Reading: Romance Tropes and Narrative

[sartorias]

I want to throw a few thoughts out and see if anyone agrees, or this is just my idiosyncratic tastes. But first, though I want to jot down some ideas about narrative devices, with a riff on why romance novel tropes don't work for me in the following instances, I'm stating up front here that I would so rather avoid sneers and slams at romance.

Comments

[asakiyume]

Oh--I thought of something else.

There's a line at the start of a Laurie Anderson song: "At the beginning of the story, they know they have to find each other, but they set off in opposite directions."

I like that because it seems to capture how life is: we end up having to go off in these separate ways, and are we going to find each other again? And how? And what will be our circumstances then? And what will our feelings be?

[sartorias]

I like that--it really does cue one that there will be unexpectednesses along the way. And maybe insights, instead of "achingly vulnerable" moments, to ding off another comment in this thread.

[asakiyume]

Wow, just read that book REVIEW (book review, not book) and it made me feel afresh how much I absolutely despise despise despise the link between sexual lack of experience and "goodness."

Bleaghhh....

[sartorias]

Yes, that is a another problem.

[barbarienne]

My experience/taste is very similar to yours. I have read a few romance novels that were well-written, good books with interesting characters, but the whole business of having the relationship as the primary focus of the book just doesn't float my boat. I was always more interested in the other things going on. (And, notably, in one novel, I found the secondary characters' secondary romance much more enjoyable, simply because I didn't have to endure any inner monologues of how nice the hero or heroine was to look at.)

But I ADORE romance as a later order of business. Give me a political-intrigue story with a romance as a subplot/complication, and I will eat it up with a spoon. I may even get weepy (as I did during Dorothy Dunnett's 6th Francis Crawford novel, when Francis was trying to protect Pippa by claiming not to love her. I was on the bus and crying and that was embarrassing, but the scene was so delicious

[sartorias]

Yes! I think for me, being told in explicit and lengthy detail all the minuatae of emotional experience keeps me from that empathetic flush. I get a truer, deeper evocation from brief but convincing reactions than pages and pages of detailed exploration of emotional landscaping. Obviously, the success of such books means that there are those who really want that exclosive focus on emotions.

[onyxhawke]

1) I love the icon.
2) gods what a brilliant mind you have. (this means i agree with you.)

[klwilliams]

I've found that I don't really like the modern genre romance, but I adore having romances in mysteries and science fiction. Go figure.

[sartorias]

*nodding* A couple people in this thread seem to feel similar.

[opheliastorn]

Yes, me too. I don't like reading about romance when it's the be-all and end-all of the plot, but if Harriet and Lord Peter sort themselves out while on a case then I'm perfectly happy!

[rj_anderson]

I've often said that I don't read mysteries for the whodunnit, I read them for the romance. Campion and Amanda = yes. Sherlock Holmes and Mary Russell = yes yes. Lord Peter and Harriet = very yes. Otherwise, I'm really not that interested.

Though to me, the most nearly perfect combination of romance, plot and character (including the secondary characters) is to be found in the suspense novels of Mary Stewart. Now and then she saddles me with a limp heroine and an overbearing hero (*cough* Nine Coaches Waiting *cough*) but I've lost track of how many times I've read This Rough Magic, The Gabriel Hounds, and Madam, Will You Talk? in particular.

[longlegs21]

I like my romances mixed with action/adventure or mystery or political intrigue or something--but, as mentioned above, the other stuff that goes on has to have real stakes. I tend to get bored and annoyed with romances where nothing but the attraction matters in the main characters' lives.

I recently bought and tried to read Warprize by Elizabeth Vaughan, which was supposed to have some fantasy and political/war stuff, and was sorely disappointed. I'm not sure if the author meant to do this, but there was no even remotely believable attempt at a conflict in the story. It's nearly impossible for me to suspend my disbelief enough to enjoy romances with situations that don't pose any real obstacle to the couple's getting together

[sartorias]

The Vaughn did indeed try some third order, but at least to my eye, the secondary characters were so very stock, I knew what they would say, certainly how they would behave, well ahead of time. But I did read that one all the way through. The sequel I thought was staggeringly awful by comparison.

[longlegs21]

Yes! I have nowhere near your reading experience, but I could predict everything as well. Basically, I just hated everything about that book. I did have fun writing about it on my LJ, though. ;-)

I shudder to imagine how bad the sequels were.

[sausconys_books]

I hated the first book so much that I couldn't bear the thought of trying the other two books in the series. I've heard her new book- which is set in the same world- is even worse.

I seem to have huge issues with paranormal romances because I've only liked one that I've tried. And even some of the fantasy/sf/romance crossovers like the Tor Romances and some Luna books rubbed me the wrong way because of their paranormal-ness. I'd much rather read romantic SFF, not because I'm looking for the romantic plot to be secondary, but because most of the gender issues in romance make me bash books into walls and SFF handles gender in a way more suited to my philosophy.

[haikujaguar]

I have to say that the image of a "marble-chested vampire" brought to mind a vampire with a piece of marble carved into the likeness of a chest, to which his head and torso had been affixed.

And I thought, "Wow, what a bizarre romance novel hero that would make, for he wouldn't have a working heart!"

*rubs eyes* I need more sleep.

[sartorias]

A lot is made of his cold skin. *shudder*

But the book is mondo popular--more proof there's something for everybody!

[haikujaguar]

Maybe some sort of subconscious symbol of his cold, unloved heart which the protagonist and all her readers are going to be responsible for warming? -_-

[sartorias]

Well, but his eyes "smolder" and "scorch" during the novel (the terms really do show up over and over and over) so . . . not so sure about the guy's inner temperature. But yeah, I think the appeal here is for that vicarious emotional thrill. I'll bet when i was fifteen, I would have been right there with them.