What romance readers want in a book and what I want are clearly not the same...
It is no secret that I don't really like romance novels unless they are written by Georgette Heyer. I think they are trashy. Nothing wrong with trashy,* but if I want that, there are plenty of dramas and mangas which fit that criteria and also provide eye-candy or pretty drawings. Not to mention come across as more realistic by sheer virtue of seeing "actual people" doing that stuff (many a bad line of dialogue has been saved by a decent actor) or have some really pretty art to distract one.
Anyway, one of the few bona fide romance novels I actually enjoy is Jo Beverley's My Lady Notorious. Set in Georgian times, the heroine is someone who's had her reputation ruined, hair cut off etc for refusing to marry a particular person by her eeeeeevil authoritarian father. Now she is helping her widowed sister escape an even worse fate and that is where her paths cross with Cynric Malloren (yet another pet peeve about romance novel names - seriously. The names in those books are ridiculous. Any kind of parent who gives their child a romance novel name deserves what they get, which is hopefully an icepick in the back). Cynric is bored and joins them on their trip, cross-dressing as a woman. So yup, here they travel, he as a girl, she as a man. Blahblahblah.
I was amused to discover that those who don't like the book dislike it for the reasons I like it. LOL. See this amazon review:
It's different enough that it should have kept my attention, but I just didn't find most of what happened in this book romantic. Maybe it's just because the book took place in a more primitive time than the Regency England that I'm used to. But hero dressed in drag? Herone going around with cropped hair and dressed as a groom? And then there's the well developed sense of time. At first I thought that the author did such a good job that even though the time period was never specified, we're never in doubt that this happened in Georgian England. But then I started to think that the realism has been carried to far. I kept on imagine in my mind Chastity and Cyn running around England in dirty clothes and smelling like sewage, which is decided not romantic. And did we really to read about diaper changing and the heroine wondering if the sound of a woman urinating is different than when a man does it?
Haaaa. Clearly what this woman looks for in a book and what I do are rather different. But the above attitude explains why I don't like most romance novels.
Also, LOL (another review):
Call me crazy, but the idea of the hero in women's clothing and makeup was a total turnoff. And the fact that he appeared to enjoy it so much only worsened it for me. Add that to the author describing him as femininely beautiful and I had a nasty picture in my head that I couldn't get rid off.
I wonder what would happen if this lady ever discovered Asian idols?
*I really don't feel like getting into a discussion that any novel with a romantic theme is a romance novel. I don't agree with that. That's like saying any novel with an explicit sex scene is an erotica book or one with murder is a mystery. I like a strong romance as much as anyone, but when it's the main topic of a book, without more (from external topics like politics or war to internal ones like exploration of the human soul in love) it becomes dull - like a meal entirely out of chocolate. I like chocolate but not as the sole food group.
ETA: And now I am remembering how years and years ago my friend and I used to go to the local bookstore's romance novel isle and have a great time reading the ridiculous stuff on the back out loud to each other, acting out the summary included.
Anyway, one of the few bona fide romance novels I actually enjoy is Jo Beverley's My Lady Notorious. Set in Georgian times, the heroine is someone who's had her reputation ruined, hair cut off etc for refusing to marry a particular person by her eeeeeevil authoritarian father. Now she is helping her widowed sister escape an even worse fate and that is where her paths cross with Cynric Malloren (yet another pet peeve about romance novel names - seriously. The names in those books are ridiculous. Any kind of parent who gives their child a romance novel name deserves what they get, which is hopefully an icepick in the back). Cynric is bored and joins them on their trip, cross-dressing as a woman. So yup, here they travel, he as a girl, she as a man. Blahblahblah.
I was amused to discover that those who don't like the book dislike it for the reasons I like it. LOL. See this amazon review:
It's different enough that it should have kept my attention, but I just didn't find most of what happened in this book romantic. Maybe it's just because the book took place in a more primitive time than the Regency England that I'm used to. But hero dressed in drag? Herone going around with cropped hair and dressed as a groom? And then there's the well developed sense of time. At first I thought that the author did such a good job that even though the time period was never specified, we're never in doubt that this happened in Georgian England. But then I started to think that the realism has been carried to far. I kept on imagine in my mind Chastity and Cyn running around England in dirty clothes and smelling like sewage, which is decided not romantic. And did we really to read about diaper changing and the heroine wondering if the sound of a woman urinating is different than when a man does it?
Haaaa. Clearly what this woman looks for in a book and what I do are rather different. But the above attitude explains why I don't like most romance novels.
Also, LOL (another review):
Call me crazy, but the idea of the hero in women's clothing and makeup was a total turnoff. And the fact that he appeared to enjoy it so much only worsened it for me. Add that to the author describing him as femininely beautiful and I had a nasty picture in my head that I couldn't get rid off.
I wonder what would happen if this lady ever discovered Asian idols?
*I really don't feel like getting into a discussion that any novel with a romantic theme is a romance novel. I don't agree with that. That's like saying any novel with an explicit sex scene is an erotica book or one with murder is a mystery. I like a strong romance as much as anyone, but when it's the main topic of a book, without more (from external topics like politics or war to internal ones like exploration of the human soul in love) it becomes dull - like a meal entirely out of chocolate. I like chocolate but not as the sole food group.
ETA: And now I am remembering how years and years ago my friend and I used to go to the local bookstore's romance novel isle and have a great time reading the ridiculous stuff on the back out loud to each other, acting out the summary included.