This guest review is from Sam, who is a longtime romance and SBTB reader.
…
I’ve read so many of Sarah Morgan’s books, all the way back to when she wrote Harlequin Presents. I don’t like billionaires or captains of industry, but if Morgan wrote them, I was all in. I liked the Harlequins and I liked the longer books she wrote, too.
Unfortunately for me, Morgan is now writing women’s fiction. And women’s fiction isn’t my genre, despite the similarities to romance. But I wanted to try because it’s a Sarah Morgan book. So I read this in an afternoon. I ended up skimming the last third of it because the characters were not that exciting, and because I wanted to know what happened in the end. But when I got there, I was mad about it. The ending requires me to forgive characters I have no interest in forgiving, and glosses over events that I think are too traumatic and too painful.
Grace is a woman in her 40s in Connecticut who is a careful planner and organizer of her day and her life, with to-do lists and advanced planning. One example: she buys and wraps up a present for her husband’s boss so he doesn’t have to shop for it or deal with it, and often pre-buys her own gifts from said husband, too. Several times she alludes to a chaotic or difficult childhood, but the particulars aren’t revealed until about two thirds into the book. Her childhood led to her organizational devotion.
On her 25th wedding anniversary, she plans a dinner surprise for her husband: she’s arranged a month off for him, and they’re going to Paris for that month. He knew nothing of this plan, and instead tells her – at the anniversary dinner – that he’s been having an affair with their former babysitter and wants out of their marriage. Why was he having an affair? Because Grace doesn’t need him. Because she’s so organized.
Grace is understandably devastated, and faces a lot of humiliation in her small town where everyone knows her business. She decides to take the trip to Paris on her own – after her husband offers to pay her for the tickets and reservations so he can take his girlfriend to Paris instead. He is terrible.
Meanwhile, Audrey, the other main character, is in London about to graduate. Her home life is also terrible. Her mother is an alcoholic who cycles between smothering affection and abuse towards Audrey. When her mother gets married, she feels like she is free, so Audrey heads to Paris to escape her life in London, which she hates.
When Grace arrives in Paris, she’s mugged, and Audrey tackles the mugger and brings back Grace’s purse. After that, they connect in starts and stops, Grace trying to fix some things for Audrey, and Audrey being prickly and pushing Grace away because she’s used to being alone and doesn’t trust anyone who is kind.
Everything in this story falls easily into place for both of them. Audrey lied about her ability to speak French when she got a job at a bookstore that comes with an apartment. She’s fired, but Grace speaks French and volunteers to work in the store with Audrey. Audrey gets her job back. Grace volunteers to work there because she doesn’t have anything else to do. Grace loves the idea of working/volunteering in a bookstore, and is trying to get away from being the really organized, careful person she was. That’s who her husband left, and she’s convincing herself that she’s partially responsible for his decisions.
She’s not, and her story makes me so mad. Instead of talking about his problems, her husband cheats. Instead of explaining to Grace that he doesn’t like some of the things she does to manage his life for him, he keeps quiet and bangs the babysitter, who is in her 20s and looks up to him (eyyew). Instead of seeking counseling, he tells her on their anniversary in a restaurant full of people that he wants to leave her. Instead of owning how awful he is, he tries to make Grace see that it’s partially her fault that he was unhappy. He’s the “both sides” of cheating husbands. And then he has to try to win her back. I really, really hated him.
I was also frustrated by the lack of counseling or mental health resources in this story. The characters are dealing with really difficult issues and a lot of traumatic things: alcoholism, assault, abuse, deceit, betrayal, addiction, death, loss, and that’s just off the top of my head. But Grace and Audrey have to fix themselves.
And in order for the story to reach what seems like a happy ending, they have to forgive characters who make what I think is a very small amount of effort to fix themselves. Grace and Audrey have to retcon their own relationships for the ending to happen, and it was too impossible and too unsatisfying.
In order to accept the ending, I have to revise my opinion of those characters as well and I wasn’t willing to do that. The people who wronged Grace and Audrey don’t do enough to demonstrate that they’ve changed. They don’t fully own up what they did and how they harmed Grace and Audrey. But the message of the book is, because they really do love Grace and Audrey, they should be forgiven.
And Grace and Audrey receive zero counseling or help with the series of extreme traumas in their lives. That part was disappointing, too, because their friendship is the best part of the novel. They inspire one another and learn from each other. They confide in each other. But they work things out by themselves. The ending requires so much from them, so much compromise, that I was frustrated and disappointed by it, and wouldn’t call it “happy.”
This book is available from:
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
We also may use affiliate links in our posts, as well.
Thanks!
This is probably a stupid question, but what’s “women’s fiction” and how does it differ from romance? If this novel is an example, it sounds like some of the 60s-70s “gothics”, which were mainly intended to deliver the message that women should stick with the status quo.
And thanks for a good review of a book I will carefully avoid.
May I second that question? I am very interested in the labels we put on things (and on ourselves :-)) and I would like to hear about ‘women’s fiction’ and how it is distinguished from any other genre/sub-genre.
And then he has to try to win her back.
Ooh, I’ve been here! “Turns out I don’t know how to run my life and neither does the girlfriend half my age, so can you please go back to mothering me? How about mothering *us* because polyam situations are trendy now and it would be so great for me to have a mom AND a fuck bunny?” I’m not saying poison him, but I’m not not saying it…
@Msb: In a romance novel, the romance is central to the plot—if you took it out, it would gut the story. A happily ever after/happy for now ending with the romantic couple/group together is a genre requirement.
Women’s fiction focuses on women dealing with their lives, not necessarily involving any romance at all, and it’s acceptable if everybody dies at the end or otherwise ends up miserably, though there’s usually a positive spin (however forced it may be).
Yes, I sort of mentally think of it as romance being the journey of the two (or more) main characters together as their relationship grows into a HFN or HEA, and women’s fiction as being the journey of the heroine, full stop, which might involve a romantic sub-plot but not necessarily a pivotally important one to the story. I would say they generally have a happy ending for the heroine (?), but that often has nothing to do with romance, it’s about personal growth and goals.
Where does “chick-lit” (God, these terms are awful) fall on the scale from women’s fiction to romance?
Another book where the main characters have to do all the emotional heavy lifting for everyone else in their lives? Ugh.
@Laura: Back in the day, there was a genre referred to by those in the know as “S&F” (aka, “shopping and fucking”). The heroines would spend half the book on Rodeo Drive or Saks Fifth Avenue, buying designer clothes and shoes (which were described in glorious detail), and the other half having sex with patently inappropriate men (married, the chauffeur, etc.), until THE MAN arrived to show the little lady how it was done (it=everything). There might be some marginal emotional growth and sometimes even an unhappy ending (THE MAN wasn’t all he was cracked up to be). I tend to think of Chick Lit as the somewhat more evolved successor to those S&F books (although that may be revealing more about me and my literary prejudices than anything about the books themselves).
First Kristan Higgins, now Sarah Morgan! All my faves are switching to women’s fiction, which is really not to my taste.
So it sounds like she forgives and (good help me) gets back together with the husband?! Because if that’s what happens that’s bullshit.
@DiscoDollyDeb That’s fascinating. Would you be able to give an example of the genre? Normally I’d just Google, but I’m not confident those search terms will yield the desired results.;^_^
/Raises hand for women’s fic question/
It follows the personal growth arc of a main female character or group of women. It may have romantic elements but that’s not the focus.
One reason I know the distinction is that I ghostwrite romance and have had multiple clients insist on my rewriting an outline because ‘there’s too much personal growth, not enough explicit sex to be a romance’ /headdesk/
@Momo: I’d say anything published in the 1970s by Jackie Collins, Judith Krantz, even some of Danielle Steele’s earlier books or Jacqueline Susann’s work after VALLEY OF THE DOLLS. I did just discover something—there’s actually a play from the 1990s called “Shopping and Fucking”—written by a man and supposedly a “brutal satire,” but we were using that term at least a decade before that.
Momo (@10) ‘Bridget Jones’ Diary’ is chick-lit, Sophie Kinsella’s ‘Shopaholic’ books–usually chick-lit. At least in my view-finder, anyway.
Rachel Gibson is also switching to women’s fiction. Jil Shalvis and Robyn Carr are writing both. It seems to me that those that wrote the best romantic comedy are making a move out of romance. Kristan Higgans last few books left me cold, but got great buzz.
I think part of the switch for many authors is the lack of respect the romance genre gets. Women’s fiction because of the lack of a guaranteed HEA has more chance of getting a positive nod from a critic and on a best summer reads list from People or USA Today.
Thanks for taking one for the team Sam. I suspect that I would have lit this book on fire in rage before throwing. If this is what HQN women’s fiction is becoming, they can keep it!
I yearn for women’s stories that don’t solely focus on romance, I avoid women’s fiction because the covers make it seem as though it’s not about women I relate to. They are in pink collar jobs, live in the suburbs, are not that confident and are sad for some reason. (Bad Hubble, sick/missing kid, mean mom, unsure of life goals, whatever). Traditional feminine middle class. And that’s just not a fun fantasy for me. If these books were about women in science, women in cool businesses, women starting nonprofits, women running for political office… women being as cool and confident and competent as the women I know are, then I’d read them. I don’t trust they are as feminist as that.
I’m curious about the explanation of Gothic romance about maintaining the status quo — I had always thought the defining traits of Gothic romance were a mystery or supernatural elements, a strong sense of place (an old castle, desolate seascape), a young heroine, always the heroine’s POV, and the idea that she is going to “save” or redeem a dark brooding hero with a tormented past. Anybody?
@Lora Give me a romance with more personal growth any day. I hate reading a book where it’s obvious the sex scenes are there to hide the fact that there is no actual story.
I was enraged by this book. I detested the husband and could not believe how easily the heroine forgave him and ended up feeling like she was partially to blame for his cheating. I’m glad I’m not the only one who felt this way. I liked Sarah Morgan’s books when she was writing for HQ Presents even though they were angsty and over the top. I couldn’t get into her books when she moved out of that line and this book has killed any interest I have of trying further.
OK, the husband is terrible, but who the hell secretly arranges for their spouse to have a month off work and take a long overseas trip? I would not do that to anybody, and I wouldn’t want anyone springing it on me.
I think of women’s fiction as more about the heroine, or a group of women, getting through the conflicts in their lives through their own fortitude and/or with the help of friends and family. Mary Alice Monroe is one of my favorite “women’s fiction” writers as there is a little romance, but the story is all about making it to the other side. The Beach House is one of my favorites. The main characters are often seasoned where in “chick lit,” they are younger and less sure of themselves. And, yes, the husbands/sons/brothers are often rat-bastards.
It seems like so many of the romance writers who try to make the transition to women’s fiction disappoint and I am saddened Sarah Morgan has joined those ranks. The only books where the writer was transitioning to women’s fiction I remember completing and enjoying was Susan Mallery’s “Blackberry Island” series which I think was her first. Three Sisters was particularly good and stayed with me for a long time.
@ DiscoDollyDeb – My mother was a big fan of those S&F books! She would lend them to me and expect a book report when they were returned. LOL
Yes, yes I agree with everything said. Husband’s an ass, used to like Sarah Morgan, yadda yadda.
What I really want to know:
@Lora, I am intrigued that you ghostwrite Romance! I (naively, it appears) assumed that most ghost writing is with celebrity books, genre series (I realize there is no Carolyn Keene) or writers that churn them out great amount with a certain brand (although I’m pretty sure Stephen King and Nora Roberts write their own stuff).
Do you write from the ground up or are you fixing up already written materials? Do you submit an outline or do they give you one? Does the “author” review or change your work? Do you have regular “authors” you work with? Is there much of a collaboration?
Of course, I want all sort of juicy details that you can’t share. I am sorry you can’t put your name of something you’ve written.
Many thanks to all for answering my question. Though if “women’s fiction” is about women’s lives, I don’t see why it’s not just called fiction – unless it’s designed for, marketed to or read by women only? I read a lot of books about the lives of men, and they’re not called “men’s fiction”, as far as I know. The term sounds like another ghetto for women’s work. After all, novels were originally disdained because women wrote them. See Jane Austen’s riff on “the novel” in Northanger abbey.
@ Carol
I was heavily influenced by Joanna Russ’ essay, “Someone’s trying to kill me and I think it’s my husband”, which basically argues that mid-20th century romantic suspense/gothic novels both valorized and glamorized women’s traditional social roles: innocence/inexperience, subservience to the hero, dressing well, entertaining, and doing all the emotional work for everybody. She points out that the various female victims/villains are often rebellious and sexually active. Later writers in the same genre, like my favorite, Barbara Michaels/Elizabeth Peters, first subverted and then redefined it in feminist terms. I’m the kind of person who reads copyright pages, and couldn’t help but notice how, the more books Michaels wrote, the more she pushed against the standard tropes and practices.
@LMC & Lora: There’s a writer whose romances I’ve read and enjoyed. She publishes under two (very similar) names and, including books she’s co-written with other romance writers, she is the author of at least 25 books by my unscientific count. I was looking at her author biography the other day and it stated that she published her first book in early 2016. She’s published an average of eight books a year for the past three years. Does that seem plausible? I immediately thought that she’s either using ghostwriters or she’s a construct like “Carolyn Keene” (which might account for the variance in tone in her books). Her bio also says she’s a busy mother—but no author photo. I try not to be cynical (ha!), but after the CopyPasteCris plagiarism scandal, you can’t help but be a little suspicious of the incredibly prolific.
@LaurelL: Those must have been some book reports!
@Msb I agree with others who note that women’s fiction is primarily about a heroine’s journey to overcome challenges in her own life, but I also think there are typical tropes and character types that make “women’s fiction” something other than just fiction-fiction. For example, I think the main characters tend to be (not always! Just with some regularity) slightly older (mid-30s and above). Often white and middle or upper-middle class. Dealing with divorce, cheating, or widowhood are common problems to be overcome. These are often overcome through sisterhood or friendship with another woman who may differ in age but is also dealing with Problems (often also related to family). Traveling or moving to a new area, often a picturesque, beach, or small town or foreign city, is often involved. HEA not guaranteed, but an uplifting and often ultimately-feel-good-with-a-lot-of-sad-feels-along-the-way is expected.
So I think in general women’s fiction involves some well-worn genre paths, beyond just being written by and about women.
This is of course just my impression of the genre. 🙂
@DiscoDollyDeb Thanks!
I think Kate Hewitt is also writing women’s fiction now. Something non-romance and heart wrenching, anyway.
@ Kim – you’ve described women’s fiction well. There are well-worn paths and they often end up at what most of us would consider a vacation destination.
@ DiscoDollyDeb – She would pick up the book, look at the cover, and quiz me about some small point in the book, like “You’ve been to a Neiman-Marcus, haven’t you?” or “What did you think of that party scene?” to verify I had read the book. My mother would have been a whiz at HaBO with her memory of authors and book details.
I wouldn’t touch Summer in Paris with a ten foot pole, so thanks for taking one for the team, Sam.
Women’s fiction sounds like one of those publisher devised pseudo-genres to me. The only thing I read recently that I consider excellent “women’s fiction” is Victoria Helen Stone’s Jane Doe.