Tag Archives: Romance novels

The Subtle Art of Subtlety

Hello! It’s been a while, but I’m still here. I’m bursting with the need to talk about one of my favorite romance authors. And then maybe next post I’ll talk about another one of my fave romance authors who isn’t that good at writing. Weird, right? It’s the truth that you can learn a lot about what not to do from other people’s mistakes. But first I want to talk about Julie Garwood. As a published romance writer (see how I subtly plugged myself there), I have realized that it’s time to de-stigmatize romance novels. They get so much crap, and for a long time, I was right there slinging arrows with the rest of society. But the fact of the matter is… romance novels are entertainment. People make fun of Rom-Com movies in a similar way, and it’s like… why? People seek emotional catharsis from their entertainment, and many genres provide that without worrying about winning Oscars or whatever. Look at the Fast and Furious series. You think people are watching that for the scintillating dialogue and believable drama? No. They’re watching it to see Vin Diesel do a flying headbutt or to see someone drive a car out the window of one skyscraper and into the window of another. Entertainment doesn’t always have to be believable. It doesn’t even have to be well-written. But you know what? Julie Garwood is a good writer. AND she writes romance! To prove this, I’m going to point out two scenes from my favorite series of romance novels. The first is from Killjoy (2002). This romantic thriller asks you to suspend your disbelief as you follow two characters on a death-defying journey through the mountains as they evade a hired killer. This story belongs to the enemies-to-lovers sub-genre, so towards the beginning of the book, the narration is all about how the leads are frustrated with each other. This includes the following snippet:

…she had vowed that, if he survived, she’d kill him, just for the sheer joy of it.

The title of the book is hidden in that sentence! Isn’t that so cool? “She’d kill him, just for the sheer joy of it.” You think Julie Garwood did that by accident? Heck no. She was having some fun with this. And I appreciate that. But that’s not the kind of subtlety I want to talk about today. No, I want to talk about relationship development and showing-not-telling. So now we’re going to look at Sizzle (2009). In this book, FBI agent Sam is grilling grad student Lyra for details about her life. Someone is trying to kill her, so he’s trying to form a list of suspects. He asks about past relationships, and she says she ended her last serious relationship some time ago. He presses her for her reasons for the breakup, and the narration reveals what she truly thought about her ex.

Not to be bored to death, she thought but didn’t say. In all the time she had known John, she had never heard him laugh really hard, the kind of laugh that brought tears to your eyes and took your breath away.

That quote is from chapter twelve. Then, during a car ride in chapter twenty-six, you get this brief line:

He [Sam] burst into laughter that made tears come to his eyes.

A dozen words. A dozen (and change) chapters later. And right there, you know these two are meant for each other. Because Sam does exactly what Lyra’s ex never did: He laughs so hard that tears come to his eyes. But here’s the thing about subtlety… it’s tempting to counteract a subtle moment with a not-so-subtle lampshade. Garwood doesn’t hang a lampshade on this moment, and I respect that. She doesn’t add narration about Lyra noticing the laughter or feeling a certain way. She just moves on. This accomplishes a few things.

1. Garwood isn’t insulting her readers’ intelligence. If she’d hung a lampshade on it, it would have sent one or two messages. “You aren’t perceptive enough to pick up on this” and/or “Look how clever I am!” Neither of these messages is good.

2. It shows that the two characters are meant for each other. No telling required. The narration doesn’t need to do that heavy lifting because the characters’ actions speak for themselves.

3. It makes nerdy readers (like me) feel proud of themselves for noticing it. Yeah, I’m not afraid to admit that I felt like I’d earned a medal or a cookie for picking up on this. I should be afraid to admit it, and you should definitely feel free to make fun of me relentlessly. But the truth is out there.

As I said above, you can learn a lot from what authors do wrong, but you can also learn plenty from what authors do right. Julie Garwood writes sexy novels, but she doesn’t sacrifice anything in doing so. Her characters are well-rounded, the conflict is compelling, and the relationships feel real. I am a huge fan, and I can’t wait for her next book.

Other places to find me:

Leave a comment

Filed under books, Humor, writing

Title That Indicates I’m Going to be Talking About Romance Novels Again

I’ve been doing some research into romance novels.  This research has stemmed from a renewed attempt to figure out the genre, and how I can produce a work that fits the parameters of same.  In the interest of said research, I read one and a half new romance novels, bringing my total romance novel consumption to about twenty and a half, probably.  Maybe more.  I never stopped to count how many Sherrilyn Kenyon novels I’d read, because I wanted to maintain whatever shred of self respect I had left.

Anyway, at this point I believe I’ve come to some conclusions about a typical romance novel.  “Typical” in this case means “a straight man and a straight woman fall in love despite some obstacle or another.  And there are probably werewolves involved.”  I made notes in my phone.  Before we continue I am issuing a warning that there will be no graphic imagery but there will be sexual content in the writing that follows.  If the idea of this upsets you, stop reading.  I will forgive you!

Okay, here are the notes:

1. Each character must act like they’ve never before seen a member of the opposite sex that they were attracted to.

Match Made in Heaven

2. There must be a constant inner monologue from both characters’ perspectives about how attractive they find each other.  Remember to really beat that into the reader’s head.  I have to wonder what one person is doing while the other is weighing out all the pros and cons of having sex with them.  All I can think of is a scenario that goes something like this:

Offer-of-Sex

3. Women must be saved from their emotions.

4. Men must curse their emotions (in that said emotions lead to relationships, which men either fear or believe they don’t deserve due to their dark and brooding past).

5. (This is exactly how I typed it into my phone last night) A man waiting for consent before doing a sex is super gentlemanly and attractive.  If he both asks for consent and is ridiculously hot, then it is ok to have sex with him within 24 hours of meeting him.  A lasting, loving relationship is sure to ensue.

Note on #5: I have read two novels so far that treat consent like a novel concept.  The first did it horribly wrong, where the male lead – the love interest! – was undeniably assaulting the female lead, but she decided it was okay because, hey, at least he’s hot and deep down inside she really did want this, didn’t she?  I was appalled.  The second got a pass because the female lead had been raised in an emotionally abusive environment with people who constantly belittled her, so she was truly learning that consent was a thing she could expect and ask for.  Still I mean… let’s just get past this, okay?  I think it’d be a great help if romance novels just took consent as a given, and didn’t tout it as some sort of proof of the man’s character.  “He didn’t rape me, so he must be a gentleman!” just doesn’t work.

6. Men are always upset (at least once per book) by the unfortunate combination of their stiff and/or tight jeans and their erections.  It’s super uncomfortable for them, and the reader definitely needs to know that.  It is crucial to the plot.  The sexy, sexy plot.

Manhood

7. No butt stuff.  Butt stuff is neither romantic nor a symbol of twue wuv.  Only oral and vaginal sex are loving forms of sexual expression.  Reading the previous statements may very well have made you uncomfortable, and therein lies the root of the problem.  Sex with a stigma attached to it is not sexy.  Therefore it is not mentioned, hinted at, or overtly used in any way.

8. Every eleven words, at least one character thinks about how much they want to have sex/pictures the love interest naked/is actively having sex with that love interest.

9. A real man knows it’s his duty to bring a woman to orgasm before he has his own climax.  That’s just common courtesy.  Conversely, the woman does not owe the man pleasure.  His orgasm is not brought on by her actions, but is rather his reward for seeing to her needs first.  And because she’s hot.  He gets to orgasm because she is very attractive, as his inner monologue should have pointed out several times already.

So there you have it.  The results of my study.  If you were thinking about writing a steamy romance of your own, now’s your chance.  You have a handy little guide right here.

I’ll be writing soon about my second rewrite of Grotesque!  Ta!

Leave a comment

Filed under art, books, Humor, writing

Aquatic Interlude

So I drew a mermaid.  And that is all this post is going to be about.

A little context:

1. Somewhat recently I drove from New York to North Dakota to Texas, so I had a lot of time to think.

2. One of the things I thought about was mermaids.  I don’t know why.  But I do know that I always struggled with the concept of the archetypal mermaid (think Disney’s version) because of, um…sex reasons.  Like…fish reproduce outside their bodies, but human beings don’t.  Mermaids have breasts and uteri (never thought I’d need the plural of that word), but no um…vaginas.  So…you know, how does giving birth work?

2.5 While we’re on the subject!  They have knees!  Like even though their lower halves are cartilaginous and fish have no knees, animators and artists always put mermaids in sitting positions where their fins are bent like there’s a knee in there.  As long as people do that, mermaids are always going to look like human women who put on half a fish costume and tried to pretend they were mythological beings.

3. Yes, this absolutely needed to be in list form.

4. No, I don’t expect a cartoon for children to explore mer-vaginas and how they work.  We can leave that to romance novels like this one, written by P. C. Cast.

4.5 Please don’t ask why I know about this book.  Please.

4.75 Cartoons for children can explore mer-knees if they really want to.

5. I started to try to come up with a concept that would work by merging fish and woman and also allowing for more mammalian reproduction.

5.5 Look, I’m not obsessed with mermaids or mermaid sex, okay?  I don’t even know why it bothered me so much.  Probably because it was a really freakin’ long road trip.

6. Obviously, I drew my concept.  I waited until I was settled in my new home.

7. What I came up with looks a little like Mystique from X-Men.  Whoops.

8. First, just a rough sketch on paper:

Mermaid

9. Then I filled in the blanks with Photoshop Elements.

Mermaid copy

10. That’s uh…that’s it.  The above mermaid can have sex and give birth.  And she has knees!

11. Wooo mermaid sex!

12. Sorry for the partial nudity.  NSFW maybe?

12.5 I probably should have done the whole NSFW warning earlier.

12.75 Too late for that now.  The list is set in stone.  It is unchangeable.

13. Okay, I’m done now.  I swear.

1 Comment

Filed under books, Humor