Formulaic writing is bad, full stop. Some genres seem better at self-evaluating than others, though. I noticed this in comparing 'historical romance' (I don't know if I ever sent you the piece I wrote on American War of Independence-set romance fiction for The Loyalist Gazette) with fantasy and sf. I've noticed that in fantasy/sf, some of the good writers will speak out and be critical of poor or stale writing within the genre; in romance, they just circle the wagons and pretend it's all wonderful, and that they're only being criticised because "they're women writing for women". I've never read anything quite so ridiculously puffed-up as the self-justifications some of the writers come out with. I know they're not writing for people like me: my psychological make-up and upbringing run pretty much counter to the mainstream; I don't share the underlying fantasy. But they claim that somehow it's the feminine form of expression, and that women who don't get it have bought into "masculine" notions of literature and criticism... I don't see an aversion to formula, bad writing or stereotyped characters as a gendered issue.
I have no doubt that your comments about romance writers are true. As a reader, I find the genre full of cliches; but that being said, there are also some superb writers who manage to overcome all the pitfalls and produce excellent novels. This is another example of what I'd call honest or dishonest writing. Honest writing stands on its own. Dishonest writing accept formulas.
I don't see an aversion to formula, bad writing or stereotyped characters as a gendered issue.
No, it isn't. And shouldn't be. I don't put the blame entirely on the writers; I got out of the romance genre because of the strict formulas that the publishers demanded. If that was the only way to be published in the genre, I was having none of it. Gravitating to fanfic was a step towards freedom.
As a reader, I find the genre full of cliches; but that being said, there are also some superb writers who manage to overcome all the pitfalls and produce excellent novels. This is another example of what I'd call honest or dishonest writing. Honest writing stands on its own. Dishonest writing accept formulas.
There's an interesting book of essays by romance writers about the genre, ed. by Krentz, Dangerous Men and Adventurous Women. Some of it was interesting, some of it alarming. For me, it's like peering into an alien world: I don't buy into the heterosexual, monogamous underpinnings, and I can't believe that characters who start off hating each other can form lasting relationships anyway. The historical ones... Well, talk about abuse of history and anachronistic characters - modern soap-opera types in fancy dress! The so-called 'Scottish romances' (aka Kilt Porn) are particularly risible to anyone who actually lives here and knows anything about history... And the industry pundits, as you say, encourage this state of affairs!
They don't just encourage it, they mandate it - they necessitate it. No wonder the romance industry, while it may be flourishing economically, is decaying in terms of quality. Building on itself too much, with too narrow margins.
Excepting the few talents who rise above the others, usually by being successful enough to flout the cliches and dictate to their publishers to some extent.
I like the idea of kilt porn but I've never found a book of the type that I enjoyed. Pity.
Yes. That bad. And the authors have such a poor grasp of history, it's unbelievable. I encountered an instance in which 18C characters stayed at an old inn... in Glenrothes, a 'New Town' in Fife which didn't exist until the 1950s. White-slaving from the small Fife port of Crail (which cracked me up entirely). Authors who believe Jacobitism was England-vs-Scotland warfare and that Scotland was "conquered by England". Authors who believe that Hadrian's Wall marked the border in 18C, and that there was still border warfare in Queen Anne's reign. Authors who invent ridiculous non-existent laws to bring their characters together. Authors who have female characters wearing kilts...
And an industry pundit actually claims in a "how to write romance" books that authors generally get the history "right", and that readers find them educational...
The 'white slavers in Crail' have become a running joke with my St As friends, as something to beware of...!
One "best-selling" author even changed the setting of her story at some point from 1800s to 1760s, but didn't change the costumes... so characters were wearing dampened muslins at the height of the Rococo!
What's alarming is that some of these books are regarded as "genre classics"!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 03:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 03:34 pm (UTC)Agreed. Absolutely.
I have no doubt that your comments about romance writers are true. As a reader, I find the genre full of cliches; but that being said, there are also some superb writers who manage to overcome all the pitfalls and produce excellent novels. This is another example of what I'd call honest or dishonest writing. Honest writing stands on its own. Dishonest writing accept formulas.
I don't see an aversion to formula, bad writing or stereotyped characters as a gendered issue.
No, it isn't. And shouldn't be. I don't put the blame entirely on the writers; I got out of the romance genre because of the strict formulas that the publishers demanded. If that was the only way to be published in the genre, I was having none of it. Gravitating to fanfic was a step towards freedom.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 03:59 pm (UTC)There's an interesting book of essays by romance writers about the genre, ed. by Krentz, Dangerous Men and Adventurous Women. Some of it was interesting, some of it alarming. For me, it's like peering into an alien world: I don't buy into the heterosexual, monogamous underpinnings, and I can't believe that characters who start off hating each other can form lasting relationships anyway. The historical ones... Well, talk about abuse of history and anachronistic characters - modern soap-opera types in fancy dress! The so-called 'Scottish romances' (aka Kilt Porn) are particularly risible to anyone who actually lives here and knows anything about history... And the industry pundits, as you say, encourage this state of affairs!
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 04:11 pm (UTC)Excepting the few talents who rise above the others, usually by being successful enough to flout the cliches and dictate to their publishers to some extent.
I like the idea of kilt porn but I've never found a book of the type that I enjoyed. Pity.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 04:33 pm (UTC)No. Believe me. Horrible. Patronising/racist 'noble savage' clichés. Highlanders bizarrely speaking Lowland Scots. No understanding of the society, history, culture...
Braveheart in paperback.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 04:41 pm (UTC)Eeeep! Whimper. You are scaring me.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-15 09:31 am (UTC)And the authors have such a poor grasp of history, it's unbelievable. I encountered an instance in which 18C characters stayed at an old inn... in Glenrothes, a 'New Town' in Fife which didn't exist until the 1950s. White-slaving from the small Fife port of Crail (which cracked me up entirely). Authors who believe Jacobitism was England-vs-Scotland warfare and that Scotland was "conquered by England". Authors who believe that Hadrian's Wall marked the border in 18C, and that there was still border warfare in Queen Anne's reign. Authors who invent ridiculous non-existent laws to bring their characters together. Authors who have female characters wearing kilts...
And an industry pundit actually claims in a "how to write romance" books that authors generally get the history "right", and that readers find them educational...
no subject
Date: 2006-12-15 01:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-15 03:29 pm (UTC)One "best-selling" author even changed the setting of her story at some point from 1800s to 1760s, but didn't change the costumes... so characters were wearing dampened muslins at the height of the Rococo!
What's alarming is that some of these books are regarded as "genre classics"!