new song, an ode to the man she luuuurves®, includes the following:
“You’ve got soul, you’ve got class
You’ve got style, you’re badass.”
*le sigh* Now that, Mr. Martin, is romance.
The Buffalo News published a touching column about one woman’s ability to recognize her husband’s love and devotion in the small gestures of each day, from blackberries for her cereal to a flower when he’s done mowing the lawn. *le sigh, part deux*
We also have an article on the history of romance… from Maryland’s Carroll County Times.
Dr. Pam Regis, author of 2003’s A Natural History of the Romance Novel says that we should ”[r]ead your romance proudly. Don’t apologize for it, because you don’t need to.”
No kidding!
Why they’re profiling a professor whose book was published in 2003, I’m not sure, unless it’s due to the “summer beach reading” reference in the title. Sad that the article’s author had to rehash the same old stale “criticisms” of romance novels without citing any specific critics themselves. I would think we were past these old stereotypes, but perhaps not.
And finally, a story to make you writers out there wish you had a great on-screen wardrobe and a hit show. Eva Longoria, the 31-year-old star of Desperate Housewivesis penning a romance novel. Says Longoria, “They offered a huge deal and I like the idea of seeing my book on a shelf. The plot’s top secret so far but let’s just say I have a wild imagination.”
That might have to be a Smart Bitch contest of the future – who can write a worse chapter than Eva Longoria? Winner gets a copy of her novel.
*giggle* That Christina Aguilera song is the death-knell of something. Taste, perhaps. It truly is as awful as the lyrics.
“How many days will it take to land?
And how many ways to reach abandon?”
—Interpol
Romance lives in music, still – it’s just hiding behind a few guitar riffs.
The Longoria story chaps me because it’s the old “Writing a romance is easy” bull. With all the books out there, coming up with unique ideas and lifelike characters ain’t easy. It might make acting in a sex parade look a helluva lot easier.
Man, I hate that. “I’ll just write a book”. *Snorts*. If it were that easy, we’d all be published.
If they’d checked out the good music instead of the Top 40 Mechanically Separated Music ‘O The Day, they might have found great romantic lyrics. And why is Dean Martin some sort of romantic because he sang someone else’s silly lyrics about pizza in the face? I’m sorry, that Amore song doesn’t make me feel the love, it makes me laugh. NOT romantic.
And the Eve Longoria article makes me want to commit Seppuku. Honestly, can they cheapen the genre just a little more? Fabio was bad enough (although those books are hilarious—I love them like I love “Showgirls”; so bad they’re good. 🙂
Did she actually talk to someone about this book deal? Or did someone go, Hey! You know who probably has great talent as a writer? Eva Longoria!
Eva Longoria got into trouble recently when she said that her sexy French boyfriend didn’t know anything about sex and that she’s needed to teach him everything. Then she backtracked and said, “no, he’s great in bed and he’s taught me everything he knows.”
I can’t wait to read her book. Silly blabbermouth cunt.
Sounds like someone said, “You know who should write a romance novel with lots of sex? Gabrielle. But she’s not real. So let’s ask that actress chick who plays her.”
Honestly, can they cheapen the genre just a little more?
I apologize in advance for the way this is going to sound, but I really think the Romance community itself (can we even use that term, with the way things have been going?) has been doing a pretty good undermining job ourselves lately. All the verbal mud wrestling has made me hope that publishers really aren’t reading around the Internet these days.
Mud wrestling? Where’d I miss that? In the past few weeks over here we’ve been talking about venti sized books, the merits thereof, and selling eBook epilogues. Unless you’re talking about another site…. How are we undermining ourselves?
Are you sure the word winner shouldn’t appear in quotation marks? “Winner” gets a copy of her novel. [insert “I’m kidding!” emoticon of your choosing here]
Mud wrestling? Where’d I miss that? In the past few weeks over here we’ve been talking about venti sized books, the merits thereof, and selling eBook epilogues. Unless you’re talking about another site…. How are we undermining ourselves?
I’m not talking about one particular site or person or topic; I’m not even talking about the majority of e-conversations about Romance. It’s just that as I’ve traveled around the Internet for the past few months or so, I’ve noticed what seems to be a good deal of ill will between readers and between authors and readers, and some of it has been expressed in some pretty ugly, even personal, terms. I understand how someone might be so incensed by the comments of an author, for example, that they might think, ‘what a fucktard,’ or ‘what a cunt,’ and that speaking that out loud can rally others who are similarly frustrated. But it seems also to be kind of ironic, and not in such a good way. I’m not referring to anyone or any comments in particular, and god knows we all have our bad days and our slips of the tongue. And yes, sometimes the rants can be very entertaining and even cleansing to read. But I think that the line between a clever cut and a low blow is sometimes too narrow to discern. And unless the actual goal of some of this stuff is simply to humiliate and debase, I’m not sure it’s accomplishing what people might think or hope. That’s all.
Let me also add that I’m not referring to any particular kind or form of language—as someone very fond of profanity, I am not in any way put off by tough or forceful or cleverly cutting language. IMO it takes a really subtle intellect to be effectively cutting and not just plain insulting, and while I don’t have that kind of subtlety, a lot of people who post here do, IMO. And, of course, all of this is just my opinion, and likely informed by work-related exhaustion, much of which has come from trying to mediate disputes between entities that don’t themselves recognize the unfortunate irony in hatefully disclaiming the alleged hateful speech of other entities. I’m sorry for venting, actually.
As a foul-mouth ranter of the first order, I can say that most romance rants are holding authors to a higher standard.
When a book degenerates into cliches that we try desperately to live down already, it’s the job of readers and fellow authors to say something.
Oh Hell, every profession gets snarky. I hope publishers are reading the blogs. It means (IMHO) that they’re paying attention to what’s out there.
Yeah, we do some bashing—Erotic vs. Contemporary, Inspiration vs. Erotica, Harlequin vs. Avon yadayadayada.
Romance is big business. It’s also a big target.
But, really, the rest of the world believes writing a book means write 300 pages, send it to an editor and POOF! You’re an author. What a laugh.
What pisses me off is the sheep following the herd. Do we have to read what Oprah says is great?
Romance readers aren’t like that at all. They LOVE them. They’re author loyal. They’re risking ridicule and harassment from peers and family to read these novels. Can’t we at least give them entertainment? And if we don’t, do we expect them to shut up?
Wow, sorry. Major rant.
Does anyone honestly think Longoria is going to write the book herself? Please.
As a foul-mouth ranter of the first order, I can say that most romance rants are holding authors to a higher standard.
When a book degenerates into cliches that we try desperately to live down already, it’s the job of readers and fellow authors to say something.
I so totally agree with you! And I’m not talking about snark, really I’m not; I enjoy passionate, clever, and intelligent rants (shit—Lewis Black is, IMO, the funniest man on earth, and definitely one of the smartest). All I’m saying is this: IMO there’s a real difference in effect between saying “Author A is an asswipe who can’t distinguish a plot from a hole in her head” and saying “Author A should be crushed under a giant heap of mantitty for writing such a cliche-ridden, insulting, and porly written excuse for a Romance novel.” Now I don’t have the gift of snark, so the second statement isn’t delivered with much power, but IMO a clever version of that sentiment is actually a much more effective way of holding to those higher standards than the first statement. I think it’s just harder to get traction while you’re hip deep in mud.
Ohhhh I could probably write a worse chapter. Having floated aimlessly in the bowels of online fanfiction archives I’ve got masses of crap up my sleeves.
Of course, I’d have to keep telling myself that it’s a parody kind of writing.
Problem is, Longoria’s probably taking her “work” seriously.
Just saw a trailer for The Lake House. . .looks to be two hours of letter writing where the two leads never meet. In other words, booorrrring. . .poor Sandra B., another bomb.
Just saw a trailer for The Lake House. . .looks to be two hours of letter writing where the two leads never meet. In other words, booorrrring. . .poor Sandra B., another bomb.
My first thought was that it was a sort of take-off on the Time Traveller’s Wife, since there are two years separating the two lead characters. I don’t know if The Niffenegger book is actually in production for film yet, but when it was purchased, I thought, oh, boy, here come all the time travel romances now.
“I apologize in advance for the way this is going to sound, but I really think the Romance community itself (can we even use that term, with the way things have been going?) has been doing a pretty good undermining job ourselves lately. All the verbal mud wrestling has made me hope that publishers really aren’t reading around the Internet these days.”
I don’t think you got my meaning—and perhaps I wrote that poorly. What have our online debates about whether erotica is porn or not got to do with the quality of the writing? Fans of other genres get into far sillier debates (we won’t go into what I read on a Lovecraft fansite once,) yet people there don’t get book deals based on being famous on telly. Or for being famous for mantitty. What famous movie star has ever gotten a book deal to write horror? Or a Western?
Yet Romance is considered such a throw-away genre that anyone can write one! Anyone on earth! *palmface* Honestly, do they think this will make anyone out there think that actual, real-life, honest to Goddess romance writers who have talent know what they’re doing? I mean, if someone with perma-buoyant tits can do it simply because she’s a ‘ho on t.v., ANYONE can. So why should they think, say, Kinsale, or any other of the fine authors any of us have read, have actual talent?
It’s not our (sometimes intelligent, sometimes not, but I’ve never sworn at anyone here in Cthulu) debates that cheapen the genre, it’s the stupid publicity stunts that the publishers put on that does.
Two things (and by the way, hi—-love reading this site): The Lake House is the Hollywood adaptation of a Korean film called Il Mare, which is a lovely film involving improbable time-travel loops and poetic voiceovers and some of the funniest subtitles you will ever encounter. I think some of the rough-hewn charm will be lost in this version, though from the reviews I’ve read (Ebert and New York Times) it may be better than I thought. And: Eva Longoria, oh my god. It’s enough that I have to compete with early-twenties trust fund kids for my job; and it’s celebrities for the romance marketplace? When you’re rocking that romance chapter contest, let me know.
Eva Longoria as a romance scratch that… Eva Longoria as a writer? Otay show of hands, who is Desperately tired of everyone jumping on the Desperate Housewives band wagon? For real, this is how that conversation/phone call went…
Eva: Quick! Terri just dropped the Abuse bomb and is “writing” a book about it… she’s about to eat up all of my press time what should I do?
Agent: Uh, could your boyfriend have an orgy with three 18 years olds and leak the camera/phone pictures onto the web.
Eva: No no! That’s so January. I need something that shows I’m just as good as that Hatcher bitch but with out all the sticky emotion goo.
Agent: Weeeel, what about writing a book too? Worked out ok for Pam Anderson.
Eva: What about? After the camera stop rolling they just put me in the closet to recharge, it’s not like I do anything else.
Agent:Well your character on the show is a total slut, you could write a book about that. It could be a romance even.
Eva: Oh yeah! Those stupid housewives would eat that sh*t out of the palm of my hand.
Agent: Yeah! it’s not like they would know any different. Everyone knows that romance readers are just a bunch of trashy housemoms who waddle around in mumus chain smoking Parliments.
Eva: Excellent idea BooBoo! Oh! I gotta dash honey my, stylist is here to do my hair and makeup so I can do one of those “Eva shopping at WholeFoods market” things for the “Celebs are just like us” pages in people. God bless the paparazzi huh?!
Agent: Sure thing sugar! Make sure to “buy” lots of potato chips and toilet paper. It will make people believe that you actually eat food.
Eva: (snort) Oh you crack me up BooBoo!
Bitter, me? never!
waaaay to much coffee though…
I think Miri must be our winner! Eva’s book will probably be written that quickly, too.
It’s not our (sometimes intelligent, sometimes not, but I’ve never sworn at anyone here in Cthulu) debates that cheapen the genre, it’s the stupid publicity stunts that the publishers put on that does.
I’m not sure there’s anyone who loves debate more than I do; heck, I even like debate for the *sake* of debate sometimes. The gratitude I feel for a lot of these debates is boundless, because I was told not too long ago that most Romance readers didn’t really care about all these different issues (and some don’t—which is fine). And I agree with your point about tasteless marketing and its cheapening effect on the genre.
I wasn’t using your comment to dispute the your point, Kaite, and I’m sorry it seemed that way. I was just trying to make the point that I don’t think Romance’s own community house is all that clean, either (and again, I’m not referring to your point). FWIW, I think there’s a HUGE (well, huge may not even be a big enough word) difference between debate and name-calling. People have a right to do it and I’ll defend that right to the end, but I think it’s costly, both to alliances that might be formed among readers and among readers and authors, and to some of the larger and more important points people are making. At a very basic level, individual readers are also the voices of the genre, and voices carry and echo, especially through cyberspace.
Two things (and by the way, hi—-love reading this site): The Lake House is the Hollywood adaptation of a Korean film called Il Mare, which is a lovely film involving improbable time-travel loops and poetic voiceovers and some of the funniest subtitles you will ever encounter.
Cool, cool, cool—thanks for that info! I’m going to hunt the original down, now.
And to Miri: Rock on!
Mira, *snort*, you had me laughing so hard that I almost peed my pants. What a dialog!
Candy and Sarah, PLEASE review that book when it comes out. PRETTY PLEASE????
While I’d love to read the Bitches snark Eva’s art, don’t pay money for it! You’ll only encourage them!
“At a very basic level, individual readers are also the voices of the genre, and voices carry and echo, especially through cyberspace.”
Sorry I misread the other post, I’m having Work Related Brain Farts. :bug: But what makes you think other genre’s fans are any less prone to being whiny name-callers? Speaking of swearing in Cthulu, some of the crap that goes on in sci-fi/fantasy readersites and writersites is twice as snarky as anything that happens on the RWA site, yet no one thinks less of fantasy for it (well, there’s a perception that they’re geeks, but Geeks With Money, not to mention Guy Geeks With Money, which makes their literature inherently superior to romance novels written for-ha!-desperate housewives.)
I guess I just don’t see how reader and writer snarkage on sites that people who aren’t readers or writers generally don’t see can possibly hurt the genre’s image with the “Outside World” nearly as much as a press release that’s announcing that romance novels are so worthless that any Jane Blog with a pen and third grade education can write one, and if she’s famous, people will read it because that’s probably the best that genre can produce. If I weren’t a romance reader, I wouldn’t be on any romance reader/writer sites, so I wouldn’t see our debates. But I would see that article and laugh out loud. Reader snarkage is only preaching to the choir, whereas this announcement is going through the loudspeakers and outside into the street.
Sorry for the run-on, see the first paragraph….
But what makes you think other genre’s fans are any less prone to being whiny name-callers? Speaking of swearing in Cthulu, some of the crap that goes on in sci-fi/fantasy readersites and writersites is twice as snarky as anything that happens on the RWA site, yet no one thinks less of fantasy for it (well, there’s a perception that they’re geeks, but Geeks With Money, not to mention Guy Geeks With Money, which makes their literature inherently superior to romance novels written for-ha!-desperate housewives.)
Oh, I have no doubt that other genres embody some of the same stuff and I’ve heard a couple of toe curling tales about sci-fi, as well. Is it fair that Romance is judged differently than fantasy or sci fi? NO WAY. And for those Romance readers and authors who don’t give a crap about how the genre is perceived by ANYONE, it doesn’t matter at all what goes on anywhere with anyone at anytime. Unfortunately, though, for those readers who do care, and who are interested in upgrading Romance’s public image (and I don’t think, by the way, that this is in any way mandatory or even superior as a position), I think the burden is higher. It’s not fair and it’s a drag, but I think it’s the reality. Like I said, I think that profanity ridden clever snark can be a wonderful, wonderful thing (witness the success Sarah and Candy have accomplished here!). I really am talking just about the below the belt stuff. Over the past six months or so, it seems to have increased for some reason.
There’s a debate right now on AAR regarding Romance and literary fiction that’s pretty interesting. One of the points raised is related to the lack of mainstream reviews for Romance, i.e. we need more of them to give credibility to the genre. But IMO, we can’t just expect the NYT to thoughtfully and seriously review the genre when the very legitimacy of a critical review is under fire *within* the genre itself. If a substantial portion of the Romance community is resistant to thorough and thoughtful reviews, what kind of message does that send to those pubs we might wish took the genre more seriously?
Zach Braff broke up with Mandy Moore, allegedly
Well, hell – I thought Mandy was still going out with Andy Roddick. How many boyfriends ago was that, I wonder? Yeesh, kids these days and their rotate-a-boy/girlfriend wheels.