my interests in the romance genre
I’m interested in the boundaries of the (historical) romance genre.
A romance is a story with the growth of a romantic relationship at its center.
With this minimal definition, a romance can be anything. It can be set in the year 2510, on a starship, and the people falling in love can do so amidst thought-provoking speculations on what human lives and emotions will be like in that time and place. It can be set in a modern war zone with the protagonists finding love and safety (or the resistance!) together. It can be set in the 1920s at a London college where the hero, an Indian come to the country to study law, meets the heroine, an activist for women’s suffrage. (Together, they fight crime!)
Instead, the majority of books one finds in the Romance section of the bookstore tell much more similar stories. They are about one man and one woman.* All the characters who matter, and definitely the protagonists, are affluent. They are almost always white, and even in rare biracial romances, the heroine is still white.* And when you just look at historical romances, which are really all I’m qualified to talk about, options narrow further: Apart from a few European medieval and USian 19th-century western settings, the vast majority of stories take place in England during the early 19th century. The characters are aristocrats and they go to balls in the city and house parties in the country. Sometimes the heroes are spies in the Napoleonic War but Waterloo is as close as anybody gets to contemporary current events. They don’t even boycott sugar from slave plantations. Everyone is straight (except for the occasional villain), white, gorgeous, and able-bodied. By the end of the book, the hero and heroine are married and the heroine, probably more than half of the time, is pregnant.
I’m not exactly complaining. Certainly not as much as I expected to when I first started reading romance novels. One thing that this genre has taught me is that it’s possible for the same story to be treated over and over again and be fulfilling and worthwhile every time. Who knows how many stories there are where the hero and heroine meet at a ball, dislike each other due to some misunderstanding, end up engaged to each other because a society gossip catches them in what she falsely thinks is a compromising position, and by the end of the country party one of their families throws to celebrate the betrothal, have worked out their misunderstandings and fallen in love, happily ever after? But romance has shown me that a good author can make a very individual work out of that factory-issue framework. I’ve come to realize that this is one of the real arts of the genre–to make the characters and emotions so vivid that the reader can simultaneously participate in the comfort and safety of a familiar story (they will have hard times, but they will find love and they will be happy) while delighting in this particular story in its own right.
Nevertheless, while I do not criticize authors for following the usual pattern, my fascination with history and my sense of social justice want more. I want books that find a love story in different times and places, because that would be fun. And I want books that acknowledge that not everybody is rich and white and beautiful and able-bodied and straight. I know that for so many readers romance novels are an escape into a fantasy world, and it’s understandable that most people’s fantasies involve being prettier and wealthier and in perfect health and, well, not oppressed. But I also know that one of the themes of romance novels is that love will find a way–and what better way to illustrate this than with the love stories of people who aren’t at the absolute pinnacle of privilege in their world?
I firmly believe that all literature, and especially the literature that is most read for pleasure, is something that both responds and contributes to the way people think about life and values and other people. Popular authors (and other creators of media) have the power to affirm and critique this thinking. And what they say about relationships between men and women, or between rich and poor people, or about the existence and roles of queer people and people with disabilities and people of color in a predominantly white society … this matters. It matters because it confirms and informs the dreams of millions of people, with and without these privileges.
So when I say I’m interested in the romance genre, what I mean is:
I’m interested in what it is. Who writes it, who reads it, why it’s limited in the ways I’ve referred to, and where it’s transgressing those limits. Who are the authors who are looking for more in history; who are the authors who are writing from a different place of privilege than the usual straight, white, middle-class Western woman. And so I’m also interested in what it can become.
* As you probably know: Gay and lesbian romances can usually be found in the LGBTQ literature section in large bookstores (lots and lots more online, including a few with bisexual and trans characters). What I’ve found is usually by small publishers and not printed to resemble mainstream mass-market romance. Large publishers do print lots of romances by African-American authors about African-American characters, but these are usually shelved in the African-American section, not in the Romance section. (I used to think, along with a number of other white, straight people, that this was because of prejudice, but then I saw some African-American and queer people saying “No, actually it just makes them easier to find” which is certainly true.) Anyway, this is really to say that I do know that these romances exist, but that they are not marketed alongside or consumed by the same people as the straight, white books in the Romance section.
I actually arrived here via the post which mentioned Janice Radway, but I hope it’s OK if I comment on a few things here. I’m not sure if you read many romance blogs other than SBTB, and if you do, and if you’ve been reading widely in the genre, everything I’m going to say is probably going to come across as nitpicking (which it might do anyway), but I thought I’d comment anyway.
“A romance is a story with the growth of a romantic relationship at its center. With this minimal definition, a romance can be anything.”
I think a lot of romance readers would insist that a romance also has to have a happy ending.
“All the characters who matter, and definitely the protagonists, are affluent”
Yes, but they’re not all billionaires/aristocrats. It depends where you’re looking, but quite a few of the Harlequin/Mills & Boon lines include protagonists who aren’t so rich. I came across a relatively recent Harlequin American romance set in Appalachia, for example, in which the heroine is really struggling financially, and the hero (as manager of a sawmill) isn’t really affluent.
“Apart from a few European medieval and USian 19th-century western settings, the vast majority of stories take place in England during the early 19th century”
Have you come across the Unusual Historicals blog yet? It’s quite a good place to find romances with non-standard settings.
“I used to think, along with a number of other white, straight people, that this was because of prejudice, but then I saw some African-American and queer people saying “No, actually it just makes them easier to find” which is certainly true.”
Yes, but some African-American romance authors aren’t happy with the situation, because it does mean that their books don’t reach a wider audience. Monica Jackson, in particular, has had a lot to say about the topic and she and some other authors gave their opinions about it at All About Romance some time ago.
Sorry it took me so long to approve your comment! I was out of town this weekend. I actually love this comment–it is full of exactly the kinds of things I’m hoping to learn about the romance genre!
I think a lot of romance readers would insist that a romance also has to have a happy ending.
Oops–of course. I knew that! I guess one of the problems with writing a “here are the basics of where I’m coming from” post is that it’s easy to leave out things that are that basic! But I should have mentioned it. Especially because that’s one of the reasons, I think, why people do stick to writing about the privileged. (HEA is not one of the boundaries I wish got pushed more–I agree that it wouldn’t be romance without it!)
Yes, but they’re not all billionaires/aristocrats. It depends where you’re looking, but quite a few of the Harlequin/Mills & Boon lines include protagonists who aren’t so rich.
Thanks for the link to A Coal Miner’s Wife! It looks fascinating–and I was able to find it on BookMooch so I’ll be reading it soon. :D
I am really eager to find exceptions to the affluent protagonist. It’s not so much that every character is an aristocrat (as to the tycoon or billionaire, I’m even less certain since I read so few contemporaries; my impression is that these are much better about depicting “ordinary” people) as it is that I’ve encountered very, very few books that don’t suggest that the people who live in high society and have all the money they could want are the only people whose lives are really interesting and worth fantasizing about. And that is fun–I just wish there were more exploration of other social strata that didn’t end in marrying into money or depend on class stereotypes.
Have you come across the Unusual Historicals blog yet?
No, I had not! Thank you so much–this is great!
Yes, but some African-American romance authors aren’t happy with the situation, because it does mean that their books don’t reach a wider audience.
More thanks for that link! These are really exactly the kinds of things I’m looking for. I haven’t had time to read that entire page carefully yet, but it seems to have a lot of concrete information (especially about publishing choices, which I really don’t know much about) and opinions from lots of people. I’m not surprised to learn that some African American authors don’t like the shelving situation–all members of a group can’t be expected to have the same opinions! I think my conclusion is that this is a complicated situation with several different points of view worth considering.
Thank you also for linking to Teach Me Tonight. This is clearly a blog I should be reading regularly! Do you mind if I put a link to it in the sidebar?
“that’s one of the reasons, I think, why people do stick to writing about the privileged.”
I think that’s true, particularly when it comes to historicals. I think part of it in historicals does have to do with the fact that life for the lower classes could be very, very hard. But I think it also has something to do with the fact that for modern readers “romance” (in the sense of things which people think are romantic) are often associated with expensive products such as lacy nightgowns, bouquets of roses, jewellery, champagne, beautiful ballgowns and men in evening wear. Most of those would have been in extremely limited supply for even the middle classes. I haven’t yet read Eva Illouz’s Consuming the Romantic Utopia: Love and the Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism but I’m fairly sure it deals with this kind of linkage between consumerism and ideas about romance (in that general sense). Chrys Ingraham’s White Weddings: Romancing Heterosexuality in Popular Culture is more narrowly focussed, but also explores the economic and social implications of the romantic “big day.”
“I just wish there were more exploration of other social strata that didn’t end in marrying into money or depend on class stereotypes.”
The only historical that’s coming to mind at the moment for me is Polly Forrester’s . I’m sure there must be others (I’m fairly sure at least some of Mary Balogh’s would fall into this category), but they’re rare.
“Thank you also for linking to Teach Me Tonight. This is clearly a blog I should be reading regularly! Do you mind if I put a link to it in the sidebar?”
Of course not! I’d be delighted if you felt like linking to us.
Oops, sorry for the delay again with your comment. This one should have posted automatically without being held up in moderation, I don’t know what’s up with that!
I will definitely put Teach Me Tonight in my links and plan on reading it regularly.
Thanks for the link to Changing Fortunes–I’m definitely interested in finding books that take an honest look at class problems in historical romance. Rose Lerner is a new author who seems interested in exploring this.
Consuming the Romantic Utopia also looks fascinating. I’ve often thought about what seem to be its main questions — “Is a walk on a moonlit beach a moment of perfect romance or simply a simulation of the familiar ideal seen again and again on billboards and movie screens?” as the review on Amazon says — but actually haven’t spent much time connecting this to my ideas about romance novels. I should!
“One thing that this genre has taught me is that it’s possible for the same story to be treated over and over again and be fulfilling and worthwhile every time.” I certainly agree! A lot of what you write about feels familiar to me, though not because of romance novels, but fanfiction. I wonder if you’ve ever read fanfiction or if you’re involved in some fandoms?
I’ve read slash (m/m fanfiction) amd occasionally femslash for about 8 years now (oh my, how time flies!). At this point, I think I’m pretty well acquainted with fanfiction tropes. I’ve read a lot of stories about the same pairing with basically the same plot (for example, at first the main characters bicker and fight, then they realize they like each other underneath all that, then try to deny it because they’re not gay/the other character is an idiot/whatever, but then get together in the end) but still I’m not bored. When the basic story stays the same, there can be variation of the setting, characterization, the writing style etc. The writer’s challenge is to make the story as entertaining, realistic, heartwrenching or memorable as possible, while not straying too far from the established framework. I don’t think that’s dull.
Of course, there’s more to fanfiction than that. Sometimes stories completely break the mold, or aren’t centered on any pairing, but I’m not gonna start lecturing because you might already know that :)
Your second-to-last paragraph asks a lot of question that I find myself asking about slash and that I look forward to you exploring in the romance genre. There’s a lot of potential in from-women-to-women fiction that reaches millions of readers. Looking forward to your next posts!
Yes, I’m definitely familiar with fandom! I’ve been involved in/an observer of Harry Potter fandom since I was a first year in college, so (oh dear) for about seven years. You won’t have heard of me, though–I was more of a reader than a writer. But I did read a lot, and still do, although now I read much more discussions of how race and gender work in fanfic than actual fanfic! In fact, discussions by people in fandom about representations of marginalized people in the media have taught me a great deal.
Apart from the discussions about social justice that have arisen from pools of very smart (mostly) women who like to discuss things in infinite detail, I’ve been really inspired by observing and being taught that fanfiction is a transformative act. I love seeing how people can take canons that excite and inspire them, but also infuriate them, and write into them and say things that need to be said. Vonda N. McIntyre’s published novelizations of the Star Trek movies are my favorite example right now, but there’s so much unpublished fanwork out there taking source material that has a fun story or exciting setting or intriguing characters but at times is emotionally dishonest or perpetuates stereotypes, and changes it, makes it a better and more empowering story.
I think you make a really great point about fanfiction being similar in some ways to romance. One of the most powerful things about fanfic is that it does take a framework, whether it’s a predictable “Kirk and Spock end up together” story or just the rules of the canonical universe, and says something new and exciting with it. And like you noted, that’s like how the appeal of a romance novel is telling a compelling story that ends with love, happily ever after. So now I’m wondering: Is what I want to see in the romance genre really the same thing that I see in the very best kind of fanfiction? Maybe I want romance also to be a transformative work, to take a canonical narrative and say Here it is, but also here’s a woman’s sexual agency, and here’s what the valet is really thinking, even (maybe especially) if those things subvert the canon in some ways… Things to think about!